Bangkok: Parit Wacharasindhu, a party-list MP from the People's Party, has called on the Election Commission (EC) to refer the Senate collusion case to the court, citing four key reasons. Parit expressed concerns during a press conference about the handling of the case involving senators, emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability.

According to Thai News Agency, the EC is currently facing the decision to either accept or dismiss the findings of two conflicting committees. The 26th investigative committee, a joint effort between the EC and the Department of Special Investigation (DSI), recommended legal action against 229 individuals, including 138 senators and 91 political party affiliates. In contrast, the 36th Sub-Committee for Adjudication concluded that none of the individuals were guilty, urging the EC to dismiss the complaint.

Parit outlined that the EC has three options: follow the 26th committee's recommendation to take all 229 cases to court, agree with the 36th committee's findings and dismiss the cases, or selectively prosecute certain individuals. He emphasized that the evidence gathered by the 26th committee, including voting records, travel arrangements, and financial trails, is robust enough to warrant court proceedings. Parit argued that the evidence is stronger than in previous cases that were taken to court, raising questions about inconsistent standards if the current case is dismissed.

Parit also questioned the legitimacy of the 36th Sub-Committee, suggesting it might serve as a tool to whitewash the EC's process. He noted that the EC bypassed its usual random selection process for subcommittees, specifically establishing the 36th committee for this case. Concerns were also raised about the lack of engagement with DSI representatives during deliberations and the suitability of some subcommittee members.

Another issue highlighted by Parit is the potential conflict of interest among EC members, with four out of seven having been approved by the Senate, which is under investigation. He suggested that referring the case to court would help clear the EC of any perceived bias or conflicts of interest.

Lastly, Parit criticized the EC's past performance in investigating Senate election corruption. He referenced a recent video clip showing EC officials collecting voting slips and issuing warnings, which he claimed raised further questions about the integrity of the election process. Parit stressed that the EC's failure to thoroughly investigate and act on such evidence could be seen as a neglect of duty or complicity in electoral fraud.

Parit concluded that if the EC fails to address these concerns and decides against sending the case to court, it risks undermining public trust and accountability in the electoral process.