Prachatai English

Activist known for “Lost Faith” shirt faces another royal defamation charge

eng editor 1 — Tue, 22 Sep 2026 05:14:38 +0000

Activist known for “Lost Faith” shirt faces another royal defamation charge

Tiwagorn Withiton, an activist known for wearing a t-shirt printed with “I have lost faith in the monarchy” has been charged with another count of royal defamation over 5 Facebook posts made in 2022.

Pattana Sriyai, Tiwagorn‘s lawyer, said he visited Tiwagorn on 18 September. During the visit, Tiwagorn told him that Pol Lt Intrachai Intra, a deputy investigation inspector from the Technology Crime Suppression Division (TCSD)’s Sub-Division 3, visited Tiwagorn on 22 July along with a lawyer from the Lawyers’ Coucil. Tiwagorn was then notified that he is being charged with another count of royal defamation.

Pattana said that the charge stemmed from 5 Facebook posts Tiwagorn made in July 2022. The complaint against him was filed by serial complainant Sonthiya Sawasdee.

Pattana said that Tiwagorn refused to acknowledge the new charge and did not sign documents. He told his lawyer that Pol Lt Intrachai said to him that he is not a man because he does not own up to his crimes.

Tiwagorn responded by hanging up the phone used in the visiting room. He told Pattana he was disgusted and did not want to participate in an unjust process.

Pattana said that Tiwagorn wrote a letter to him in early Augsut about the new charge but the letter never arrives. Pattana has not seen documents relating to the case since he has to request it from the prison.

Tiwagorn also told the lawyer that he expects more royal defamation charges. Before his imprisonment, he received Facebook messages from members of royalist groups threatening to file complaints against him over a number of Facebook posts.

Tiwagorn is currently detained at the Khon Kaen Central Prison. Her was sentenced to 6 years in prison on a royal defamation charge for posting a picture of himself wearing the t-shirt, which went viral in 2020. The Appeal Court in August 2024 overturned the Khon Kaen Provincial Court‘s ruling dismissing the charges against him, finding him guilty and sentencing him to prison. In May 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the Appeal Court‘s ruling.

He was also charged with sedition and the Supreme Court is expected to soon issue a verdict. The sedition charge is one of the charges covered by the new political amnesty law, but Pattana said that Tiwagorn does not wish to participate in the amnesty process and wants a Supreme Court verdict. Nevertheless, he said there is nothing he could do if the court decides to dismiss the case under the new amnesty law.

eng editor 1 Tue, 2026-09-22 - 12:14

News

Thailand and Cambodia at UNCLOS: where they stand on maritime dispute

eng editor 3 — Mon, 21 Sep 2026 12:28:44 +0000

Thailand and Cambodia at UNCLOS: where they stand on maritime dispute

Thailand and Cambodia have held the first compulsory conciliation meeting over their maritime dispute in the Gulf of Thailand. Their opening statements offered key clues about how each side frames the dispute and what they may seek from the process.

The first three-day session (14-16 September) of compulsory conciliation under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) between the two countries was held in Singapore, with Cambodia and Thailand exchanging opening statements on 15 September.

Cambodia does not rule out possibility of a joint development area

Prak Sokhonn, Cambodia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, began with Cambodia’s history and its commitment to a peaceful resolution in accordance with international law.

He said that Thailand unilaterally terminated the 2001 MOU in May. With its commitment to peaceful settlement of the dispute, Cambodia chose to initiate compulsory conciliation under UNCLOS. “Cambodia sees this conciliation process as a means to rebuild trust, not a form of escalation,” said Prak Sokhonn.

Cambodia also hopes that Thailand will engage constructively and will work to implement all existing bilateral agreements, particularly the 27 December 2025 joint statement, This would facilitate the return of 20,000 displaced villagers to their homes and the preservation of cultural sites which have been damaged in the fighting.

Cambodia’s objective in the proceedings is to conclude a treaty with Thailand in order to delimit a single all-purpose maritime boundary. Alternatively, Cambodia would be prepared to conclude an agreement on the joint development and equitable sharing of resources with Thailand, pending a final agreement on the maritime boundary.

If a final agreement on either the maritime boundary or a joint development arrangement cannot be concluded, Cambodia would request the commission to prepare a report containing recommendations to the parties for further settlement.

Thailand eyes ‘maritime boundary delimitation’ only

In his statement, the Thai Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow as a Deputy stated that Thailand has believed in addressing issues through dialogue. Cambodia has approached the issues differently. It always claims that it respects international law and portrays Thailand as flouting it, but its claims are self-serving and contain elements of hypocrisy.

“When Cambodia leaked a private telephone conversation between our leaders, when Cambodian rockets hit and killed innocent Thai civilians, and when our soldiers lost their legs to landmines planted by Cambodia, where was respect for international law?” said Sihasak.

Thailand viewed international law and diplomacy as complementary foundations of peaceful relations between states. The country repeatedly sought resolutions to restore relations.

Instead of engaging fully and sincerely through bilateral dialogue, Cambodia has repeatedly vilified Thailand through false narratives, distortion of facts and unfounded accusations on an almost daily basis, including at international forums. “And it does this by playing the role of a victim with a sense of self-righteousness aimed at claiming the moral high ground,” said the Thai Foreign Minister.

Regarding the termination of the 2001 MOU, Cambodia’s claim that Thailand’s decision left it with no option but to initiate these proceedings, is simply not true.

Over a period of 25 years, both counties managed to hold only two rounds of official talks. It is clear that the MOU had produced no concrete progress. Thailand therefore chose to make a fresh start in negotiations.

Thailand also believes that Cambodia’s recent ratification of UNCLOS would have provided a timely opportunity to resume talks. Thailand proposed direct talks on the maritime boundary, but Cambodia disregarded the option.

Sihasak asserted that the scope of these proceedings concerns only delimitation of the maritime boundary between Thailand and Cambodia in the Gulf of Thailand. It does not concern sovereignty over land, including Koh Kut. There has never been a debate on this matter. Thailand also rejects Cambodia’s 1972 continental shelf claim line which is without legal basis.

Thailand and Cambodia have disputed maritime boundaries for decades, leading them to enter into the 2001 MOU to delimit the boundary and share the natural resources. Playing along with nationalist sentiment, PM Anutin Charnvirakul vowed to cancel the MOU and kept his word by announcing the termination of the 2001 MOU, citing that it had made no progress.

On 2 June, Cambodia initiated the compulsory conciliation process under UNCLOS, which either party is allowed to invoke without consent from the other party. Compulsory conciliation has previously been invoked only once, in the dispute between Timor-Leste and Australia over the Timor Sea.

Thailand later submitted a response agreeing to enter the proceedings, making this only the second case in the history of the international law of the sea. Each country appointed two conciliators, and these four selected a chair to form the Commission.

Thailand named Judge Albert J. Hoffmann of South Africa and Judge Rüdiger Wolfrum of Germany. Cambodia named French academic Jean-Marc Thouvenin and Danish diplomat Peter Taksøe-Jensen. Australian diplomat Katrina Cooper was then appointed as the Chair

What do their statements reveal?

Given that compulsory conciliation proceedings typically aim at finding common ground for both parties to resolve an issue, several observers expressed concerns over Thailand’s assertive tone, as the proceedings rely on trust from both sides.

Ultimately, both Thailand and Cambodia, under the UNCLOS mechanism, will inevitably have to find an amicable solution.

The standpoints of both Thailand and Cambodia are also interesting. Cambodia laid out two options: ‘a single all-purpose maritime boundary,’ or ‘an agreement on the joint development and equitable sharing of resources, pending final agreement on a maritime boundary’.

The inclusion of joint development also suggests that Cambodia continues to favour the model it has prioritised for the disputed maritime areas.

Joint development is part of a provisional arrangement under UNCLOS in which disputing countries agree to share the natural resources pending final maritime delimitation. However, it is not mandatory.

In the Gulf of Thailand, we have seen one example of joint development: between Thailand and Malaysia.

Also, the term ‘equitable’ in Cambodia’s statement does not appear to be random. In the context of UNCLOS, this does not always mean a 50:50 split of resources in the disputed area. Maritime delimitation considers a range of factors, including geography, coastline, historical circumstances, economic considerations, and, in some cases, environmental concerns.

