Pornsant critiques EC Secretary's interpretation | thailandedition

thailandedition

Pornsant critiques EC Secretary's interpretation of Section 226

Pornsant critiques EC Secretary's interpretation of Section 226

Matichon•Politics•1d ago

Reader Briefing

Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai argues that the Election Commission Secretary's interpretation of Section 226 of the Constitution is incorrect and risks blurring the roles of the EC and the Supreme Court.

•Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai posted a legal explanation on Facebook on August 25 regarding the interpretation of Section 226.
•Pornsant disputes the Election Commission Secretary's view that three specific elements must be fully met before the EC can petition the Supreme Court.
•Pornsant asserts that Section 226 establishes an inquisitorial system where the Supreme Court has the power to order additional investigations.

Overview

•On August 25, Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai posted an explanation via Facebook regarding Section 226 of the Constitution.
•The post responded to an explanation by the Secretary-General of the Election Commission regarding the three elements required to send a case to the Supreme Court.
•Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai stated that the Secretary-General of the Election Commission's interpretation is likely inconsistent with the Constitution and constitutional law governing election cases.
•Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai explained that the phrase "evidence that should be believed" in Section 226 is a standard for bringing a case to court, not a final determination of guilt.
•Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai detailed that the Supreme Court possesses the authority under Section 226 paragraph 2 to order further investigation of facts and evidence.
•Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai argued that the Election Commission's role is to investigate and assess evidence without needing a final conclusion, while the Supreme Court handles the final adjudication.
•Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai warned that creating overly strict conditions for Section 226 would destroy the boundary between the powers of the Election Commission and the Supreme Court.

Full article content is available on the original source.

Read on Matichon (Thai Version)View in Google Translate

Source: Matichon (Original)

Key Entities

Person

Pornsant Liangboonlertchai(พรสันต์ เลี้ยงบุญเลิศชัย)

An Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, Chulalongkorn University.

Secretary-General of the Election Commission(เลขาฯ กกต.)

The individual who provided an explanation on the elements of Section 226 of the Constitution.

Organization

Election Commission(กกต.)

The body responsible for investigating election fraud and petitioning the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court(ศาลฎีกา)ℹ️

The court responsible for the final adjudication of election cases using an inquisitorial system.

Faculty of Law, Chulalongkorn University(คณะนิติศาสตร์ จุฬาฯ)ℹ️

The academic institution where Associate Professor Pornsant Liangboonlertchai teaches.

Law

Constitution(รธน.)ℹ️

The supreme law containing Section 226 which governs the process of election cases.

Organic Act on the Acquisition of Senators(พรป.ได้มาซึ่ง สว.)

A law whose Section 62 works in conjunction with Section 226 of the Constitution.