Bangkok: Srisuwan insists that the QR code on the ballot violates the Constitution and the law. Srisuwan submitted an opinion to the Constitutional Court, asserting that the inclusion of a QR code on the ballot violates the Constitution and the law.
According to Thai News Agency, Mr. Srisuwan Janya, leader of the Patriotic Organization, has submitted a written opinion to the Constitutional Court on the issues determined by the court, along with relevant documents. This concerns a complaint filed through the Ombudsman under Section 213 of the 2017 Constitution, requesting a ruling on whether the Election Commission's (EC) inclusion of QR codes and barcodes on election ballots is in accordance with the Constitution and laws. This follows a letter from the Constitutional Court to the Patriotic Organization requesting an opinion within 15 days of the petition filed with the Ombudsman on February 13, 2016. The petition seeks a ruling on whether the EC's inclusion of barcodes on election ballots could allow others to access voter information, thereby undermining the fairness and integrity of the recent parliamentary elections, and the EC's regulations. The question is whether Section 129, paragraph two, of the 2023 Election Act is in accordance with Section 85 of the 2017 Constitution and Sections 84 and 86 of the 2018 Organic Act on the Election of Members of Parliament. Subsequently, on March 18, 2026, the Constitutional Court, by a majority vote of 6 to 3, accepted the Ombudsman's petition for consideration, designating it as case number T.30/2569.
In this case, the Patriotic Organization has clarified in detail to confirm that the barcodes and QR codes that the Election Commission has prepared on the ballot papers allow the results of other people's votes to be revealed, or can identify voters from these codes. Although the ballot papers are designed to be confidential, the serial numbers running on the QR codes and barcodes may be linked to the ballot stub. If someone were to check the ballot stub containing the name of the voter along with the ballots used for counting, there could be a risk of tracing the identity of the individual.
However, even though such actions are illegal, violate personal rights, and contradict the principles of transparent elections, if vote buying occurs, it is possible to verify whether the vote was cast through serial numbers on QR codes and barcodes. These numbers could be linked to the ballot stub, and fraud could be planned with those overseeing the ballot boxes and stubs. Furthermore, modern scanning technology could easily reveal the voting results of other individuals or identify voters from these codes. Article 85, paragraph one, of the 2017 Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand stipulates that members of the House of Representatives shall be elected through constituency and party-list systems by direct and secret ballot voting. This means that any process that compromises the secrecy of the vote violates the Constitution. Additionally, Article 82 of the 2018 Act on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives requires the Election Commission to ensure that elections are conducted honestly and fairly. Therefore, even a traceable system could facilitate fraud.