Bhumjaithai Party has approved nine leaders to sue "Yingcheep iLaw" for defamation over allegations of collusion in Senate elections, pointing out a lack of evidence and political discrediting intent.
On 24 Jul 2026 GMT+7, Mr. Krawi Prisanantakul, MP for Ang Thong from Bhumjaithai Party, commented on Mr. Yingcheep Atchanont, director of the Internet for People's Law Project (iLaw), who revealed information implicating nine Bhumjaithai leaders, including himself and his brother Mr. Pharadon Prisanantakul, in collusion related to Senate elections. He stated that the party is preparing for the nine affected individuals to take legal action and is considering additional charges beyond defamation.
Mr. Krawi expressed surprise that Mr. Yingcheep admitted having no direct evidence and that his statements were based on hearsay. He said such actions do not follow proper verification processes but aim to smear reputations for political gain. He affirmed that politicians welcome scrutiny through opposition channels or parliament but only based on facts, not fabricated information that misleads the public.
Regarding questions about whether this is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), Mr. Krawi explained that SLAPPs involve the state silencing truth-tellers. In this case, since the accuser admits lacking evidence, the lawsuits by himself and others named are to defend their legal rights and dignity.
"If someone falsely accused Yingcheep—whether it's 'Y.C.' or 'Yingchu'—linking him to Forex scams or inciting youth unrest, would he not defend his rights? We are no different. When falsely accused, we must protect our dignity. If we do not respond, it might be seen as acceptance," Mr. Krawi said.
On the issue of alleged connections with Senate candidates, Mr. Krawi clarified that this only involves an aide to an MP who met a candidate, with no relation to himself. If he had driven someone to register, or if there were audio or video clips or evidence of money transfers in collusion, that would be different. But this is using others' matters to mislead the public into thinking all nine were involved, which appears to be a politically motivated agenda rather than genuine transparency efforts.