Meanwhile, Thailand proposes only one solution: 'maritime boundary delimitation between Thailand and Cambodia,’ which was also its longstanding position before the negotiations to enter into the 2001 MOU.

Phattharaphong Saengkrai of Thammasat University's Faculty of Law observes that given the proceedings take approximately 12 months, it would be impossible to achieve a single all-purpose maritime boundary to cover the 26,000 sq km. overlapping area as Cambodia proposes.

In addition, he noted that Sihasak’s statement indicates that Thailand does not want to be seen as allowing an external party to influence its decision-making. Although the Commission’s recommendations are not legally binding, they carry political and diplomatic weight.

At the very least, in Phattaraphong’s assessment, Thailand and Cambodia are likely to negotiate a new detailed MOU that sets out a framework for further negotiations, while the two sides might agree on boundary lines in certain disputed areas.

Koh Kut is also the most controversial part in the dispute. Cambodia’s claimed line forms a U shape curve around Thailand’s Koh Kut. But Under UNCLOS, an inhabited island is entitled to its own territorial sea, EEZ and continental shelf. Thailand, therefore, argues that Cambodia must redraw its line in a straight southwesterly direction away from the island. Thailand is likely to be in a strong legal position at this point.

Whether their proposed options can be reconciled will depend on the extent to which both parties agree. It is to be noted that the Commission is not responsible for drawing the line for both parties, and there will be no winner or loser from the compulsory conciliation.

eng editor 3 Mon, 2026-09-21 - 19:28

Feature

Bhumjaithai executives should be prosecuted, says election commissioner

eng editor 1 — Mon, 21 Sep 2026 08:04:08 +0000

Bhumjaithai executives should be prosecuted, says election commissioner

Election Commissioner Sitthichot Intrawiset said in a press conference on 15 September that he believes the 20 Bhumjaithai Party executives implicated in the Senate selection fraud case should have been prosecuted.

The Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) voted 5 to 2 not to refer the Bhumjaithai executives to the Supreme Court. Sitthichot, along with Election Commissioner Chai Nakornchai, were the two who voted in favour of prosecuting.

Sitthichot said that he and Chai believe there is enough evidence that the Bhumjaithai executives were involved in collusion during the Senate selection. Evidence was found of vote rigging in several provinces, where candidates were gathered in hotels and given voting instructions. Sittichotnoted that candidates ranked in the first 7 places from each group were included in the instruction sheets found and are being prosecuted, showing that those involved in making the instruction sheets have committed fraud.

All evidence in each province points to one political party, Sitthichot said. Each suspect is either a member of or connected to this party. A witness who later retracted their testimony said that an order was given during a party meeting for local MPs or party members to take part in collusion. Sittichotsaid that he found the witness’testimony credible because action took place that corresponded with the testimony.

Another witness, a secretary to one of the senators, said that a group of senators met at a hotel in Bangkok after the ECT certified the selection result. Members of the party were also in attendance. According to Sittichot, the witness said the meeting was to select the senate president and vice presidents, and that they saw high-ranking figures in the party walking out of the room. This corresponds with call records to some ministers after the selection. Sittichot said that the minority Election Commissioners believe these instances can be considered involvement in colluding to produce voting instructions in each province.

Sitthichot said that Direk Pornseema, another witness, gave testimony that corresponded with that of Witness No. 16/26, previously revealed to be former Bhumjaithai MP Ekkarat Changlao, concerning the action of a minister. Sitthichot said he does not believe Ekkarat retracted his testimony because he was threatened into testifying because Ekkarat was an MP at the time and an influential figure. Another witness who retracted his testimony is a politician’s father-in-law, and Sitthichote does not think anyone would threaten such a figure.

Sitthichot said that, although no records were found of money transfers by well-known politicians, there are records of transfers by people connected to them. One witness claimed that they went to the party headquarters to receive money in cash, but no one else can corroborate the account.

He also said that he told the ECT Chair about transaction records of a senator from Prachuap Khiri Khan and that a businessman named Worapoj Tangphanphian transferred a large amount of money to Surat Thani. However, when he asked the joint investigation committee where the money came from, he was told that they cannot investigate because the ECT voted 4 to 3 to reject the evidence. Sitthichot still considers it an offence because the money has to come from somewhere, but due to this limitation, he could not find out more. It is now up to the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) to continue investigating, since the DSI is investigating the Senate collusion case as a money laundering case and may prosecute other individuals.

Regarding Ekkarat’s claim, after retracting his testimony, that the voting instruction notes were not real, Sitthichot said that CCTV footage from the national level selection showed a candidate bringing out the notes. A witness who testified to the joint investigation committee also took a picture of the notes on their phones, which shows the dates the notes were made. It is therefore not possible for the notes to have been made after the testimony was given or that the investigation committee made them up to make accusations.

He noted that writing down the numbers of candidates to vote for would be wrong if the candidates are told which numbers to write down, which is different from the candidates taking notes in the introduction documents to remind themselves of the numbers. The Supreme Court previously ruled that voting with instructions given by others means that the candidates are not voting independently and is considered fraudulent.

On 14 September, the ECT voted to prosecute 77 out of 229 individuals implicated in the Senate selection fraud case. 26 of those prosecuted are sitting senators. Bhumjaithai Party executives, including Prime Minister and party leader Anutin Charnvirakul, were not prosecuted.

Of the 7 election commissioners, 4 were appointed after they were approved by the incumbent Senate: Narong Klunwarin, Narong Rakroi, AnanSuwannarat, and Chirute Visalachitra.

Among this group, 3 were also bureaucrats serving under Bhumjaithai Cabinet ministers or working closely with Bhumjaithai politicians. Anan was the Permanent Secretary for Agriculture between October 2018 - September 2020, when Mananya Thaiseth — sister of Bhumjaithai deputy leader Chada Thaiseth, one of the suspects in the Senate selection fraud case — was Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives. Narong Rakroi was Governor of Uthai Thani between 2018 - 2021, during which time he worked with Alongkot Worakee, now a senator and a suspect in the selection fraud. He served as Governor around the same time that Mananya was Mayor of Uthai Thani Municipality. Chirute was formerly the Director-General of the Department of Land Transport when Saksayam Chidchob was Minister of Transport.

Election commissioner Titichet Nutchanart was appointed in December 2018 by the National Legislative Assembly formed in 2014 following the military coup led by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). Titichet has been accused of bribing a former Auditor General and a complaint was filed against him with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC).

All 5 voted against prosecuting Bhumjaithai executives. Meanwhile, Sittichot and Chai, who voted in favour of prosecution, were appointed following approval from the NCPO-appointed Senate, which was in office from 2019 to2024.

eng editor 1 Mon, 2026-09-21 - 15:04

News

Cartoon by Stephff: UNCLOS Thailand-Cambodia talks

eng editor 1 — Fri, 18 Sep 2026 17:17:03 +0000

Cartoon by Stephff: UNCLOS Thailand-Cambodia talks

eng editor 1 Sat, 2026-09-19 - 00:17

Multimedia

ECT refers 77 Senate selection fraud suspects to Supreme Court; No Bhumjaithai politicians included

eng editor 3 — Mon, 14 Sep 2026 16:05:02 +0000

ECT refers 77 Senate selection fraud suspects to Supreme Court; No Bhumjaithai politicians included

The Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) has decided to refer 77 individuals to the Supreme Court on accusations of involvement in Senate selection collusion. This includes only 26 sitting senators. Notably, no politicians from the Bhumjaithai Party were referred. iLaw, which has been following the Senate selection process since 2024, will now release more information from the case file, including testimonies of witnesses.

The ECT met on Monday (14 September) to decide whether to refer the Senate selection fraud case to the Supreme Court. The ECT chose to refer only 77 individuals.

According to the investigation, the individuals accused of electoral fraud included 138 sitting senators, 50 candidates and individuals on the reserve list, 21 Bhumjaithai politicians, and 20 other individuals linked to Bhumjaithai politicians.

During its press conference, the ECT representatives clarified that a total number of the accused was actually 427, not 229, with 67 complainants. The 77 individuals whose cases were referred to the Supreme Court include 26 sitting senators, 36 candidates, and 15 others.

