Bangkok: Mr. Supachai Jaisamut, a party-list MP and chairman of the legal affairs committee of the Bhumjaithai Party, has addressed the ongoing controversy regarding the opinions of the 26 and 36 committees in the Senate election case. He emphasized via Facebook that the focus should not be on "who's helping whom," but rather on the evidence and legal principles that support each side's opinion.

According to Thai News Agency, Mr. Supachai highlighted the importance of Sections 226 of the Constitution and 62 of the Organic Act on the Acquisition of Senators, which stipulate that credible evidence of a crime is necessary for any accusation. He stressed that accusations should not be based solely on favorable evidence or general allegations.

Mr. Supachai noted inconsistencies in the case files, particularly the contradictions where the same actions support accusations in one document but lead to dismissals in another. This inconsistency raises questions about how evidence is evaluated. He suggested that Subcommittee 36 should rely on Supreme Court rulings as they provide established precedents rather than creating new standards.

He pointed out that Supreme Court rulings require proof of the alleged act and evidence linking the accused candidate. Without such proof, the court is likely to dismiss the case, as demonstrated in case numbers LT Senate 8/2568 and LT Senate 55/2568. Mr. Supachai underscored that the Senate election case should be decided based on factual evidence rather than public opinion, media reports, or political pressure.

Mr. Supachai acknowledged that the 36-member committee could have differing views from the 26-member committee, but those opinions must be grounded in legal reasoning. He reiterated that following Supreme Court precedents is a more rational approach to weighing evidence than succumbing to public sentiment.

In conclusion, Mr. Supachai asserted that accusations do not equate to proof and that the legal process should prioritize evidence and the law over public opinion.