Evidence-seeking system in election fraud cases

Abstract

This analytical article aims to study the evidence seeking system in election fraud cases. The research method is document analysis and descriptive presentation. The research results of the evidence seeking system in election fraud cases found that the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2560 stipulates that the Supreme Court shall use the investigation or inquiry records of the Election Commission as the main consideration. However, there was a ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court in the red case number F.26/2557 and black case number F.7/2554 that the ruling of the National Anti-Corruption Commission that resolved that the plaintiff had committed a serious disciplinary offense by acting or omitting to act in official duties inappropriately to cause serious damage to a person according to Section 85 (1) of the Civil Service Act B.E. 2551 is binding on the organization with the power to consider the appeal, but is not binding on the court, which is an organization that exercises judicial power with independence in considering the case and can examine and seek the facts as appropriate. In this regard, the Administrative Court may accept witnesses, documentary evidence, expert witnesses, or other evidence in addition to the evidence of the parties as it deems appropriate. According to Section 197 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2550 and Section 55, paragraph three of the Administrative Court Establishment Act, the Administrative Court has independent discretion to consider and adjudicate this case according to the case without having to rely on evidence from the case file of the intervening petitioner. For this reason, in the Supreme Court's consideration of the case of election fraud under Section 226, paragraph two, the Supreme Court is not required to make a decision based only on the investigation or inquiry file of the Election Commission. However, the Supreme Court can seek additional evidence.