The ECT revealed that a total of 7 charges in accordance with the 2018 Organic Act on the Acquisition of Senators were brought against the accused. However, 2 charges against a politician in connection with electoral fraud were dropped.

The ECT resolved that neither reasonable grounds nor evidence indicated that Bhumjaithai Party MPs and members of its executive committee were involved in the collusion as accused, despite phone call records and witnesses. According to the ECT, the testimony of some witnesses was not credible, open to question, and inconsistent.

The investigation into this case began last year, but the case reached a tipping point after the opposition and the legal watchdog NGO iLaw, which has been following the Senate selection process and noticed abnormalities, began releasing evidence of vote rigging and collusion and alleging that high-ranking Bhumjaithai members, including Cabinet ministers, were involved.

In the past few months, civil society organizations have insisted that the ECT must refer the case to court so that the evidence can be heard, instead of being adjudicated solely by the ECT, whose neutrality is questioned. iLaw has also said several times that it will release the information it has on those individuals if the ECT decides not to indict any one of the 229 it has accused.

The ECT’s legitimacy has been under scrutiny due to the connections between its commissioners and the ruling party; it should therefore not make any decision and should simply send the case to court.

Election commissioners are appointed on the Senate’s approval and 4 out of the 7 sitting commissioners were approved by the incumbent Senate. 3 out of the 7 sitting commissioners were once bureaucrats under a Bhumjaithai minister. Some members of the nomination committee for election commissioners are also connected to Bhumjaithai-aligned politicians and senators.

Following the ECT press conference, People's Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut revealed that the ECT’s decision not to take legal action against even a single Bhumjaithai politician, despite solid evidence, was “tantamount to an action contrary to the law and the past standards of the ECT”.

The resolution not only allows the majority of those accused in the Senate collusion to escape prosecution but also perpetuates the problems surrounding the independent institutions under the 2017 Constitution, which have been truly unable to operate independently.

He said that the party will take and support legal action against the ECT for wrongful exercise of power and ensure that the evidence concerning the suspects who have not been indicted is brought before the Court.

The party will also scrutinize the accused politicians through parliamentary mechanisms, such as censure debates, as well as a public campaign.

Natthaphong reiterated that pushing for constitutional amendment is the way to limit the Senate’s illegitimacy and to allow the public to scrutinize and remove those who hold positions in independent bodies under the Constitution.

Response from iLaw

At a press conference following the ECT announcement, iLaw Director Yingcheep Atchanont said that iLaw has been following the Senate selection process since 2024, even before the ECT announced how the selection would be conducted. It campaigned for people to participate in the selection process and conducted observations at every level. After the national level selection, Yingcheep said, iLaw noticed something abnormal. He noted that over a thousand candidates were seen wearing the same outfits on voting day. Notes were found with the numbers of candidates who would later be selected as senators, winning more votes than even the ECT thought possible.

Yingcheep said that from this information, it can be concluded that there was a large conspiracy to ensure a chosen group of candidates were selected. He noted that at least 120 senators were part of this plot, and that as senators, they tend to vote in the same way so often that it is impossible to say they are independent.

It was not easy to find evidence of the conspiracy, he said, but the only people with a motive and opportunity are large political parties with networks in several provinces. The evidence pointed to the Bhumjaithai Party. Its MPs, former MPs, MP assistants, and politicians’ family members were accused of recruiting candidates and paying them, as well as gathering them in hotels and instructing them on how to vote.

Yingcheep said that the ECT decision not to prosecute political party executives is not surprising, given that even ECT Chair Narong Klanwarin was appointed following approval from the incumbent Senate and given that the Senate’s affiliation and connections are well-known.

He speculated that it is likely that the 77 people whose cases have been referred to the Court are minor players in the game who made a mistake, such as by transferring money from their own accounts or from those of their spouses. As for the others, not being prosecuted does not mean they did nothing wrong, just that they did not slip up and leave behind a trail.

Yingcheep stressed that the prosecution of 26 senators means that fraud was committed during the selection process. He noted that the information the ECT presented during its press conference is related to senator Surachart Wichaya Suwannaphrom from Nong Bua Lamphu, since it is the same information previously disclosed by People’s Party MP Parit Wacharasindhu about Surachart’s financial transactions.

Yingcheep noted that Surachart came 5th out of 154 candidates and that he won the highest number of votes during inter-group voting. This means that a large number of candidates were involved beyond candidates from Nong Bua Lumphu who received money. He questioned how other candidates included in the same voting instructions as Surachart can be uninvolved or unaware. Nevertheless, prosecuting some individuals means the ECT accepts that the Senate selection process was fraudulent.

Boonyanuch Matthujak, an iLaw representative, said that the ECT had acted as if it were a court. It is required by law to refer a case to court if there is reasonable evidence of fraud, but the ECT Chair said during the press conference that some witnesses were not credible or that other evidence was not found. She said that the ECT should have searched for additional evidence instead of judging a witness’ credibility and refusing to find other evidence. The verdict should be up to the Supreme Court, which is a more neutral organization than the ECT, whose commissioners were approved by the Senate.

Boonyanuch said that refusing to refer every suspect to court means the Supreme Court will not be able to find additional evidence and the public will never see whether those let off by the ECT were guilty.

Kalyakorn Sunthornphruek, another iLaw representative, noted that Ekkarat Changlao, a witness mentioned by the ECT as not being credible, is a former Bhumjaithai MP involved in recruiting candidates. Other witnesses said they met Ekkarat during the Senate selection and that they were candidates in Ekkarat’s network. Phone call records between Ekkarat and Newin Chidchob were also found.

Kalyakorn said iLaw will be releasing Ekkarat’s testimony to the public. Yingcheep added that iLaw considered Ekkarat a first-tier witness because he was still a Bhumjaithai MP in 2024 and testified during the investigation that Bhumjaithai executives and several Cabinet ministers were involved in the Senate selection fraud, but the ECT Chair said he dismissed Ekkarat’s testimony because Ekkarat had a prior conflict with Party executives.

Yingcheep said iLaw will be releasing more information from the case file, including testimonies of other witnesses.

Phatcha Chaimongkolsub, also an iLaw representative, said that it is necessary to rewrite the Constitution because it has become clear that the ECT commissioners, who came into office with approval of the Senate, have used their power to protect the Bhumjaithai-aligned senators. Bhumjaithai has also proposed a constitutional amendment that gives the Senate the power to select members of the drafting assembly and approve a new constitution. The only way out, she said, is to object to the drafting process proposed by Bhumjaithai and back a bill being proposed by the civil society calling for a Constitutional Drafting Assembly election.

Civil society is now in the process of collecting signatures for the bill. Eligible voters can support the bill at conforall.com.

eng editor 3 Mon, 2026-09-14 - 23:05

News

Protests demand ECT prosecute 229 senate selection fraud suspects

eng editor 1 — Mon, 14 Sep 2026 07:34:59 +0000

Protests demand ECT prosecute 229 senate selection fraud suspects

Protests took place in several provinces over the weekend to demand that the Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) prosecute 229 individuals accused of fraud during the 2024 Senate selection ahead of the ECT’s ruling on the case.

On Friday (11 September), in Khon Kaen, a group of activists gathered at the Ratchadanuson Park in Khon Kaen city where they play a game of bingo and gave speeches before marching to the ECT office in Khon Kaen.

Activist Nattaporn Artharn gave a speech saying that the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) has gathered evidence on the 229 suspects and all the ECT has to do is to refer the case to court. The group is calling on the ECT not to stall the case.

Activists submitting their petition at the ECT’s Phitsanulok office.

On Saturday (12 September), the Northern People Democracy Network (NPD) staged a protest in which they walked 229 steps to the provincial ECT office in Phitsanulok to file a petition demanding the prosecution of the 229 suspects.

Oat, one of the members, said that the group also filed a petition with the ECT office in Phetchabun on Friday (11 September). The group wants every suspect to go to trial and prove their innocence in court. They found the ECT questionable and are concerned that the ECT might not refer every suspect to court.

Sunday’s protesters marching through Ha Yaek Lat Phrao intersection.

On Sunday (13 September), iLaw staged a protest march from its office in Bangkok‘s Lat Phrao district to the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre (BACC) to demand the ECT prosecute all 229 suspects.

