The Central Administrative Court, meanwhile, is expected to hand down by the middle of this month its verdict on whether the EC erred in its configuration of voting booths in the general election.

In a bid to counter charges of impropriety lodged against it in the Administrative Court, the Election Commission has requested two separate reviews of constitutional provisions relating to its mandate to manage elections.

In the first case, the EC has asked the court to rule whether the Central Administrative Court was legally able to issue an injunction against the third round of balloting in the disputed election.

It also questioned whether the court had erred in intervening in the electoral process, which it said was not an administrative dispute. This puts it at odds with the court.

The administrative order put a stop to any new rounds of voting until the court rules whether the EC has violated voters' privacy when it comes to the configuration of the ballot booths.

The court found cause to suspect foul play in the April 2 election, after the EC changed how the booths were laid out, allowing bystanders to see how people voted.

In the second case, the EC has appealed against the Administrative Court's ruling against the use of rubber stamps to mark ballots.

It said it was empowered by the Constitution and organic laws to rule on matters relating to the electoral process to use the stamps, which is outside the purview of the administrative court.

Constitution Court secretary-general Paiboon Warahapaitoon said his court would rule on the two cases after completing its inquiry into the validity of the April 2 election.

The court will today begin a continuous session until it can reach a decision on the election's outcome, Paiboon said.

On Monday it ruled it would launch a judicial review and also set a three-day deadline for the EC to submit factual evidence on its management of the polls. That deadline expires today.

Paiboon said he was optimistic the verdict would end the political crisis, but refused to predict how long a ruling would take.

Meanwhile, the Central Administrative Court is expected to hand down by the middle of this month its verdict on whether the EC erred in its configuration of voting booths in the general election. If the court rules that the EC acted improperly, it could lead to the invalidation of the April 2 election.

"The parties to the dispute have submitted factual evidence on which the court can base a verdict," presiding judge Somchai Watanakarun said yesterday.

The judicial review is based on two citizen's complaints filed by Photiphong Banluewong and Pramual Wirutamasen. The court has combined the two cases.

The complainants allege that the EC violated the privacy of voters because bystanders could observe the marking of ballots.

During the hearing to decide whether the case merited judicial review last week, the court found cause to suspect foul play in the April 2 election. It also issued an injunction against the repeat vote until it can rule on the matter.

Photiphong said he lodged a separate complaint last week asking the Supreme Administrative Court to cancel the April 2 election on grounds that the Royal Decree for the vote had been wrongfully enacted.

In another lawsuit, Sompong Sukpinij, a voter from Samut Sakhon, asked the court to order the EC to reimburse him the Bt50 he spent on travelling to the balloting station.

He also demanded Bt100 compensation for the EC's failure to protect his privacy while marking his ballot.

Representing Sompong, lawyer Sukrit Kittisriworaphan said the EC should pay compensation because it went ahead with the balloting even though the vote was not honest or fair.