Bangkok: "Natthapong" leads the opposition and senators in submitting a request to the Speaker of Parliament to send the case to the Supreme Court to appoint an investigative committee to examine the National Anti-Corruption Commission's (NACC) dismissal of the complaint regarding Sak Siam's hidden shareholding case.
According to Thai News Agency, the move, spearheaded by Mr. Nattapong Ruangpanyawut, Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives, highlights perceived discrepancies in the NACC's handling of the stock concealment case against Mr. Saksayam Chidchob. During a press conference held at the Parliament building, Mr. Nattapong, along with representatives from opposition parties and several senators, underscored the urgency of their petition, which is being submitted under Article 236 of the Constitution. The petition calls for the Supreme Court to establish an investigation committee to scrutinize the NACC's alleged misconduct in dismissing the complaint against Saksayam.
Mr. Nattapong emphasized that the petition has been meticulously prepared over the past month, incorporating publicly available information, including NACC representatives' clarifications during opposition whip meetings. The petition outlines four main allegations against the NACC:
1) The NACC's investigation was flawed and unlawful, lacking thoroughness in examining assets and liabilities. The NACC dismissed complaints without complete investigations or summoning crucial witnesses, such as Mr. Pakornwut Udompipatkul, failing to follow up on fraudulent transactions or financial trails as previously investigated by the Constitutional Court.
2) The NACC misused its discretion by ruling that Saksayam did not intentionally submit a false asset declaration, contradicting the evidence presented in the Constitutional Court's deliberations. Additionally, it failed to determine whether Mr. Saksayam Chidchob remains a shareholder in Buricharoen Construction Limited Partnership.
3) The NACC concealed the investigation process, neglecting to respond to requests for access to relevant documents and being slow to disclose investigation results. Although the NACC dismissed the complaints in September 2025 and February 2026, it only publicly announced the decisions in April 2026, without directly notifying the petitioner.
4) The NACC neglected to investigate other related charges, failing to address offenses such as conflicts of interest under Section 126 of the NACC Act.
Mr. Nattapong highlighted the importance of the Speaker of Parliament's role in exercising discretion when examining the petition and the attached evidence to determine reasonable grounds for suspicion. He asserted that the evidence confirms sufficient grounds for suspicion, urging the Speaker to forward the matter to the President of the Supreme Court for an independent investigation.
When questioned about potential dismissal of the petition by the Speaker, Mr. Nattapong stressed the undeniable nature of the evidence, suggesting other legal avenues could be pursued if necessary. He warned that dismissing the petition would contradict public opinion and could indicate an improper exercise of discretion, emphasizing the need for honest and straightforward conduct from those in power.
Mr. Nattapong concluded by expressing hopes that the Speaker of Parliament, independent organizations, and parliamentary representatives would fulfill their duties with integrity. He criticized the misuse of legal power for personal advantage and called on society to judge the Speaker's exercise of discretion in this matter.