A tough job for election panel

General news - Thursday December 13, 2007

EDITORIAL

A tough job for election panel

Whether Chaowarin Latthasaksiri, a People Power party-list candidate, really meant what he said, his warning that the country would burn if the party were dissolved for electoral violations could be deemed both a threat and a challenge to the Election Commission.

Apparently the PPP candidate was concerned that the EC would investigate the allegation made by Veera Somkwamkid that many VCDs had been widely distributed in the North and Northeast in which former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra urged people to vote for the PPP.

It is encouraging the EC has not taken Mr Chaowarin's warning seriously and is going ahead with its investigation into the VCD case.

Despite the PPP candidate's prediction, the country will definitely not burn so long as the party members and their supporters play by the rules and not resort to mass instigation. Nonetheless, adverse repercussions should not be ruled out in case the party is to be dissolved by the EC for electoral violations in connection with the controversial VCDs, given the fact that People Power has massive support among the grassroots people, especially in the North and Northeast. Thus, it is of utmost importance that the EC treat the case with great care, fairness and without partiality.

This means the EC must not base its judgement on just the evidence presented by Mr Veera, who initiated the petition. The PPP has a valid point in its claim that the VCDs could have been produced and distributed by anyone who harboured malicious intentions against the party. However, one wonders why the PPP has been silent all this time since the VCDs first emerged, making noises only now that the matter has reached the EC. The party can hardly deny it has benefited from the VCD distribution.

Despite its promise to hold free and fair elections and to treat all contesting parties and candidates with equal impartiality, the EC is regarded by several PPP members and supporters as being biased against them. This suspicion may stem from the fact that the PPP is the most watched by the EC.

Aside from the VCDs which are the subject of an investigation, the EC has also decided to file a complaint with the police accusing the PPP of forging a signature on a membership application for Puea Pandin deputy leader Sitthichai Kwosurat, after the Supreme Court cleared him of a charge of holding membership in two parties. On top of that, the Anti-Money Laundering Office and the Immigration police are investigating whether the PPP had anything to do with the 60 million baht in cash hand-carried into the country by a group of Hong Kong Chinese. It was suspected the money would be used to buy votes.

The EC's ruling yesterday which cleared the Council for National Security of any wrongful act in connection with the leaked classified documents detailing ploys to block the PPP from winning the election may further enhance the PPP's suspicions against the election watchdog. The EC based its ruling on the CNS argument that the ploys detailed in the documents had never actually been carried out.

Perhaps the PPP may have a fixation against the EC for the simple fact that it was handpicked by the coup-makers who overthrew the Thaksin regime. This perception is not likely to change overnight. What actually matters is that the EC must not only be fair but must also be seen to be fair, and its decision on any case must be beyond reasonable doubt.

The EC has been tasked with an unenviable and almost impossible job. Confronted with challenges and threats from unscrupulous politicians who employ all sorts of dirty tricks in order to win the election, the EC may not be able to achieve its goal without the support of the general public, voters in particular, who must come forward and report any wrongdoing or suspicious activity. The EC itself must first be seen as an impartial referee, and have the courage to confront all challenges and threats, and to uphold justice and fairness.

Bangkok Post