The Problems of Election Offenses as a Predicate Offense in Money Laundering Law

Abstract

The Organic Act of Election of Member of the House of Representatives B.E.2561 in Thailand designates predicate offenses, as outlined in Sections 73 (1) and (2) are predicate offenses under The Anti-Money Laundering Act. The provision of predicate offenses primarily pertains to vote-buying activities, involving acts, including inducing individuals to vote for certain candidates by offering, promising, or providing property or benefits to various entities, which could then be classified as predicate offenses for money laundering. Section 158 carries severe penalties and is also considered a money laundering offense, raising concerns about potential over-criminalization. The issue of over-criminalization, where certain actions are excessively criminalized, can lead to conditions in which the acts are more criminal than necessary without benefiting from the charges or bases of the offense that have been determined. And that provision does not take into account the reality of law enforcement whether the perpetrators of the offenses under the law can be punished because in all cases, the Election Commission has issued a decision to prosecute the offenders under the Organic Act of Election of Member of the House of Representatives B.E. 2561, Section 73 (1) and (2), the Election Commission cannot prosecute the offenders for the offense of money laundering.

In addition, the offenses under Sections 73 (1) and (2) as predicate offenses of money laundering are disproportionate consequences and challenges related to enforcement, running counter to the principles of proportionality, the rule of law, and the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E.2560 Section 77 because the penalty rate for election-related offenses is set as predicate offense of money laundering. The provision of offenses under the Organic Act of Election of Members of the House of Representatives B.E.2561, Section 73 (1) and (2) also makes it an offense of money laundering, thus creating uncertainty in law enforcement. In addition, it is ineffective in protecting society and also causes a criminal law that is not enforceable. In addition, the prescribed criminal penalties are less beneficial than the burden or cost that must be lost in making the law work as desired. In addition, according to the Anti-Money Laundering Act B.E. 2542, Section 3 does not contain provisions that election offenses are predicate offenses. Rather, it is stipulated in the last paragraph of the Organic Act of Election of Members of the House of Representatives B.E.2561, Section 73, whereby the offenses under (1) or (2) shall be considered as predicate offenses of money laundering, and the Election Commissioners shall have the authority to refer the matter to the Anti-Money Laundering Office for further action.