Throughout the election day, incidents and complaints continued to arise. These included errors in polling station management, confusion in facilitating voters, and tense situations in some areas between officials and observers.
Thai PBS Verify compiled and examined key events that occurred throughout the election period until vote counting. Even the polling stations had closed, rumors of vote buying and fake news did not stop to be used as tools for public confusion and political discrediting. The aim was to reflect the overall picture of the election and help society access well-rounded information.
February 8, 2026 – election day
In the afternoon of election day, citizens gradually came out to exercise their right to vote for their preferred candidates and political parties. However, throughout the day, several incidents raised questions about the orderliness of election management in various areas.
Nan province: 69 ballots torn incorrectly; polling committee immediately replaced, awaiting EC’s decision
The situation began in Nan province. The Facebook page “Here Is Nan” reported that incorrect ballot tearing occurred at the polling station no. 3 in Chai Sathan subdistrict, Mueang Nan district. A polling station committee member mistakenly tore 69 constituency MP ballots along the fold instead of the perforated line.
The Director of the Nan Provincial Election Commission Office immediately ordered the official to be replaced and established an investigation committee, while awaiting a ruling from the Central Election Commission on whether the incident would require a new election to be held.
However, The iLaw civil society organization contacted the Election Commission and received confirmation that ballots torn while still attached to their stubs would not be considered invalid. Polling station officials are responsible for tearing off the stubs during the vote-counting process to preserve ballot secrecy after voting. If a ballot is torn in the voting section, voters are entitled to request a new ballot, and the incident must be recorded using the prescribed form.
Later, the EC issued a statement outlining measures to handle the situation. It confirmed that voting should continue as normal. However, if irregularities are found during the vote-counting process, counting must be suspended and reported to the Central EC for consideration. The EC also emphasized that if a polling station committee member damages ballots, they may face legal action just like ordinary citizens.
No prior notice: Bang Bua Housing’s polling station moved from Flat 3 to Flat 13
In Bangkok, another case involved the relocation of a polling station in the Bang Bua Housing community from Flat 3 building to Flat 13 without prior notice to residents. As a result, many voters wasted time searching for the new polling location. Polling station officials stated that they had been informed of the relocation by the EC since late January but were unaware of why the public had not been notified. Consequently, they faced criticism from residents on behalf of the agency responsible, before the community made announcements through the local broadcast system to inform voters.
Meanwhile, on social media, images were shared showing a candidate list board with the political party’s name written incorrectly — from “People’s Party” to “Bhumjaithai Party.” There was also a video clip from a polling station showing officials placing the wrong type of ballots on the tables. Party-list MP ballots were mistakenly placed on the table designated for constituency MP ballots, before being corrected after observers raised objections.
Netizens shared images of a candidate list board showing the party’s name switched from the People’s Party to Bhumjaithai Party.
Clip reveals polling officials have placed pink and green ballots at the wrong tables.
Online images of observers barred from monitoring vote counting in Pathum Thani’s 7th constituency
After the polls closed and during the vote-counting process, controversy arose in the seventh constituency of Pathum Thani province. Images were shared online claiming that officials did not allow members of the public to observe the vote counting and had covered CCTV cameras, raising concerns about transparency.
The Pathum Thani Provincial Election Commission clarified the case involving the covering of CCTV cameras inside the polling station no. 7 at Rajamangala University of Technology Thanyaburi. Officials stated that the cameras were covered due to concerns about recording footage while citizens were voting, which could potentially violate election laws.
The incident led to a dispute between officials and the public, including students who had come to observe the vote-counting process.
After more than six hours of continuous debate, the Election Commission resolved to recount four ballot boxes of advance voting ballots, totaling over 3,000 ballots. This did not include ballots cast on the main election day. Students were also allowed to participate as polling station committee members to help enhance transparency.
Image of pink envelopes allegedly linked to Bhumjaithai’s vote buying in 1st constituency of Chumphon
Meanwhile, after Mr. Anutin Charnvirakul, leader of Bhumjaithai Party, publicly thanked voters for their support, images began circulating online showing pink envelopes containing cash and campaign documents. The posts alleged that the envelopes were used for vote buying in the first constituency of Chumphon province. The matter is currently under factual investigation to determine whether it constitutes a violation of election law.
These incidents clearly reflect that Thai society is seriously questioning “transparency” — whether regarding concerns about vote buying, the accuracy of vote counting, or the role of officials at every stage of the electoral process. Citizens do not merely want the opportunity to cast their ballots; they want to see the exercise of power that is accountable and fair to all parties.
The monitoring, questioning, and observation from the public throughout election day were not signs of chaos, but rather indications of an awakened society that no longer accepts ambiguity. These developments reflect rising expectations for Thailand’s democratic standards.
The key question, therefore, is not simply who won the election, but when Thailand will truly achieve “transparency,” and whether the electoral system can adapt to the increasingly watchful eyes of citizens each time they cast their votes.