Speaking to the media ahead of the march, iLaw director Yingcheep Atchanont questioned the independence of the ECT, noting that 4 out of 7 election commissioners were appointed by the incumbent Senate. He reiterated that the civil society is demanding that the ECT refer the case to the Supreme Court so the case can be heard by a neutral organization.

Yingcheep said that iLaw has the case file, and if the ECT refuses to prosecute any of the 229 individuals, information about that individual will be released to the public. He stressed that they would prefer not to do it, but it would be necessary if the ECT leaves anyone out.

Protesters marching past the Victory Monument.

While stopping in front of the Century shopping mall near the Victory Monument, police officers negotiated with the organizers for a route change to avoid having a protest march pass by Sa Pathum Palace. Protesters instead marched to the Phayathai BTS Station, where they dispersed and met up again at the Siam BTS station. They then marched through the Siam shopping district to the BACC, where an event was taking place.

Opposition politicians like People‘s Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, deputy leader Sirikanya Tansakun, and a number of MPs including Parit Wacharasindhu and Chayaphon Satondee joined the march. Former election commissioner Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, former senator Ruengkrai Leekitwattana and sitting senator Wuttipong Pongsuwan also joined the march.

Participants in DRG’s activity running past a bus stop on Phayathai Road. (Photo: Kotcharak Kaewsurach)

At around 14.29, the Democracy Restoration Group (DRG) staged an event where they ran from the Chamchuri Square shopping mall to the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre (BACC), where a mass protest was taking place to demand that the Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) prosecute the 229 individuals suspected of Senate selection fraud.

At the BACC, they perform a symbolic act of protest by dropping clothes into a basket before joining the rest of the protesters.

The march from iLaw arrived at the BACC at around 15.00, where they joined the gatherings. The event featured performances, speeches, and activities from other civil society groups.

At the end of the protest, participants stood holding pictures of the suspects in the shape of the number “229”. The other side of the card they were holding says “Prosecute the senators.”

Of the 229 individuals being accused of collusion and fraud, 138 are sitting senators. 50 are former senator candidates and individuals on the reserve list. 21 are Bhumjaithai Party executives and MPs, including Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and several of his Cabinet ministers. 20 others are family members of candidates and Bhumjaithai MPs, MP assistants, and local politicians connected to the Bhumjaithai Party.

An iLaw representative presenting a board showing connection between senator candidates and politicians implicated in the Senate Selection fraud case. (Photo: Kotcharak Kaewsurach)

During the event, iLaw representatives gave a presentation on the case, including details of financial transactions made between senator candidates in exchange for votes and about meetings held at several hotels ahead of the national-level selection where candidates are given instructions on how to vote, as well as records of phone calls between candidates and Bhumjaithai politicians. They cited the joint investigation committee formed by the ECT and the Department of Special Investigation (DSI), which proposed that all 229 individuals be prosecuted, including Bhumjaithai Party members because they were participating in a plot to win seats in the Senate and were recruiting candidates and giving them notes for voting.

Yingcheep said in his speech during the event that, if the ECT does not prosecute the suspects, these senators will stay in office and there will not be anything anyone could do. They will then be appointing election commissioners, Constitutional Court judges, as well as board members in other independent bodies that should be holding the government accountable.

Yingcheep said that the only way of fixing the system is to amend the junta-backed 2017 Constitution. The problem is that constitutional amendments require approval from at least a third of the Senate. He noted, however, that there is hope in that 21 million people voted in favour of a new Constitution in the 8 February referendum.

If the ECT does not prosecute the senators, the so-called “Blue seantors”, or those aligned with the Bhumjaithai Party, would be in control of the constitutional amendment process. A new constitution that comes out of this process will not be better, he said, and the people will have no choice but to vote against it. If the ECT refers the case to court, the majority of senators would be suspended. He said that this could be a way towards a new constitution where everyone is heard.

Protesters in front of the BACC holding cards saying “Prosecute the senators” in the shape of the number “229.” (Photo: Kotcharak Kaewsurach)

Meanwhile, in Chiang Mai, people are camping out in front of the ECT‘s provincial office ahead of tomorrow’s meeting where the ECT will rule whether to refer the Senate selection fraud case to court. The gathering began at 16.00 and featured a free mic session, music from North Gate Jazz, and other activities.

Nutchapakorn Nammuang from the Constitution Advocacy Alliance (CALL) said during the event that Monday (14 September) will be another watershed moment in Thai politics, and the people are gathering to tell the powers that be that the elites are doing something that is not right. If the Senate lacks legitimacy, it would affect other positions appointed by the Senate, including the ECT and the Constitutional Court.

Protesters in Chiang Mai camping out in front of the provincial ECT office.

The Senate and the ECT have been put in the spotlight over the past few months as the opposition People‘s Party and the legal watchdog NGO iLaw release evidence of vote buying, vote rigging, and collusion during the 2024 Senate selection. Citing leaked official documents and witness testimony, they alleged that a number of senator candidates and high-ranking Bhumjaithai Party executives are involved in a plot to ensure that candidates aligned with the party are selected.

The ECT will meet on Monday (14 September) to rule whether to prosecute the suspects and refer the case to court. Meanwhile, the civil society has been pressuring the ECT to prosecute all 229 suspects, saying that the ECT is required by law to refer a case of suspected election fraud to the Supreme Court if there is reasonable evidence and that, since appointment of election commissioners are approved by the Senate, the ECT should not make a decision regarding the case and should simply refer it to court so the evidence can be heard during trial.

eng editor 1 Mon, 2026-09-14 - 14:34

News

ECT at the crossroad in Senate selection fraud saga

eng editor 1 — Sat, 12 Sep 2026 03:18:31 +0000

ECT at the crossroad in Senate selection fraud saga

Amidst mounting pressure from the opposition and the civil society, the Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) is convening this coming Monday (14 September) to rule whether to prosecute the 229 individuals accused of fraud during the 2024 Senate selection.

A controversial selection

The incumbent senators came into office in July 2024 following a complex self-selection process marked from the beginning by controversies.

The system was the brainchild of the Constitution Drafting Committee, led by Meechai Ruchupan, supposedly designed to eliminate political influence over the Senate and increase the diversity of senators. Candidates register by social and professional groups and senators qualify through both intra- and inter-group elections through a multi-level voting system at the district, provincial, and national levels.

The civil society have observed at the time of the selection that, instead of increasing public participation and diversity in the upper house, the process made it more difficult to participate as only candidates are allowed to vote and the general public was not allowed to closely observe the process. Meanwhile, 120 - 130 senators have been noted as voting in bloc on several motions. They came to be called the “Blue Senators” because of their alleged affiliation with the Bhumjaithai Party.

Allegations of collusion, vote rigging, and fraud soon arose. In March 2025, the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) launched an investigation into alleged collusion during the Senate selection with monetary offers being made to candidates. According to the DSI’s initial investigation, the acts constituted offences under Section 77 of the Organic Act on the Installation of Senators, under criminal laws regarding secret societies, and under the Money Laundering Act. The DSI eventually voted. 11:4 to take the case as a money laundering investigation.

Tawee Sodsong, then the Minister of Justice, said that the DSI had around 7,000 witnesses, 3,000 of whom were present during the national level selection.

In June 2025, Bhumjaithai left the government coalition led by the Pheu Thai Party, reportedly over the leaked phone call between then-Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen. When Paetongtarn was dismissed by the Constitutional Court in late August 2025, parliament elected Bhumjaithai Party leader Anutin Charnvirakul to replace her.

In December 2025, the DSI decided to indict 8 individuals, among whom were 2 senators, of money laundering.

On 17 July 2025, the 26th investigation committee, a joint committee formed by the ECT and the DSI, recommended the prosecution of all 229 individuals.

On 15 September 2025, soon after Anutin became Prime Minister, a set of documents was issued by Kanchit Charoen-in, Deputy Secretary-General of the ECT acting on behalf of ECT Secretary-General Sawaeng Boonmee. Kanchit proposed prosecuting 136 senators, 1 Cabinet minister, and 2 MPs. However, he proposed that the charges against Anutin and a number of Bhumjaithai Party executives be dismissed because he believes witness testimonies are insufficient.

