The Electoral Law's Article 3 prohibited candidates from, amongst other things, giving or promising money or valuables or anything else that could be converted into cash to individuals or organisations; organising entertainment to attract voters; or ganising parties. Yet there were considerable grey areas, as the interpretation of the article depended upon intent. Thus, it was perfectly permissible to hold a party to celebrate a birthday, but not to attract votes. But was it reasonable to provide free water or soft drinks to people who attended a rally held in the hot summer sun? Was it permissible to give alms to monks? Was it permissible to distribute audio tapes with a candidate’s speeches on them? Also, it had previously been common practice for election candidates to make donations without any direct inducement to vote for a particular person. Soccer balls to a school; a car for the temple abbots kitchen equipment for a housewives' group; farming equipment: office stationary Was this all to stop? Nobody knew.
One activity that appeared to be possible (although questionable) was the organisation his home of banquets. SAP leader Montree went from district to district in his home province of Ayutthaya hosting sumptuous dinner feasts. This was followed by a 1,300 table feast held in Suphanburi for 13,000 Chart Thai guests mid-January to "celebrate the New Year", a similar banquet for about 2,000 hosted by the NAP in Bangkok, and was capped off by a 1,500 table feast in Saraburi organised by Samakkhi Tham.