“Parit” explained that after being cut off by “Sopon” during a meeting, he was denied the right to rebuttal. He countered “Anutin” saying it was the latter who did not do his homework, assigning jobs based on political agendas by giving “Yotsanan” responsibility over agriculture instead of “Supphajee.” He is prepared for all scenarios regarding the case involving 44 MPs and confirmed the secretary’s resignation.
On 10 Apr 2026 GMT+7, Parit Watcharasindhu, party-list MP and spokesperson for the People’s Party, spoke about the incident following Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul’s thank-you remarks after his policy statement to Parliament, where Sopon Sarum, Speaker of the House, prematurely closed the session before Parit could exercise his right to rebut. Parit said the Speaker did not follow procedural rules since the right to protest can be raised anytime according to regulations. He respected the Prime Minister and did not want to interrupt, so he reserved his rebuttal for the end and had already notified officials to inform the Speaker accordingly.
Parit said there were two points that caused damage from the rebuttal. The first was the claim that he did not do his homework, while in fact, the Agriculture and Cooperatives Ministry was assigned under the cluster led by Deputy Prime Minister Yotsanan Wongsawat, who also serves as Minister of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation. Yotsanan oversees the social and welfare cluster as deputy PM.
Parit said he was aware of this and spoke accordingly. The issue is that if the government divides clusters based on national duties, the Agriculture Ministry should be under the responsibility of Deputy Prime Minister Supphajee Suthumpun, who also serves as Minister of Commerce. Assigning it to Yotsanan reflects that the cluster division does not consider national priorities but rather political agendas, placing it under social welfare simply because Agriculture Minister Suriya Jungrungreangkit comes from the Pheu Thai party.
“I am not the one who didn’t do his homework. If the Prime Minister listened, I don’t know if he was truly paying attention or simply did not understand. I reiterate that the Agriculture and Cooperatives Ministry is under Yotsanan’s cluster. The one who didn’t do homework is not me. I wonder if the Prime Minister was absent from the meeting room,” Parit said.
Regarding the Prime Minister’s statement that he is not ready to comment on the Election Commission’s prosecution over the Senate election fraud case and that no one would be happy about it, Parit said he is indeed the person accused by the EC. He welcomes the legal process and is ready to prove his innocence through the justice system fully. He believes that those who are innocent will go through all procedures. This contradicts the Prime Minister’s gracious claim to be open to all parties’ suggestions, proving it untrue.
On whether he felt successful in policy scrutiny, Parit said the process will continue and not stop today. However, he was disappointed that the Prime Minister’s explanation focused mostly on his own achievements rather than addressing public concerns about certain policies, including details missing from the documents or the speech—both short- and long-term plans the Prime Minister barely mentioned—as well as problem policies and clarity on handling the energy crisis.
Asked about the idea of shadowing the government, possibly by forming a shadow cabinet from the People’s Party, Parit said they will use every method to scrutinize the government, both parliamentary mechanisms and public oversight outside Parliament. However, the party wants to finalize details before communicating further.
Regarding the formation of a special parliamentary committee to investigate elections, the People’s Party has already submitted a motion to include this as an agenda item. The aim is to investigate irregularities in elections and propose improvements to ensure elections are fair and clean. This includes the Act on MP Elections. He believes this will be a good platform for all political parties and academics to use past data to dispel public doubts and consider how future elections can build public trust as truly fair, just, and transparent. They hope for cooperation from all parties.
Whether the committee will be established depends on the parliamentary session. Judging from the Prime Minister’s recent remarks, there seemed to be no promise. What they want to know is the Prime Minister’s position on this matter.
If established, the committee’s scope will include examining past events, making proposals to improve rules so that media and public observers can monitor more rigorously, and ensuring quick, transparent, and comprehensive disclosure of score sheets for further analysis.
“Although the last election has passed, we don’t want such events to recur. This committee is important, including representatives from all parties and various external sectors. We hope it can reach a consensus,” Parit said.
Parit also commented on the case involving 44 former Move Forward Party MPs, where the National Anti-Corruption Commission submitted the case file to the Supreme Court on 9 Apr 2026 GMT+7. When asked about the timing of the party’s general meeting, he said meetings occur annually and are not arranged specifically to handle this case. Regarding their approach, he said they will proceed step-by-step. He understands the case has been sent to the court. Yesterday, they filed a petition requesting the court accept it and not issue an order to suspend duties, arguing that the 10 MPs are not in a position to interfere with evidence or affect the case. Therefore, this approach should not hinder the process. They will proceed stepwise, and if the court accepts and orders suspension, they have prepared plans for all scenarios.
When asked about the date of the general meeting, he said he is unsure and will wait for official information. There is no concealment but he wants to avoid misinformation.
Regarding the party secretary’s resignation, Parit said it is scheduled as previously stated and is unrelated to the case involving the 44 MPs. All 10 MPs will perform their duties until the moment they are ordered to stop because ultimately, those who elected the MPs are the people. Their duty is to repay that trust.
Asked about the process to request no suspension, Parit said the petition was submitted to the Supreme Court. He suggested Dr. Wayo Aswarungreung, party-list MP and deputy legal head of the People’s Party, explain the details, as the court’s decision is ultimately at its discretion. He believes the petition has already been submitted.
When asked if he worries about behind-the-scenes pressure to expedite the case during Songkran, Parit said it’s impossible to know if anyone tries to alter standard timelines. The fact is, looking at similar cases, the time between the NACC sending cases to the court and the court accepting them usually takes about one month. This can be a reference. Another case to watch is the unresolved vote-rigging case at the EC. Currently, two opinions exist: the 26th investigative committee found grounds to prosecute and sent the case to court, while the 36th adjudicative committee believes no prosecution is warranted. Therefore, close attention is needed to see which view the EC adopts and what the outcome will be.