It was reported on 12 March 2026 that the ECT’s 36th Subcommittee, formed in September 2025 to rule whether to act on the proposal of the 26th investigation committee and refer the case to court. It eventually voted 5 to 2 to dismiss the case entirely.

According to People’s Party MP Parit Wacharasindhu, an ECT representative told the House Standing Committee on independent bodies that the 35th subcommittee’s workload was too much for it to take a case that needs to be carefully considered.

The House Committee and Parit himself have both asked the ECT to provide information on what the 36th subcommittee have done in regards to the investigation, but the information was never delivered. The House Committee met on 18 June 2026 to discuss the Senate selection fraud case, but the ECT representatives taking part in the meeting did not explain the role of the 36th Subcommittee. Questions were therefore raised about the 36th Subcommittee’s function and whether it was an attempt to steer the case in favour of the accused.

Former election commissioner Somchai Srisutthiyakorn alleged that investigators from the 26th investigation committee were never summoned to speak to the 36th Subcommittee, and the Subcommittee never considered the over 10,000 pages of primary evidence. He claimed that its meetings mostly consisted of listening to its secretaries summarising the 26th committee’s case file. He also questioned its interpretation of the law, raising concerns that too narrow an interpretation might mean the Subcommittee does not see the political connection.

People’s Party MP Chayapon Satondee has also alleged that members of the 36th Subcommittee participated in the ECT’s Advanced Certificate Course in Politics and Election Development and the Constitutional Court’s Rule of Law for Democracy programme along with several people accused of Senate selection fraud. Participating in these programme does not mean they committed an offense, Chayapon said, but it is questionable whether connection between these individuals affect the neutrality of the Subcommittee.

Who are the accused?

An infographic showing the number of Bhumjaithai MPs in each province and the number of senators. (Photo from WeVis)

The 229 individuals included 138 sitting senators, 50 candidates and individuals on the reserve list, 21 Bhumjaithai politicians, and 20 other individuals linked to Bhumjaithai politicians, including family members, former MP candidates, MP assistants, and local politicians.

The list was released to the public in late July, when iLaw submitted information to the opposition requesting an investigation into 9 politicians allegedly involved with collusion during the Senate selection, including Anutin and 5 other sitting Cabinet ministers.

Among the 138 senators accused, 14 are from Buriram, Bhumjaithai’s main stronghold, where local MPs are also accused. Also on the list are Newin Chidchob, the patriarch of the province’s main political dynasty, and his son Chaichanok, the current Minister of Digital Economy and Society.

Other politicians are included on the list who are members of Bhumjaithai-affiliated political dynasties, like Prime Minister’s Office Minister Paradorn Prisnanantakul and his brother Koravee who is an MP for Ang Thong, and deputy Interior Minister Jeseth Thaiseth, son of Uthai Thani politician Chada Thaiseth. There are also Bhumjaithai MPs from Si Saket, Ayutthaya, Phichit, Satun, Leoi, Buriram, Krabi, Surat Thani, Ubon Ratchathani, Sukothai, and Amnat Charoen.

Parit said during an event organised by the opposition that, according to several witnesses, there is an attempt to take over the Senate and that individuals involved in the collusion targeted smaller provinces because it would require less people to ensure that a candidate aligned with said group get to the national level.

ECT in the hot seat

Individuals wearing yellow shirts at the national level selection. (Photo from ConForAll)

The Senate and the ECT has been put in the spotlight over the past few months as the opposition and the legal watchdog NGO iLaw and the opposition began releasing evidence of vote rigging and collusion and alleging that high-ranking Bhumjaithai members, including Cabinet ministers, were involved.

iLaw said that observers began noticing abnormalities on the day of the national-level selection. A large number of candidates were seen wearing the same yellow shirt and black jacket and carrying the same document folder. Observers noticed that they tend to move around in groups. When leaving the Impact Forum, one group left together and was picked up by vans parked behind IMPACT Challenger Hall, where there were no people around. One of the vehicles had a Buriram license plate.

Some candidates were winning an unusually high number of votes while others got none. It has also been noted that provinces that are known Bhumjaithai strongholds have several senators in each province, such as in Buriram, where 14 candidates were selected, or Ang Thong, where 6 were selected.

iLaw director Yingcheep Atchanont told the101world that, according to the DSI’s meeting minute, the candidates wore yellow shirts to blend in with ECT officials at the selection so they would be able to walk around or go to the toilet without being followed as people might think they work for the ECT. Nantawat Saksakulkunakorn from the ConForAll Network said during the same interview that, according to candidates, the yellow-clad candidates tend to gather in the toilet. Afterwards, a crumpled piece of paper was found on the floor containing number of candidates.

Video clips were released by People’s Party MP Parit Wacharasindhu and former election inspector Pol Col Manas Nakornsri showing officials walking around and asking candidates to hand over their notes, telling the candidates to vote honestly. One of the officials was identified as election commissioner Thitichet Nutchanart, while one of the candidates was now-Senate President MongkoL Surasajja. In one video clip, ECT officials were seen putting confiscated notes into their pockets.

The ECT issued a press release saying that it was not illegal to bring documents or notes into the selection venue as there is no law explicitly prohibiting candidates from doing so. However, the ECT issued a resolution on 26 June 2024 prohibiting candidates from bringing documents into the inter-group voting round. It may not be illegal, but the ECT is free to issue regulations for order during the selection, so such notes must be confiscated when found.

Citing leaked official documents and witness testimonies, iLaw have released information from the investigation to the public, including concerning vote buying in several provinces. Former candidates have come forward saying they were offered money in exchange for voting for specific individuals.

In Surat Thani, for example, iLaw alleged that Subin Sakda, who claimed to be an assistant to local Bhumjaitai MP Pichai Chomphupol, transferred money to around 10 candidates during the provincial level selection. Among them is a former candidate named Nattapong Saroj, who later testified to the DSI. During an event iLaw organised on 23 August, Nattapong said he received a phone call from a local MP assistant offering him 3,000 baht and asking him to “help the boss,” which he believes refer to the MP. He also received an offer of an additional 2,000 baht at the provincial level.

And in Nong Bua Lamphu, witnesses said that Sorachart Wichaya Suwannaphrom, who later became senator, transferred money to Pannipa Pasuk, who then transferred a total of around 105,000 baht to at least 7 candidates. Some were invited to the Tara Grand Hotel in Pathum Thani, where they met Sorachart and Pannipa and was offered 500,000 baht each. Pannipa also transferred money for their travel and gave them a yellow shirt.

According to an opinion issued by Kanchit Charoen-in, Deputy Secretary-General of the ECT, which iLaw released, Kanchit believes that the ECT should prosecute Sorachart, noting that Sorachart transferred money to Pannipa several times and Pannipa transferred money to candidates. Given this, and the fact that they have a child together, Kanchit said there is enough reason to believe Sorachart and Pannipa were either accomplices or know what the other was doing.

Both iLaw and the opposition have also made allegations about a vote rigging scheme where candidates were taken to hotel conference rooms and instructed to vote for a certain group. Witnesses say they had their phones confiscated while in these meetings and were told to to make a table in the last page of their introduction document and write down numbers of candidates to use during the selection. Documents found during the investigation contain the number of 140 candidates.

Several witnesses said they were given money and gifts, as well as had their travel and hotel stay paid for.

Ballots from the national level selection voting for the same candidates in the same order. (Photo from Phanida Mongkolsawat)

It was also found that a large number of ballots contain the number on the document in the same order. According to People’s Party MP Phanida Mongkolsawat, the same pattern occurred in several groups, where 10 candidates were getting a notably high number of votes. During the afternoon round where candidates vote across groups, 6 out of the 10 candidates from the morning round emerge with a high vote count.

Direk Pornseema, a former candidate from Maha Sarakham, said he attempted to raise the issue to ECT officials during the national-level selection. He said he noticed that the bellots being counted look identical, so he asked the officials if they were counting old ballots. He also said there were around 20 candidates in his group that did not get any vote.

iLaw also release information from the DSI’s case file, including call logs showing phone calls from several candidates from Ang Thong to Paradorn and Koravee Prisnanantakul on the night of the national-level selection, when vote counting was still in progress. The location of both the callers and Koravee is shown to be Muang Thong Thani, where the selection took place. By law, senator candidates are prohibited from using communication devices throughout the selection process.

