The Judicial Commission is likely to ban judges from helping the Election Commission decide which candidates from the next general election should be disqualified, the Supreme Court secretary said yesterday.

The embattled EC, in a desperate bid to ease public pressure on it to resign, had proposed that the commissioners and the judiciary share responsibility in organising the new election, with the power of disqualifying candidates going to the judges.

Wirat Chinwinijkul, the secretary of the Supreme Court Office, said the EC should resign now for the public interest and for the sake of the EC itself.

Wirat said the Judicial Commission, which is the governing body of judges, could not allow judges to help the EC to issue yellow or red cards because doing so would be tantamount to "endorsing illegal deeds and courts would become a tool to create legitimacy for the EC".

He said the EC had lost the legitimacy to organise the new election after the Constitution Court ruled that its handling of the April 2 election was illegal and unfair.

As a result, he said, "it's too late" for the EC to hold a meeting with political parties today to set the next election date. The EC has refused to step down but scheduled the meeting for today. In what is seen as an attempt to stay in office, the EC offered a compromise for the Supreme and Administrative courts to help consider election complaints to see whether certain candidates should be disqualified.

Wirat said the new EC should set the election date because the current EC had lost legitimacy following the Constitution Court ruling.

"The EC should resign to pave way for the invocation of Article 138 (3) of the Constitution. That is, the Supreme Court will select 10 EC candidates for the Senate to select five commissioners," Wirat said.

"The EC's resignation will do much good for the country and for the EC itself."

Wirat noted the four commissioners were facing malfeasance charges filed by Democrat Party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban and deputy secretary-general Thavorn Sennium.

He said as the EC had refrained from accepting responsibility by resigning and had instead gone ahead with organising the election, the two Democrats could pursue their cases to the fullest extent of the law.

He said the courts could not do anything if the EC stayed put and held the next election.

"But the EC should be reasonable ... I would like to say that the courts have nothing prejudicial towards the EC, but they have to carry things out in line with the law and facts. And the three courts need to help to get the country back to a normal situation as soon as possible," he said.

Wirat said judges usually were not proactive in their jobs unless there was an agenda for the courts to work on.

"But now, the Constitution Court has ruled that the election was illegal so the courts have to come out and give advice. Moreover, His Majesty the King had asked the courts to step in and resolve the national crisis," Wirat said.

Judges from the Administrative Court had refused to make a commitment on whether they would accept the EC's offer to help screen election complaints.

But observers believe the Administrative Court would turn down the offer like the Supreme Court as the three highest courts had earlier announced they would make decisions in the same direction.

The Administrative Court is also scheduled to rule tomorrow on whether the Election Commission violated the Constitution by configuring polling booths in a way that prevented voters from casting their ballots in complete privacy.