A STUDY ON THE EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY, JUSTICE AND PUNISHMENT BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION IN THAILAND
Main Article Content
Abstract
The Election Commission (EC) was an independent organization that significantly managed elections and referendums in Thailand. Its responsibilities included ensuring the integrity and fairness of the electoral process. However, the EC faced issues regarding the misuse of power in issuing regulations and declarations, as well as the lack of clear penalties for violations, which affected the credibility of the electoral system. The centralization of power within a single organization may have led to an abuse of power, contrary to the principle of separation of powers in public law.
This research aimed to study the basic information, concepts, theories, and legal principles related to the misuse of power in issuing regulations and declarations and penalties for violations by the EC. The findings indicated that the legal measures concerning the EC faced three significant issues: 1) the centralization of power that affected independence and transparency, 2) the lack of fairness in issuing regulations and declarations without parliamentary approval, which posed a risk of injustice, and 3) the absence of clear penalties, leading to a lack of transparency and fairness in the electoral process. The study primarily used documentary research, collecting data from relevant laws such as the Constitution of 2017 and the Organic Act on the Election Commission of 2017, as well as legal textbooks, articles, and other documents to analyze and derive conclusions and suggestions for improvement.
The study recommended amending the Constitution and relevant laws to regulate the EC's powers under parliamentary supervision, requiring the parliament's approval of regulations and declarations and establishing clear penalties for violations to enhance trust and prevent the misuse of power in the electoral process.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
คณะกรรมการร่างรัฐธรรมนูญ. (2560). รัฐธรรมนูญแห่งราชอาณาจักรไทย. เข้าถึงได้จาก สำนักงานเลขาธิการสภาผู้แทนราษฎร: https://web.parliament.go.th/assets/portals/7/files/constitution2560.pdf?utm.com
ปฏิรูปองค์กรอิสระและศาลรัฐธรรมนูญ : ยุติอำนาจไร้ขอบเขต เพิ่มความเข้มแข็งให้ประชาธิปไตยไทย. (18 ตุลาคม 2024). เข้าถึงได้จาก The101. Wrold: https://www.the101.world/independent-entity-and-constitutional-court-reform/?utm.com
พระราชบัญญัติประกอบรัฐธรรมนูญว่าด้วยคณะกรรมการการเลือกตั้ง. (2560). เข้าถึงได้จาก ราชกิจจานุเบกษา: https://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2560/A/093/1.PDF
BBC NEWS ไทย. (1 พฤษภาคม 2566). เลือกตั้ง 2566 : ประชาชนคาใจ กกต. เคลียร์อย่างไรกับสารพันปัญหาจัดเลือกตั้ง. เข้าถึงได้จาก https://www.bbc.com/thai/ articles/cn0ex66yd64o
Friedrichs, D. O. (2003, January 2003). Accountability and Power in Governmental Institutions. Educational Policy, 17(1). 60-79. doi:DOI:10.1177/0895904802239286
German Criminal Code. (1998). Strafgesetzbuch-StGB, Section 107a. Retrieved from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html
Hess, D. (2019, February 26). The Transparency Trap: Non-Financial Disclosure and the Responsibility of Business to Respect Human Rights. Retrieved from Wiley Online library: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ablj.12134
Japan: Public Offices Election Act 2019 rev. (2019). E-GOV. Retrieved from https://laws.e-gov.go.jp/law/325AC1000000100/
Pettit, P. (2013, January 05). On the People's Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/on-the-peoples-terms/219DF8F7F166B305318CD9D51FAC45DE
Thai Publica. (16 ตุลาคม 2563). ชาวอเมริกัน “เลือกประธานาธิบดี” กันอย่างไร. เข้าถึงได้จาก https://thaipublica.org/2020/10/us-election-how-american-elect-president/