Phanida said that now-senator Alongkot Worakee, former deputy governor. of Buriram, called Deputy Interior Minister Jeseth Thaiseth 31 time and called Bhumjaithai MP and Jeseth’s father Chada 3 times. Although making these calls is not wrong, Phanida said that it shows the relationship between politicians and individuals who became senators.

Phone signals for at least 40 senators were found at the Pullman Hotel on 21 July 2024. Parit said that all 40 senators are being accused of fraud.

On Thursday (10 September), iLaw published information from the 26th investigation committee’s case, which recommended the prosection of Bhumjaithai Party executives.

According to the case file, Bhumjaithai MPs were instructed to recruit senator candidates, who were offered money in exchange for joining the scheme. At the national level, one candidate is tasked with covering the costs of travel, food, and hotel stay for other candidates in their network. Witnesses say the party aimed to win around 120 seats in the Senate.

After the national-level selection, senators-to-be were asked to meet at the Kingpower Hotel in Bangkok, where they met Newin and given instructions. Newin also chose one senator among the “Blue-aligned” group to become Senate president.

The 26th investigation committee ruled that, given the evidence and witness testimony, Bhumjaithai Party executives and their network were colluding in a nationwide scheme to win seats in the Senate and use their positions to ensure the plan succeed. By taking part in the scheme, candidates were not voting independently, while their action also mean the selection was not held in secret. This is unconstitutional and an offense under the Organic Act on the Acquisition of Senators.

iLaw have also reported that, in many provinces, candidates were not running the groups that fit their profession. In Ang Thong, the stronghold of the Bhumjaithai-aligned Prisnanantakul family, none of the group 12 candidates in Pa Mok district were industrial operators. Most wrote on their introduction document that they “work for hire,” while one said they were a deputy village chief.

Meanwhile, in group 17, candidates in every district wrote that they were village health volunteers. The group is supposed to be for NGOs, civil society groups, and public interest organizations, but village health volunteers are paid by the state. It is also not a profession and several candidates wrote that they have other jobs, from agriculture to “work for hire.”

iLaw also noticed that the group 17 candidates write very similar introduction or wear similar clothes in their photos. In Wiset Chai Chan district, they wrote that they were part of medical mobile units. In Samko district, all candidates wore a polo shirt with a village health volunteer logo on the left pocket in their photos. In Muang district, they all wear white collared shirts and a jacket.

Similar phenomenon have been noted in other provinces. In Buriram, group 16 candidates (arts, culture, and sports) wrote that they participated in cultural events, while several group 17 candidates wore the same shirt and tie in their photos and wrote that they were village health volunteers.

Chanchai Chaiyapit, a senator from Buriram, ran as a candidate in group 17. iLaw noted that he is an educator, a school principal, and President of the Association of Provincial Kindergarten Executive and Teachers. However, said association was registered in Buriram on 15 August 2023. Another association with the same name was registered in Bangkok in June 2011, but Chanchai’s introduction document said he was president between 2021-2023, or around 3 years, when the law requires 10 years of experience in a profession to run for the Senate.

Meanwhile, in Amnat Charoen, 2 senators from group 10 (large enterprises) did not appear to own businesses that would qualify for the group. Senator Daeng Kongma said she sells pork. According to iLaw, Daeng has a stall at a local market, but does not appear to have enough employees or make enough profit to be a large enterprise.

Senator Sompan Palasak wrote in his introduction document that he sells chicken noodle soup, but later said in an interview that he actually sells fish ball noodle. iLaw attempted to check his claim but could not find the shop on Google Map. They found a picture online of Sompan working in a restaurant called “Krua Ton Kradon,” while his Facebook profile states that he works for “Nai Pan Noodles.” A witness visited a chicken noodle shop in Amnat Charoen and was told by an employee that Sompan used to work there but was not the owner. Nonetheless, each shop mentioned has been opened for less than 10 years and does not appear to employ enough people or make enough profit to be a large enterprise.

What’s next?

Protesters at the ECT on 30 August holding pictures of the 229 individuals accused of fraud in the Senate selection. A banner hanging from the balcony says “Prosecute the senators.”

Demands continued to be made for the ECT to prosecute all 229 individuals and refer the case to the Supreme Court so that evidence can be heard in court. Although the ECT previously said it would rule on the case by the end of August, it said on 28 August that it will rule whether to refer the case to court on 14 September.

Civil society organizations have said that the ECT must refer the case to court so that the evidence can heard during a trial. And because the ECT’s legitimacy has been under scrutiny due to the connection between commissioners and the Bhumjaithai Party, it should not be making a decision and should simply send the case to court.

Election commissioners are appointed on the Senate’s approval and 4 out of the 7 sitting commissioners were approved by the incumbent Senate. Not only that, as noted by the Constitutional Advocacy Alliance (CALL), 3 out of the 7 sitting commissioners were once bureaucrats under a Bhumjaithai minister. Some members of the nomination committee for election commissioners are also connected to Bhumjaithai-aligned politicians and senators.

Under the 2018 Organic Act on the Acquisition of Senators, the ECT must refer a case to court if there is reasonable evidence of fraud. Once the Supreme Court accepts the complaint, senators implicated in the case will automatically be suspended.

The ECT previously refer to the Supreme Court a case against a number of senator candidates over messages agreeing to vote for each other. The Supreme Court subsequently found them guilty and ban them from running in elections for 10 years, ruling that even trading votes is fraudulent as it means candidates are not voting freely or because of another candidate’s professional experience.

The ECT has also referred to court the case of 7 candidates from Roi Et accused of vote buying.

Concerns have also been raised that, if the ECT dismisses the case, it could also affect the DSI’s ongoing investigation. Phanida said that the DSI might close the case if the ECT does not prosecute the accused, but even if it does, DSI investigators will not be testifying in court as they were transferred to another unit.

Several abnormalities have been noted over the past weeks as the People’s Party and iLaw ramp up the pressure by releasing evidence and bringing witnesses to speak at events. Rumours have been circulating that Pol Capt Piya Raksakun, director-general of the Department of Probation, will soon be appointed director of the DSI. Concerns were raised as Pol Capt Piya sat on the ECT’s 36th subcommittee and was among those who voted to dismiss the Senate election fraud case and the DSI is separately investigating alleged criminal association and money laundering associated with the Senate selection.

Meanwhile, the House of Representatives’ Standing Committee on Police Affairs summoned Parit and Yingcheep to give a statement on the leaked documents after the DSI filed a complaint with the Crime Suppression Division over the leak on 25 August. The Chair of the committee insisted that he was doing his job and that he was not trying to obstruct the opposition.

On 3 September, when parliament was supposed to discuss the ECT’s annual report, Bhumjaithai MPs proposed moving up an urgent motion on the Deep South. The House Speaker adjourned the meeting following arguments between MPs. Parliament has also dropped its Friday session (11 September) after delays and interruptions caused the debate on the budget bill to run past the original schedule of 7-9 September. The opposition has accused the ruling Bhumjaithai Party of protecting the ECT and trying to delay debate on its function until after 14 September.

With the case now in its final stretch, the civil society are staging protests in several provinces to demand prosecution. iLaw have said several times that, if the ECT decide not to indict any one of the 229 accused, it will release the information it has on that individuals. A final gathering has also been called this Sunday (13 September) at the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre.

eng editor 1 Sat, 2026-09-12 - 10:18

Feature

Cartoon by Stephff: Sondhi is back

eng editor 1 — Fri, 11 Sep 2026 09:42:38 +0000

Cartoon by Stephff: Sondhi is back

eng editor 1 Fri, 2026-09-11 - 16:42

Multimedia

Thai student movement forms ‘Hope Theatre,’ making the stage its new battleground

eng editor 1 — Mon, 07 Sep 2026 07:53:28 +0000

Thai student movement forms ‘Hope Theatre,’ making the stage its new battleground

This past year, Thailand’s ‘Bad Student Organisation’ developed a new mechanism to question seemingly unbreakable cultural and educational taboos: theatre.

In 2025, the organisation formed Hope Theatre in order to create a dialogue around long-held Thai cultural norms and practices, particularly those involving education and students’ rights. Such practices include corporal punishment, never questioning teachers, wearing school uniforms and compliance with haircut regulations.

