Thongtong panel's 'no-case' decision a letdown

Thongtong panel's 'no-case' decision a letdown

No effort made to find the source of Supoj's questionable wealth

Barely three months after the inquiry into the alleged unusual wealth of Supoj Saplom began the team has thrown in the towel, ending the investigation and raising public suspicions about the government's sincerity in promising to deal harshly with the problem of corruption.

Dr Sungsidh Piriyarangsan of Rangsit University made a good point in his reaction to the decision by the Thongthong Chandrangsu fact-finding committee to end its probe into the source of transport permanent secretary Supoj's surprisingly large fortune.

Thongthong Chandrangsu (Photo by Kosol Nakachol)

Prime Minister’s Office permanent secretary Thongthong said on Monday there was insufficient evidence to justify disciplinary proceedings against Mr Supoj because it could not be determined just how much money was actually stolen from his home by the burglars.

Mr Supoj’s house was robbed on Nov 12 and he said five million baht was stolen, but the robbers later arrested by police were caught with 18 million baht and claimed they had discovered an amount of cash stashed in the house so large they were unable to carry it away with them.

Dr Sungsidh said the Thongthong committee’s decision to end its investigation would increase public doubts about the government’s determination to deal with corruption. The case, he said, had attracted widespread public interest because of the huge amount of cash reportedly involved and lingering suspicions about the source of the money, and whether it was legally acquired.

Indeed, the Thongthong committee’s decision is a big letdown, and most certainly premature as it is barely three months since the panel started looking into the allegations of unusual wealth.

The panel should have tried harder. It needed to spend more time digging into the case to determine whether Supoj is unusually rich. It is far too early to throw in the towel and walk away from it.

When the robbery was first reported by the media, one of the first questions that popped into the minds of many people was: who in their right mind would keep tens, maybe hundreds, of millions of baht in cash in their house instead of putting it in banks, where it is not only safer but also earns interest - unless, of course, the money is not clean?

Mr Thongthong’s explanation is not good enough because it has not shed any light on the source of the money. Does it mean that the committee is satisfied with Supoj’s explanation about how he acquired his wealth, and that it was in an honest fashion?

The onus now rests on the National Anti-Corruption Commission to carry on with its investigation.

The public can, at least, have greater trust and confidence in the NACC, given its credibility, than it can in a government-appointed inquiry panel.

Hopefully, the anti-graft body will produce an inquiry result which is more acceptable, uncompromised and fair.

Veera Prateepchaikul

Former Editor

Former Bangkok Post Editor, political commentator and a regular columnist at Post Publishing.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (18)