BANGKOK — Thailand’s election authorities have acknowledged that a sample referendum ballot may contain an omission, saying the wording originated from the Cabinet and that additional public clarification is needed. Political parties and the public are free to express opinions on the referendum, officials said, as long as such actions do not violate the law.
Speaking on 8 January at the Office of the Election Commission (EC), Secretary-General Sawaeng Boonmee responded to comments by former election commissioner Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, who questioned whether the referendum booklet contained missing text.
Sawaeng said the document distributed to household heads stated that voters should mark only one symbol. In practice, he said, voters are required to mark a single X. The EC therefore needs to conduct further public communication to ensure clarity. He acknowledged that an omission or error may have occurred and said additional publicity would be required to address the issue.
Asked whether public information campaigns on referendum voting should be expanded and whether politicians should help publicize the process, Sawaeng said political parties are already allowed to do so. He added that voters should already understand the issue and have decided whether to approve or reject the proposal by the time they arrive at polling stations.
He noted that a referendum differs from a general election, where party popularity plays a role. A referendum, he said, requires public understanding of the substance of the issue. The EC has distributed a 31-page referendum document to households, containing text provided entirely by the Cabinet. The EC’s role, he said, is limited to printing and distribution, not drafting the content.
Sawaeng added that the materials must remain neutral and must not present advantages or disadvantages in a way that influences voters. The documents comply with five legal requirements under Section 15 of the law. On polling day, polling station officials are prohibited from guiding voters on how to vote. Voters may cast their ballots as they choose, while officials are responsible only for facilitating the process and have no authority to offer advice.
Asked whether parliamentary candidates advising people on how to vote in the referendum would constitute improper influence, Sawaeng said referendum-related activities fall into three categories. The first involves official documents sent by the Cabinet through the EC to households, which constitute information sharing. The second is public expression of views, such as forums involving supporters and opponents of the proposal. The third is campaigning, which involves advocating for a desired outcome, whether approval or rejection, and providing reasons for that stance.
He said members of the public are free to declare their positions for or against the referendum. However, such actions must not violate the law or involve false or misleading information. While campaigning may involve persuasion, it must remain within legal boundaries, he said.
