"Bank Suphanat" demands "Chadchart" clearly explain 12 points concerning the corruption case in Bangkok's exercise equipment procurement after the investigation concluded with only a 600-baht fine, importantly approved by the governor, and insists he will not let this issue go.
On 9 June 2026, regarding the case Ms. Tawida Kamolwet, former Deputy Governor of Bangkok, revealed yesterday (8 June 2026) about allegations of corruption in Bangkok's exercise equipment procurement, Mr. Suphanat Meenachainan, Member of Parliament (MP) for Bangkok from the People's Party, disclosed that the investigation process continues and the then Governor of Bangkok ordered ongoing additional checks, not allowing the case to end with the preliminary investigation results. Meanwhile, Mr. Chadchart Sittipunt, former Governor of Bangkok and independent candidate for the Bangkok governor election, stated that the matter has no official conclusion yet. The investigation results released are only preliminary committee proposals and have not been confirmed as final rulings (read more:"Tawida-Chadchart" explain the Bangkok exercise equipment corruption investigation, emphasizing the process is still ongoing.)
Recently, Mr. Suphanat raised questions viaFacebookto Mr. Chadchart and Ms. Tawida after their explanations, listing 12 points to clarify the matter for all of Bangkok as follows:
1. Did the disciplinary investigation committee have Mr. Chadchart himself appoint its members?
2. Did the investigation committee he appointed decide on a 600-baht fine?
3. Did the committee submit a report about the 600-baht fine for Mr. Chadchart’s acknowledgment and approval?
4. Did Mr. Chadchart "approve" the committee’s report proposing only a 600-baht fine and forward it to the Bangkok Civil Service Commission (CSC), which includes outsiders like the Ministry of Interior, the Civil Service Commission, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation, Teachers’ Civil Service and Educational Personnel Commission, and experts?
5. Why did Mr. Chadchart approve it?
6. Mr. Chadchart said he continually ordered further investigations, but in the end, the case only resulted in a 600-baht fine before being sent to the CSC. Is this correct?
7. Mr. Chadchart said in March 2026 there was a resolution to order additional investigation and the case was not closed. I want to ask clearly: Was the order for further investigation not from Mr. Chadchart but from the CSC? And did Mr. Chadchart not attend the CSC meeting? And did he himself approve the 600-baht fine report and send it to the CSC for action according to the committee’s resolution?
8. If the CSC blindly follows Mr. Chadchart’s approved report and proceeds without objection, does that mean the fine remains only 600 baht?
9. Did the Bangkok Permanent Secretary actually order a 600-baht fine for the officials last year?
10. Does the CSC’s resolution (after the 600-baht fine) to request further investigation guarantee a penalty harsher than the 600-baht fine?
11. I have repeatedly asked Mr. Chadchart publicly why he hasn’t ordered investigations into corruption in the remaining 17 exercise equipment projects (covering both his and Governor Aswin Kwanmuang’s terms). Mr. Chadchart said he ordered checks on all projects, but after two full years, he has not issued orders to appoint investigation committees for those 17 projects, correct?
12. Has Mr. Chadchart ever guided the committee on what types of corruption to investigate or which points to press to effectively address corrupt individuals in this case?
"I will not let this corruption case go. I ask for clear explanations point by point so I can know who truly takes corruption seriously—Mr. Chadchart or the CSC. Nothing is more disgraceful than the investigation result from the committee Mr. Chadchart set up concluding with only a 600-baht fine, which was also approved by the governor. If anything makes Mr. Chadchart angry or upset, I apologize in advance, but I must perform my duty as a representative."