Thailand’s People’s Party to Challenge Election Commission Over Ballot Barcodes
– Thailand’s People’s Party is preparing to file a lawsuit against the Election Commission (EC) concerning the use of barcodes on ballots in the recent election, raising concerns about voter privacy and potential intimidation.
The legal challenge, announced on Saturday, centers on the argument that the barcodes could compromise the secrecy of the ballot, allow for the tracking of voters’ choices and create opportunities for undue influence. The petition will be submitted to the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases, according to party spokesman Parit Watcharasindhu.
The controversy stems from an EC briefing held on Friday, where officials attempted to address growing public anxieties regarding the potential for the barcodes to be used to identify individual voters. According to Mr. Watcharasindhu, the EC’s responses inadvertently highlighted the risks involved.
“According to the EC, in theory, voters can be identified by using three components: the codes, the counterfoils and the voters’ list,” Mr. Watcharasindhu explained at a briefing in Bangkok. This revelation, he argued, directly contradicts the fundamental principle of a secret ballot, which ensures that no one can determine how an individual voted.
The People’s Party also alleges that the barcode system creates a loophole that could be exploited by political parties or candidates. Despite assurances from the EC regarding the secure storage of counterfoils – the portion of the ballot stub retained for record-keeping – the party fears that prior knowledge of the coding features could allow for coercion.
“If a political party or candidate had prior knowledge of the coding features, they could force voters to disclose the needed component before casting their ballots,” Mr. Watcharasindhu warned. He further suggested that even without direct access to official EC records, unscrupulous polling station officials could secretly photograph the counterfoils and provide them to individuals engaged in such practices.
The concerns are echoed by the Pop Chan Party, which has also announced its intention to sue the Election Commission and its Secretary-General for violating Section 157 of Thai law. Dr. Vayo, assigned by the Pop Chan Party to collect data on the issue, stated that the barcodes represent a loophole that could create political advantages or disadvantages, potentially impacting future elections.
Mr. Watcharasindhu emphasized that the issue isn’t necessarily about the ease with which a voter could be identified, but rather the *possibility* of identification. “The key point is not whether it is easy or difficult to trace who voted for whom, but whether anyone can access the identity linked to that ballot,” he said. He stressed that even with robust data security measures, the mere accessibility of the codes poses a significant risk.
The Pop Chan Party’s investigation, according to Mr. Watcharasindhu, is not aimed at overturning election results but at safeguarding voters’ rights and ensuring the integrity of the electoral process. They argue that the presence of barcodes on ballots compromises election fairness and poses a threat to voters, potentially influencing future elections if the data were to be leaked and reveal voting preferences.
The legal challenges come amid a broader debate about election security and the protection of voter privacy. While the Election Commission maintains the barcodes were implemented for security purposes, critics argue they have inadvertently created a vulnerability that could undermine public trust in the electoral system. The outcome of these lawsuits could have significant implications for future elections in Thailand.
