Bangkok: MP Phanthil Nuamjerm of the People's Party is following up on the actions of the Election Commission and the Department of Special Investigation in the Senate collusion case. Today, Mr. Phanthil Nuamjerm, MP of the People's Party, held a press conference to follow up on the actions of the Election Commission (EC) and the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) in the Senate collusion case, Special Case No. 24/2568. He stated that the eight suspects listed in the documents returned by the prosecutor to the DSI are not secrets, and it's not just these eight individuals, but the entire system whose names haven't been revealed. He said he was testing the waters to see if anyone involved would come forward to dispute the information. He emphasized the need to spur the DSI's work, not just targeting those who claim to know the details but are aware of them. He warned against the DSI feigning ignorance or acting on orders from political factions. He added that Special Case No. 24/2568 stems from the previ ous government, and this Thursday, the Sub-committee to Study the Senate Selection Process will invite Pol. Col. Tawee Sodsong, former Minister of Justice, and the DSI for further discussions. This case must clearly answer whether any networks are interfering with, dominating, or manipulating the entire Senate selection process.

According to Thai News Agency, while the identities of the eight individuals cannot yet be disclosed, it is publicly known who they are. This includes Mr. W., a former assistant to a Member of Parliament from the southern region, and two women currently serving as Senators. These individuals are suspects in a money laundering and organized crime case involving 400-500 million baht. The DSI has identified the network as multi-layered, encompassing six groups of masterminds, those who orchestrated the scheme, those elected as Senators, and voters. It's important to note that these eight suspects have not yet been convicted; they represent only a part of the system, the first layer of the network. Why did the DSI initially send only eight individuals before the prosecutor rejected the initial case? Given the large number of involved individuals, including current politicians, executive officials, and MPs, it's questionable why such a large file of over 1,000 pages was sent with only eight names. Could they be sc apegoats? The crucial element of this case is the mastermind, whose name has yet to be revealed. Today, we'll use Mr. W. as an example. According to available information, he is identified as the central figure in the money line, an assistant to an MP from the leading government party in the southern region, and a former parliamentary candidate for the same party in Phuket. With clearly identified money transfer trails, Mr. R., a member of the minister's working group in a key ministry and a former MP from the same party's party-list, also received transfers of hundreds of thousands of baht. All the individuals mentioned have a history of political involvement in similar ways, whether as former assistants, candidates, or members of the minister's working group, with information regarding their financial transactions. The public has the right to question whether the political parties involved have any basis for scrutiny. From the audio clip, questions arise: Which party is "our party"? Who was nominated? What does it mean to nominate someone for the Senate? And what was the purpose of that? If there's no connection, why are they the first to want the information disclosed? Why wait for me to disclose it?

Another case that needs to be clarified is one with at least two layers. The first layer concerns the national Senate election day, where voting slips were brought in. The second layer of question is the distribution of power within the Senate. According to information surrounding the events at the Pullman Hotel on July 21, 2024, just two days before the election of the Senate President and Vice-President, a list of candidates was submitted in advance. The election results for the President and Vice-President of the Senate matched the pre-selected list exactly. This isn't a judgment of who is guilty, but rather a question: Should the Senate be able to elect its members independently, without party affiliation? Was the appearance of a pre-selected list for all three positions two days before the election a coincidence, or is it a valid indication that further investigation is needed to determine if power was pre-arranged? A bigger question is: Once the Senate is in place, who holds the pre-selected list and or chestrates the distribution of power within the Senate?

There are suspicions that this same network could bring people into the Senate and continue to administer it. Today, I want to emphasize that there are four parties that must provide clarification, not just let the matter slide.

1) The DSI must not stop at the eight suspects; they must investigate the group that ordered the crime. It shouldn't end with just a few scapegoats. This case involves hundreds of suspects, and those involved are in the Senate; the case file is over 1,000 pages long. The entire case must be prosecuted.

2) The Election Commission must clarify the current status of the Senate collusion case currently under consideration, the clear framework for voting, and what information regarding vote counts and evidence can be disclosed to protect the officials involved.

3) The Narcotics Suppression Bureau must clearly answer whether, in a money laundering case of this magnitude involving a joint offense against the state, the money trail has been thoroughly investigated, what assets should be seized, and why society only sees this as a shadow of money and ignores the entire system, despite evidence of transfers that cannot yet be disclosed.

4) Political parties involving individuals must publicly respond whether they will allow scrutiny or remain silent to protect their party members.

Today, I'm not here to ask about the internal workings of the party, whether there are any conflicts, who will be the scapegoat, or who will be sidelined to prevent the truth from reaching the top. I'm not here to ask who is reorganizing the party. The questions are: Who is in charge? Who is giving the orders? Who is really paying? Who owns the votes for this Senate? Who holds the pre-arranged script over the Senate? And did the Senate vote according to their own independent will, as the Constitution states that Senators are independent and not affiliated with any political party, or did they vote according to the script? In short, did these Senators elect themselves, or were they pre-selected before the election?