The Election Commission (EC) may not be able to endorse the results of last month's general election by May 9 as it is still awaiting a court ruling on its method for calculating party-list seats, political pundits say.
Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam suggested on Thursday the EC ask the Constitutional Court to deliver another ruling clarifying the deadline for its endorsement, as there are two competing alternatives.
He said the court should be asked to clear up any doubt over whether the task must be completed within 60 days of the election, as stipulated in the organic law governing the election of MPs, or within 150 days of that organic law taking effect on Dec 11, as mandated by the constitution.
If it rules in favour of the former, the date could be postponed until May 23, giving the EC more room to breathe. The second option would see the May 9 date retained. Failure to meet the chosen deadline could result in the election being nullified, according to analysts.
Mr Wissanu's words of advice came as the poll agency is struggling to resolve a controversy over its method of calculating and allocating party-list seats. A sitting of four Constitutional Court judges was reportedly split over whether to accept the EC's original petition.
The court has not said when it will make its ruling.
Under the EC's method, which has drawn fierce criticism from key political parties, party-list seats can be distributed to political parties that captured fewer votes than required under the mixed-member proportional (MMP) representation system.
The nine-member court is expected to decide on Wednesday whether to accept the EC's petition. Pundits say the deliberation process could take two weeks or longer, if the court agrees to hear the case.
Mr Wissanu said the EC should use this as an opportunity to seek a second court ruling on the dates of the final steps of the election process.
"I think the court is likely to complete its deliberation before May 9 as the EC says the election process must be completed within 150 days of the organic law taking effect," he said.
"But I suggest the EC should ask the court about the time frame for endorsing the result, too," he said.
He declined to comment when grilled on what would happen if the EC fails to endorse the result by May 9.
"Let's figure that out when the time comes," he said.
Mr Wissanu said if the petition is rejected, the EC would have to explain how and why it chose this calculation method that has been criticised for being overly complicated.
However, the EC does not need to wait for the court's ruling to proceed with its probe into alleged poll irregularities, disqualify election candidates who broke the rules, or organize re-runs in the case of electoral fraud, he noted.
Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, a Democrat candidate and former election commissioner, called on the EC yesterday to put a contingency plan in place to prevent the controversy from dragging on. If the court issues its ruling within two weeks, as Mr Somchai expects, it would beat the May 9 deadline by a day.
Mr Somchai said the EC would have to consider the possibility of the court giving a "broad" ruling, which would most likely see the EC advised to strictly adhere to the constitution.
"In that eventuality, the ball would swing back to the EC's court," he said.
"So there should be a 'Plan B' in case things do not go as expected. Usually, Plan B would be a contingency plan that can be used to strategically back out from a [tricky] situation," he added.
If the court opts not to hear the case and dismisses the EC's petition, it could open the floodgates to litigation from disgruntled groups and political parties unable to accept the legitimacy of the EC's calculation method for party-list seats, said Yutthaporn Issarachai, a political scientist from Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University.
Such cases would appear soon after the EC endorses the results on May 9, he added.