In September 2025, Hope Theatre delivered its first performance, a musical called Ribbon Club, which centred around four students who seek to uncover the truth behind a classmate’s mysterious death at an academy for magic similar to Harry Potter’s Hogwarts. At the behest of the character Jinny, a top ่student at the school, students gather to discuss the institution, its rigid rules, how teachers employ violence against them, and the identities they are forced to adopt.

(Photo from Hope Theatre)

As explained by Thamjuthi Thiangtham, 18, who recently completed his freshman year at Chulalongkorn University and works as an editor for Bad Student Organisation, “we started with the question of violence in the context of Thai schools … authoritarianism and violence directed against the lives and freedoms of students.”

He was referring to Thailand’s long-standing use of corporal punishment in schools. It was officially banned in March 2025 but the law has not been strictly enforced. Thamjuthi said that over the past year, his organisation received over 200 reports of student rights violations, including corporal punishment, mental abuse, and discrimination against LGBTQ+ students.

Thai teachers still frequently make headlines by imposing physical punishments on students. In June 2025, three months after the ban was implemented, a Bangkok teacher made a student do 200 squats as punishment for late homework. In February 2026, another student was hospitalised after his teacher ordered him to perform 800 squats for failing to submit an assignment.

Raising the issue on stage allowed student actors to address the violence directed again their peers. It also let them magically defend themselves from violent teachers.

Another topic raised in Ribbon Club the Musical is the suppression of classroom questions and debate. In the play, the characters have a special room where they can go for open conversations, similar to the room Harry Potter and his friends secretly gathered in to train against dark magic after a corrupt teacher refused to teach them. It provides a safe space for the students to break free from strict school rules. Inside, they can talk about anything, questioning, challenging, and debating with friends.” According to Thamjuthi, it frees them “to openly question the school power structure.”

The room is a plot device which serves to challenge cultural notions of what makes a “good student.” In Thai society, Thamjuthi said, “ideal” students don’t just have academic ability; they obey their teachers and don’t ask questions. “Conversely, a student who is brave enough to ask questions and disagree is considered arrogant … and labeled bad.” In the play, when students deemed ‘good’ and ‘bad’ by teachers meet each other and talk in the secret room, they discover there are no differences between them, however.

In the world of Ribbon Club, it is magic which serves as an indicator of who is a good student. Anything unrelated is deemed useless. Students are expected to use magic every day or - according to an ancient belief - some sort of major disaster will happen. The idea of using magic as a symbol, Thamjuthi said, was meant to help non-Thai audience members who might be less familiar with the context of the Thai education system understand the themes of the play. The audience included members of the Swedish Embassy, as well as some Chinese and American nationals.

According to Thamjuthi, around 80 percent of the audience were young people who already agreed with Hope Theatre’s message and protests. The rest were elderly people, who agreed with the play’s message but didn’t necessarily agree with direct protest. Younger audience members thanked the theatre group for making them more optimistic and hopeful about change in Thai schools. As for the elderly, although the play “wasn’t polite enough for them,” Hope Theatre’s advocacy drew praise from some, including a very conservative high school principal. Thamjuthi found it impressive that “art has this power to bring people, even those who might not stand on our side, to have more faith in us.”

(Photo from Hope Theatre)

Hope Theatre’s next performance will likely be staged in late 2026 or early 2027. It doesn’t have a script yet but Thamjuthi said it will explore the intense competition to be admitted to Thailand’s top schools. An idea in the works is for the plot to feature a reality or game show in which students must fiercely compete to demonstrate their ability. According to Thamjuthi, “contestants can do anything, no matter if it’s right or wrong, to compete for the prize. “

From the height of Thailand’s youth protests in 2020-22, the student movement has quieted down. In 2020, Bad Student led numerous protests for students’ rights and protections from strict uniform policies, haircut rules, and abusive teachers. Their protests often included costumes and creative expression, such as songs from the Japanese cartoon “Hamtaro.” These protests came amidst a larger protest movement demanding reforms of Thailand’s Article 112, which prohibits criticism of the country’s monarchy. Thamjuthi noted that Bad Student doesn’t engage in political issues at the national level, such as parties, the constitution or the justice system. However, regarding the larger protest movement, he remarked that as a result of the government’s ensuing crackdown, “most of our protest leaders had to go overseas … with negative consequences for the movement,” Thamjuthi said.

Thamjuthi remains hopeful for change, despite the election results earlier this year. He notes that ‘Bad Student’ has become a household name locally and no longer carries a negative connotation. “If you’re a bad student in your school, maybe it’s because you’re rebellious. Maybe it’s because you’re brave enough to question your teacher or challenge their power,“ he said.

Hope Theatre’s primary challenge, Thamjuthi said, is funding. Last year, the initiative was lucky enough to receive funding from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). Now, however, it must find a new source of funding. It is not easy. “To work with students in this society, to work with youth to promote democracy… few funders or businesses are confident enough.”

Hope Theatre is a continuation of the student movement’s focus on art and culture. In the beginning, the organisation used dinosaurs to portray conservatives, promoting the slogan “goodbye dinosaurs.” Bad Student has also provided students with cartoon guidebooks to help students understand their rights. Another of their past artistic endeavours involved translating songs from Matilda the Musical into Thai in order to explain learners’ rights.

eng editor 1 Mon, 2026-09-07 - 14:53

Interview

Detention of Chinese dissidents draw continued pressure, attention to treatment of refugees

eng editor 1 — Sat, 05 Sep 2026 16:05:17 +0000

Detention of Chinese dissidents draw continued pressure, attention to treatment of refugees

Human rights organizations have urged Thailand to immediately halt the possible deportation of Chinese dissidents currently detained in Bangkok, warning that returning them to China would violate the international principle of non-refoulement and expose them to a serious risk of persecution, arbitrary detention, torture, and enforced disappearance.

The case has drawn renewed international attention to Thailand's treatment of refugees and political asylum seekers at a time when the country's diplomatic and economic relations with China continue to deepen. Rights advocates argue that the detention of the four dissidents illustrates a broader trend in which geopolitical considerations increasingly outweigh humanitarian obligations, raising concerns that Thailand is becoming an increasingly unsafe transit country for individuals fleeing political persecution in China.

A number of Chinese dissidents were detained at the Suan Phlu Immigration Detention Center in Bangkok between July and August. At least four were known: former investigative journalist Bai Zhaodong, activist Zhou Junyi, Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Zhang Xinyan, and human rights advocate Tan Yixiang. All four are recognised as refugees by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

On 13 July 2026, Human Rights Watch publicly urged Thai authorities not to deport the detainees, stating that the Chinese government had intensified pressure on Bangkok ahead of Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul's official visit to China from 16–20 July. HRW warned that any forced return would constitute a violation of Thailand's international legal obligations and would further damage the country's human rights reputation.

Sunai Phasuk, Senior Thailand Adviser at Human Rights Watch, criticized Thailand's repeated willingness to comply with requests from Beijing concerning Chinese political dissidents. He argued that successive Thai governments have repeatedly ignored international human rights obligations in order to maintain favorable relations with China. According to Sunai, Thailand should instead permit the dissidents to travel safely to third countries where they have already been accepted for resettlement.

Among this group, Zhang has since been released and resettled in Canada. A Falun Gong practitioner, journalist, and member of the “Hong Kong Parliament” exiled activist group, Zhang is wanted by the Hong Kong authorities along with 14 other members of the group for alleged “subversion” under Hong Kong’s draconian National Security law.

Zhang had been approved for resettlement in Canada and was scheduled to leave Thailand on 8 July. However, Thai immigration authorities prevented her from departing shortly before her flight and transferred her to immigration detention.

Human rights organizations issued statements calling for her release. Fortify Rights submitted a petition on 15 July to Thailand’s Parliamentary Committee on Legal Affairs, Justice and Human Rights requesting an investigation into Zhang’s detention and urging authorities to facilitate her departure to Canada. The organisation argued that preventing a UN-recognised refugee from reaching a country willing to provide asylum raised serious concerns regarding due process and Thailand’s human rights obligations.

