Setting the record straight

Setting the record straight

exclusive: EC chairman admits to 'flaws' in poll organisation

Election Commission chairman Ittiporn Boonpracong
Election Commission chairman Ittiporn Boonpracong

The Election Commission has come under fire for its handling of the March 24 polls, which has prompted its chairman Ittiporn Boonpracong to set the record straight. In an exclusive interview, the former diplomat admits to flaws in the organisation of the polls, and vows to come up with a quick but comprehensive solution to the issues.

What went wrong in the March 24 polls?

Let's begin with the advance voting. Judging by recent examples, it can clearly be seen that we have to improve our method of estimating the number of advance voters. In the future, the estimate has to be more precise.

Another weak point is the delivery and distribution of ballot papers. In the future, no more delivery mishaps.

Overcrowding at advance polling venues is also an issue that needs to be addressed. Advance voters were given a wide window to vote between 8am to 5pm, but we still received reports of voters waiting in long queues at many advance polling stations. As many voters had to wait in the sweltering heat to vote, we expected to hear such complaints.

At several central advance voting venues, voting time had to be extended. Tensions flared as officials barely got anything done when people began pouring into the polling stations.

Many of the staff who were present at the polling booths were City Hall officials and volunteers from the Education, Interior, and the Public Health ministries. Many of the problems that came up on the day were not anticipated during the preparatory meetings -- for example, fatigue. The team who worked at polling units in Bang Kapi, for example, clocked in at 4am and didn't clock out until 9pm. That's 17 hours of work!

Have you found a way to solve the problems?

To put it simply -- yes. But right now, we're wrestling with the more pressing issues of calculating the list MP seats, addressing election complaints, and the announcement of the results.

We must do our best to ensure the results have the smallest margin of error possible, and that any issues with the results are dealt with promptly.

Some of the complaints we received are quite serious and could lead to accusations of electoral fraud; for example, the miscounting of ballots in several polling stations.

However, we can't immediately provide an answer to these queries because we have to establish the facts first. We need some time to investigate before we can come up with the answers. That said, I am sure we have most of the answers to the questions that people may have surrounding the March 24 election.

With regards to queries about "surplus" ballot papers, I'd like to say that no such thing existed. I admit the EC did not clearly explain that the voter turnout figures listed in our preliminary report were based on estimates filed by individual polling stations. As such, the figures did not represent the real turnout. Also, the figures excluded the ballots cast by overseas voters, which were counted at the central advance voting venue.

We are certain that at least 90% of the information that we publish is correct -- and everyone in the EC must be able to come to terms with what had been said about the agency in the media. If there are mistakes, then we have to be able to explain the reason, and provide a solution.

Sometimes, we just have to handle the criticism. If we act slowly, we'd be accused of complacency, but on the other hand, if we move quickly, we'd be criticised for being reckless.

Do you feel the EC is being manipulated as a political weapon?

Thais are increasingly becoming more aware and involved in politics. Tens of thousands of people registered to run as MP candidates under the banners of the 70-plus parties which competed in the March 24 elections -- many of whom took their campaigns to social media platforms. This provided voters who were not previously familiar with politics with easy access to multiple sources of information, both real and fake.

That said, I don't think that the EC is being used as a part of an orchestrated political attack.

To those who allege that poll fraud was at play, I have to say that they are entitled to their opinion. If there is evidence to support the allegation, I am duty-bound to provide an explanation and launch a probe into the matter. If the allegation holds true, then I and my fellow commissioners give you our promise not to repeat the mistake.

The EC strives to rebut fake news in speedy manner, and baseless allegations will be dealt with in court.

Some have said that under your leadership, the EC has received more negative publicity than ever -- even more than when Pol Gen Wassana Permlarp headed the agency in 2011. How do you respond to these criticisms?

Back in 2011, not many people had mobile phones. It is a different story today, as more and more people express their views online, without even thinking.

We have arrived at that point in history where anyone can post whatever message they want without feeling any guilt. In the past, mass media such as newspapers had to publish apologies if they run a false story. These days, social media users can just go on numerous rants online without thinking of the consequences.

I'm not offended -- this is just my opinion.

We ought to look at the big picture. Some 38 million voters came out to vote across almost 100,000 polling units staffed by approximately 500,000 officials and volunteers. Despite that, the amount of mistakes were relatively minimal and many of these mistakes cannot be blamed on the EC, or the system.

How are the other commissioners holding up against the barrage of criticism?

They are senior figures -- for example, some are former judges whose long and distinguished experiences have taught them to remain level-headed under pressure. Another commissioner is a former permanent secretary who has worked under tough conditions before.

As such, I'm only concerned about how quickly we can deflect the allegations made against the EC. When a crucial piece of information comes to light, the agency should not wait for a commissioner to brief the public, because the EC's reputation banks on the accuracy of its information.

I admit that confusing figures are our weakness, and the misinterpretation of these figures can be damaging to the EC's reputation, as well as its commissioners.

Some foreign media outlets suggest the EC is the product of a dictatorship. What do you make of that?

The sentiment against dictatorships is universal. As a citizen, I think it was necessary for a strong figure to step in, otherwise there would have been lots of casualties among the yellow- and red-shirted protesters. It was meant to restore peace and order.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (56)