Bangkok: "Pharadon" highlights the need to differentiate between 'verification' and 'cancellation' concerning the TH-AI Passport initiative. "Paradorn" emphasizes the importance of distinguishing these terms to avoid pre-arranged decisions that could lead to missed opportunities for the country. He stresses that full verification is achievable but must be grounded in factual evidence.
According to Thai News Agency, Mr. Paradorn Prisnanantakul, MP and Minister attached to the Prime Minister's Office, responded to the opposition party's demand to cancel the TH-AI Passport project. The opposition's concerns revolve around cost-effectiveness, redundancy with existing AI services, and potential legal and security issues. Mr. Paradorn urged society to differentiate between scrutinizing the project and ordering its cancellation.
Mr. Paradorn asserted that while the opposition has the right and duty to scrutinize government budgets and operations, this process should be fact-based and fair. He argued that such scrutiny is beneficial for public transparency, accountability, and ensuring value for money. However, he cautioned against premature conclusions without involving relevant agencies.
He further explained that if doubts arise about the project's legality, cost-effectiveness, or data security, these concerns should be disclosed and thoroughly investigated. He warned that demanding immediate cancellation without a conclusive determination of illegality or harm could have unintended societal consequences.
Mr. Paradorn acknowledged Thailand's transition towards a digital economy and the global race in AI development. While debates on project suitability are typical, he argued they should not result in obstructing all efforts from the beginning. He challenged the notion that the availability of free AI tools negates the need for the project, stressing the importance of access to quality tools for all Thai citizens to enhance education, work, and economic competitiveness.
He also noted warnings from academics and experts about potential contractual disputes and financial liabilities if the government cancels the project without clear legal or factual justification. Such actions could affect investor confidence in Thailand's technology development sector.
Mr. Paradorn advocated for full scrutiny, transparent information disclosure, and inclusive participation in the review process by experts, civil society, and all stakeholders. He stated that if any illegality is discovered, legal action should follow, and if the project is deemed not worthwhile, it should be improved or terminated. However, he advised against rushing to judgments while investigations are ongoing.
Mr. Paradorn concluded by emphasizing that scrutiny is a vital democratic mechanism, but it must be free from prejudice. Society should base decisions on data rather than political trends, allowing the facts to determine the course of action. He urged that the opposition's role is to scrutinize, the government's role is to clarify, and neither should decide the truth outside the country's scrutiny process.