Zhang’s legal representatives were unable to contact her during the first few days of her detention and were not allowed to visit her. They filed for a court hearing under Thailand’s Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act, requesting that all relevant agencies be summoned to testity on why Zhang was not allowed to board her flight and why her representatives were not informed of her whereabouts.

During the hearing on 16 July, a representative of the Immigration Bureau confirmed that the Chinese Embassy in Bangkok had requested that her resettlement be delayed, while Canadian authorities had already accepted her for resettlement and issued the necessary visa. The Thai Immigration Bureau subsequently prevented her departure while the case was considered by Thai authorities.

Hong Kong Free Press reported on 6 August that Zhang has arrived in Canada. Her arrival ended weeks of uncertainty over her fate and concern over potential deportation to China.

The case of Bai Zhaodong has also received particular international attention. Bai is formerly an investigative journalist for the investigative magazine Caijin. He has reported on high-level corruption in rural China and the social consequences of President Xi Jinping’s poverty alleviation initiatives on vulnerable populations, and fled China after facing pressure for his reporting.

Bai told Reporters Without Border (RSF) that at least five charges were brought against him between 2011 and 2022 by various public security departments due to his reporting on fraud and corruption. He was also accused of “inciting subversion of state power,” which carries up to five years in prison. If a court classify it as a “major crime,” five year is the minimum sentence.

Reuters reported that China has requested Bai’s extradition from Thailand, claiming that Bai is wanted on charges of extortion and bribery.

Bai remains in detention. His lawyers have filed a petition with the South Bangkok Criminal Court for his release on the grounds that he is being unlawfully detained. A hearing will take place on 18 September.

Nadthasiri Bergman, one of Bai‘s lawyers, said that Bai has a visa for a third country. He was initially scheduled to leave Thailand on 5 February, but the trip was cancelled after Thai authorities claimed that the exit clearance process was not completed. His re-scheduled trip on 22 June was also cancelled.

Nadthasiri said that exit clearance must not take more than 3 weeks and should be completed. She noted Bai has no criminal charge in Thailand and a third country has already agreed to his resettlement, and that it is unclear why he is not allowed to leave the country.

Another detainee, Tan Yixiang, has reportedly been deported. A Catholic activist and vocal advocate for the rights of Tibetans and Uyghurs, Tan came to Thailand in 2022. According to Human Rights Watch, he was then arrested and later released on bail in mid-2023. The police arrested him again in February 2024 and placed in immigration detention.

Thai Enquirer reported that Tan was deported around 11 - 12 July, days before Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul’s official visit to Beijing. Sunai told Thai Enquirer that Tan was deported, but there was no confirmation from the Thai or Chinese governments.

It is unclear whether Zhou Junyi, a member of the banned China Democracy Party who fled China in 2015 and was arrested in Bangkok in 2025 after organising a memorial event for the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre, is still held in immigration detention.

The case of the detained dissidents follows a broader pattern of controversial deportations and forced returns by Thailand that have drawn international concern. Thailand has previously returned refugees and dissidents to countries like China, Vietnam, and Cambodia, where they are likely to be prosecuted or face other abuses. Many of those forcibly returned were UN-recognised refugees.

Two Chinese activists and UN-recognised refugees, Dong Guangping and Jiang Yifei, were deported to China in 2015, despite being approved for resettlement in Canada. Both were subsequently detained upon their return.

In February 2025, Thailand deported 40 Uyghur men to China despite repeated warnings from the UN and international human rights organizations that they could face human rights violations upon their return. Earlier, in 2015, Thai authorities also deported more than 100 Uyghur asylum seekers to China, triggering widespread condemnation from the international community.

In November 2021, Thai authorities deported at least three Cambodian refugees despite UNHCR having notified the government of their refugee status and concerns about their safety if returned. UNHCR condemned the deportations, saying that it contravenes the principle of non-refoulement. Freedom House has also documented the case of four Cambodian dissidents who were deported from Thailand that same month despite being registered as refugees with UNHCR; all four were reportedly arrested immediately after their return to Cambodia.

Thailand has also faced criticism over the forced return of Vietnamese dissidents. In November 2024, Thai authorities extradited Y Quynh Bdap, a Montagnard human rights and religious activist who had been recognised as a refugee by UNHCR, to Vietnam. Human Rights Watch said his return placed him at risk of torture and other serious abuses, while Bdap had previously been sentenced in absentia by a Vietnamese court to 10 years in prison on terrorism-related charges that he denied. The case prompted renewed concerns that Thailand may prioritise immigration enforcement and bilateral relations over the protection of people fleeing political persecution.

Even refugees and asylum seekers who are not dissidents are not safe. Thailand has hosted displaced persons from Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam for decades, and UNHCR reported that Thailand was hosting more than 80,000 refugees from Myanmar in nine border shelters and around 6,500 urban refugees and asylum seekers from more than 46 countries as of February 2026. In 2025, Human Rights Watch reported that Thai authorities continued to carry out mass deportations of Myanmar nationals, including children, despite the grave risks they could face if returned given continuing conflict and repression in Myanmar. More recently, in August 2026, rights groups warned that 26 ethnic Karen villagers detained in Phetchaburi province faced possible deportation to Myanmar after Thai authorities raided their community and arrested 28 people, including children and pregnant women.

Thailand is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and has no national refugee law. However, its 2023 Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Dispparance Act prohibit the transfer of individuals to a countries where they may face torture or inhumane treatment. Human rights organizations have argued that deporting the dissidents would be in conflict not only with international human rights laws but also with Thailand’s own legislation. Meanwhile, the absence of secure legal status leaves many refugees and asylum seekers vulnerable to immigration detention, forced return and pressure from the governments they fled.

Human rights advocates believe that these cases reflect a broader pattern of transnational repression, whereby governments are cooperating with each other to monitor, intimidate, detain, abduct, or forcibly return political oppositions and human rights defenders. In Southeast Asia, dissidents who fled to neighbouring countries continue to face surveillance, legal pressure, extradition requests, and diplomatic efforts aimed at securing their return.

The pressure also operates in the opposite direction. Thai activists who fled to Laos, Cambodia, or Vietnam have disappeared or been killed, such as Chatchan Buppawan and Kraidej Leulert, whose body was found in the Mekong River in December 2018 after they disappeared in Laos along with fellow dissident Surachai Danwattananusorn.

Siam Theerawut and Chucheap Chewasut, both Thai dissidents living in exile in Vietnam, were reportedly extradited back to Thailand but were never heard from again.

Taken together, these cases illustrate how transnational repression can function through a combination of formal and informal mechanisms: extradition requests, immigration detention, diplomatic pressure, surveillance, cross-border policing and, in the most serious cases, alleged abduction or enforced disappearance. Freedom House has described Southeast Asia as a major centre of such cooperation, noting that authoritarian governments increasingly collaborate to pursue dissidents beyond their own borders. The result is a regional environment in which exile does not necessarily guarantee safety. For refugees and political activists, crossing into a neighbouring country may provide temporary physical distance from persecution without providing durable protection from the governments they fled.

Observers also argue that Thailand's expanding strategic partnership with China has contributed to growing concerns regarding refugee protection. China has become one of Thailand's largest trading partners and a major investor in infrastructure, tourism, and transportation projects. While neither government has publicly acknowledged any connection between bilateral relations and the treatment of Chinese dissidents, Human Rights Watch warned that Beijing's increasing pressure ahead of Prime Minister Anutin's official visit has heightened fears that political considerations may influence decisions concerning refugee protection.

Thailand’s handling of the case may also affect its international standing ahead of its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) later this year. As a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Thailand has repeatedly committed to strengthening human rights protections, including for refugees and asylum seekers. Yet the detention, threatened deportation and forced-return cases involving people from China, Cambodia, Vietnam and Myanmar have raised broader questions about whether Thailand can provide a safe and reliable place of refuge for people fleeing persecution. For refugee advocates, the cases of Bai Zhaodong, Zhou Junyi and Tan Yixiang therefore extend beyond the fate of three individuals: they are a test of whether Thailand will uphold the principle of non-refoulement when doing so may conflict with diplomatic or security interests. Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights have urged Thai authorities to allow the remaining dissidents to travel to countries willing to receive them, arguing that Thailand's response will demonstrate whether its international human rights commitments are being implemented in practice.

eng editor 1 Sat, 2026-09-05 - 23:05

Round Up