Election Commission dismisses “Moddam-Modlek” petition

Office of the Election Commission, "Moddam Kachapa - Modlek Nong Nong" survives. The Election Commission dismisses the request to use the profession of MC. Speech to campaign for benefits Motivate people to vote The website of the Office of the Election Commission (EC) published the decision in the case of an order dismissing a lawsuit accusing Mr. Sakchai Tancharoen or Modlek, Chachoengsao MP, Electoral District 3, Pheu Thai Party (Respondent No. 1). and Mr. Kachapha Tancharoen or Moddam, the voter (Respondent 2) acted in violation of the Organic Act (Act) on the election of MPs. B.E. 2018, Section 73 (5) and Section 80 contain the Election Commission's regulations regarding campaigning methods and prohibited characteristics of campaigning for MP elections. B.E. 2018, Section 18 (1) and (5) in the case where Respondent No. 1 causes, supports, or connives at Respondent No. 2, who is a professional in radio broadcasting. Radio, television, mass media, advertising media, such as actors, singers, musicians, MC s, mass media, using their abilities or professions Facilitate election campaigning for candidates or political parties. and deceive or mislead a candidate's popular vote in order to induce voters to vote for themselves or their political party. In this regard, the Election Commission has considered the report of the inquiry as well as other evidence. related already assembled It is seen that the facts obtained from the inquiry are that on April 28, 2023, between approximately 5:30 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. at the intersection of Line 331, Khao Hin Son Subdistrict, Phanom Sarakham District, Chachoengsao Province, Respondent No. 2, who is Pheu Thai Party campaign aide speaking at election campaign which has content regarding the family members of respondent no. 2 and the party's policies in the nature of general election campaigning As for the message that the complainant alleges 'May the small ant be Can someone be an MP instead of Black Ant?' is only some of the message. and from the examination of witnesses It is a voter who went to listen to the speech giving a consistent statement that the statements given by Respondent No. 2 were not deceptive. and did not provide an incentive to vote for Respondent No. 1 and did not use his skills or professional skills as a host to give speeches during the election campaign. Just gave a campaign speech as a campaign assistant for the Pheu Thai Party. It did not appear that the second respondent acted as a master of ceremonies or used his other profession. To facilitate the election campaign for respondent no. 1 or the Pheu Thai Party. Moreover, no other evidence has appeared that confirms that there has been a violation of the law as alleged. Therefore, the facts are still unheard of. Respondent No. 1 caused, supported, or connived at Respondent No. 2 to commit a violation of the Act on the Election of Members of Parliament. 2018, Section 73 (5) and Section 80 accompany the regulations. Election Commission regarding campaigning methods and prohibited characteristics in campaigni ng for MP elections. 2018, Article 18 (1) and (5) according to the petition, there is an order to dismiss the petition. Source: Thai News Agency