Suspicions Rise Over EC's Cooperation with DSI in Senator Election Bribery Case

A dispute has emerged between the Department of Special Investigations (DSI) and the Election Commission (EC) of Thailand concerning the sharing of information and submission of evidence in the ongoing investigation into alleged bribery in the senatorial election, known as the 'Swa 67' case. The DSI has raised 'suspicions' about the EC's reluctance to provide necessary documents and accept evidence gathered by the DSI, potentially hindering the investigation's progress. On September 14, the EC resolved to indict 77 individuals for their alleged involvement in electoral fraud before the Supreme Court's Election Division. In parallel, the DSI is conducting its own investigation into charges of conspiracy and money laundering related to the case. A DSI investigative team is scheduled to hold its first meeting this September. The DSI maintains that it does not need to wait for the EC's detailed ruling, expected within 60 days, as criminal investigations are separate from the EC's proceedings. The DSI clarifies that not all 77 individuals indicted by the EC will necessarily be subjects of their criminal probe; the investigation will focus on individual conduct, evidence, and financial trails. However, it has been revealed that some cases previously forwarded by the DSI to prosecutors have been returned for further investigation. While the DSI and prosecutors initially indicted eight individuals, only six of them overlap with the 77 individuals the EC is indicting. The DSI will need to re-evaluate the cases of the remaining two individuals, as they were included in the initial indictment but are not part of the EC's current decision. Relying solely on the EC's figure of 77 makes the initial indictment difficult to reconcile. Sources indicate that the DSI has continuously inquired with the EC about incorporating DSI's gathered evidence into the investigation, but the EC has refused. Similarly, the DSI's requests for related documents from the EC have gone unfulfilled. Furthermore, the DSI requested salary payment records for the assistants, experts, and personal secretaries of 138 senators from the Secretariat of the Senate. However, the request was denied, citing the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA). The DSI countered that the PDPA is not applicable to criminal investigations, but the situation remains unresolved. Discrepancies have also been noted between the evidence held by the DSI and that of the EC's sub-committee in the money laundering investigation. The DSI is particularly questioning the EC's handling of the testimony change by Witness No. 16, Mr. Ekkachai Changlao. He testified before a joint investigative team from both the DSI and the EC, but later informed the EC chairman in writing of his testimony correction, without formally appearing before the DSI or the joint committee to request the amendment. The DSI also pointed to the EC's refusal to accept evidence such as CCTV footage of important individuals' vehicles entering a hotel linked to the bribery scheme, and mobile phone location data, as further reasons for their 'suspicions.' Additionally, there are reports that some political factions are exerting pressure on agencies involved to withhold documents and financial information from the DSI. Source: INN News