Bangkok: The Justice Protection Group has submitted a petition to the Lawyers Council of Thailand, urging them to request the Constitutional Court to interpret the legality of QR codes and barcodes on election ballots. This move has sparked debate about the secrecy and validity of the recent election process.
According to Thai News Agency, the Dharma Protection Group also expressed concerns about the potential violation of constitutional provisions regarding secret ballots. Mr. Tinkorn Surabandit, representing the Lawyers' Association, handed a letter to Dr. Thanapol Kongchieng, President of the Lawyers' Council, to analyze whether the use of QR codes and barcodes on ballots contravenes the Constitution. The group insists that the matter should be referred to the Constitutional Court for a definitive ruling.
The controversy arises following a general election for the House of Representatives, held on February 8, 2026, with advance voting starting on February 1. Ballot papers used in the election contained unique QR codes and barcodes, intended for traceability and security purposes. However, these codes also revealed a unique number linked to voter registration, undermining the secrecy of the ballot and allowing identification of voters' choices. This contravenes the Amended Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (No. 1), B.E. 2564, which mandates secret balloting.
The Justice Protection Group argues that such measures infringe on the constitutional requirement for secret voting, potentially invalidating the election results. They have called on the Lawyers Council, under royal patronage and known for its expertise in public law, to protect the public interest and clarify the legal issues involved. They believe that a Constitutional Court ruling is essential to resolve the dispute and reduce public conflict.
Mr. Tinkorn clarified that the petition to the Lawyers Council was preferred over a direct complaint to the Ombudsman due to the Council's legal expertise. He emphasized that the issue is not politically motivated but is grounded in protecting public interest and ensuring justice. The final decision, he noted, lies with the Constitutional Court.
Dr. Thanapol Kongchieng acknowledged the potential impact of the issue on national confidence and stability. He announced plans to form an academic working group to thoroughly examine the facts and legal implications before sharing the findings with the public.