"Criminal Court for Corruption" judicial body. Sentenced to three years in prison. "Watcharapol-Supha". Case of failure to disclose watch information. "Big Pom" (General Prawit). Eight other defendants were acquitted by the court.
At 09:30 on 27 May 2026, at the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct, Region 1, Saraburi Province, the court convened to announce the verdict in the case where Mr. Veera Somkhumkit, Secretary-General of the Anti-Corruption People's Network, filed a lawsuit against 12 executives and commissioners of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) alleging concealment of documents regarding General Prawit Wongsuwan’s luxury watches.
The plaintiff stated that he is a human rights activist and chairman of the Anti-Corruption People's Network, assisting in government anti-corruption efforts. Defendants 1 and 2 served as Secretary-Generals of the NACC, while defendants 3 to 12 were NACC commissioners. Between 22 August 2019 and 23 May 2024 during daytime, all 12 defendants, as officials, jointly committed multiple legal offenses as follows.
1. Defendants 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 neglected their duties by failing to provide information requested by the plaintiff to the NACC’s investigation into whether General Prawit Wongsuwan willfully submitted false asset declarations or concealed facts regarding possession of numerous expensive wristwatches and valuable rings.
The Social Information Disclosure Review Committee in Public Administration and Law Enforcement ruled that the NACC must disclose to the plaintiff three items: (1) the full fact-finding report and all collected evidence documents, (2) opinions of all responsible NACC officers, and (3) meeting reports of the NACC committee concerning the plaintiff’s request to investigate General Prawit.
2. Defendants 1, 3, 7, 8, 11, and 12 neglected their duties by violating the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment requiring disclosure of those three items to the plaintiff, as determined by the Social Information Disclosure Review Committee.
3. Defendants 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 2 neglected their duties by disobeying the Central Administrative Court’s order compelling the NACC to comply with the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment in case number red A224/2566. They were ordered to disclose three items about the luxury watch and diamond ring case of General Prawit to the plaintiff by 11 August 2023: (1) fact-finding and all collected evidence documents, (2) opinions of all responsible NACC officers, and (3) NACC committee meeting reports related to the case.
4. Defendants 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 neglected their duties by violating the Central Administrative Court’s enforcement, causing the court to impose fines of 5,000 baht each on the NACC Office (defendant 1) and the NACC Committee (defendant 2). The 12 defendants conspired to conceal true facts related to the investigation of General Prawit’s concealed asset declarations unlawfully.
Although the Social Information Disclosure Review Committee and the Supreme Administrative Court ordered the defendants to disclose the information to the plaintiff, all 12 defendants collectively violated the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment. This led the Central Administrative Court to enforce compliance and impose fines for noncompliance.
Eventually, the NACC, through defendant 1, urgently notified the plaintiff to collect documents per the court's order. However, defendant 1 and associates delivered incomplete documents contrary to the Supreme Administrative Court's judgment, with many sections blacked out and concealed. The 12 defendants committed offenses as officials jointly performing or neglecting duties improperly causing damage to the plaintiff or others, or doing so corruptly under the Criminal Code, Sections 157 and 83, occurring in Tha Sai Subdistrict, Mueang Nonthaburi District, Nonthaburi Province. Punishment is requested under Sections 83 and 157 of the Criminal Code.
During the preliminary hearing, the plaintiff requested withdrawal of charges against defendant 4, citing that defendant 4 had reached the mandatory retirement age of 70 before the incident. The court granted the withdrawal.
At the preliminary hearing, the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct, Region 1, ruled that the actions of defendants 3, 7, 8, and 11, who voted not to comply with the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment, constituted neglect or misconduct causing damage under Section 157 of the Criminal Code. Therefore, charges against defendants 3, 7, 8, and 11 were accepted for further consideration. Defendants 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 12 were acquitted.
During the trial, the plaintiff requested withdrawal of charges against defendants 8 and 11; the court granted this. When the plaintiff sought to withdraw charges against defendants 3 and 7, the court denied the request, citing that withdrawal would not serve the public interest and could cause significant harm to the state, according to the procedural report dated 7 April 2026.
However, the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct, Region 1, determined that "the plaintiff is a human rights activist assisting government anti-corruption efforts. The plaintiff's request for information from the NACC and its committee was solely to investigate corruption. Thus, the plaintiff is directly affected and has legal standing to sue." The court ruled that defendants 3 and 7 were guilty under Sections 157 and 83 of the Criminal Code and sentenced each to three years in prison.
It was reported that defendant 3, Police General Watcharapol Prasarnrajkit, and defendant 7, Miss Supha Piyajitti, after the verdict, filed for bail pending appeal. The court allowed bail with a bond of 400,000 baht each and prohibited them from leaving the country without court permission. Reporters attempted to contact Police General Watcharapol and Miss Supha but were unsuccessful at this time. Further updates will be reported.