Three NBTC commissioners discussed with the Political Development Committee the reason for five consecutive failed meetings and declined to participate alongside “Dr. Sorn.” Meanwhile, the NBTC deputy secretary explained that Dr. Sorn’s position is fully terminated but must await the Royal Command for official dismissal by royal decree.
On 13 Aug 2026 GMT+7, during the Political Development Committee meeting of the House of Representatives at 13:30, the committee considered the qualifications of Clinical Professor Dr. Sorn Boonbaichayapruk in the position of Chairman of the NBTC. The meeting invited three commissioners of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC)—Air Marshal Thanaphon Raicharoen, Emeritus Professor Dr. Pirongrong Ramasoot, and Associate Professor Dr. Suphat Suphachalasai—to attend and provide explanations, along with representatives from the NBTC Secretariat and the Consumer Protection Council.
Before the agenda began, Dr. Pirongrong submitted additional documents to Ms. Pakamon Hun-anun, Chairwoman of the Political Development Committee. Then the meeting started with Air Marshal Thanaphon explaining the reason for five consecutive failed NBTC board meetings: Since the NBTC selection committee, a legally authorized body, ruled on 23 Jul that Dr. Sorn forfeited his rights under Section 18 in conjunction with Section 8(2) of the Frequency Allocation and Regulatory Act, he has sent letters to the NBTC office requesting resolution of this issue before each meeting.
The reason for insisting on a resolution first is that Dr. Sorn has lacked qualifications from the start. If he continues to attend meetings and votes are taken, those decisions may be legally invalid and could cause serious harm. However, both Dr. Sorn and the NBTC office have insisted on his participation as chairman. Furthermore, on 7 Aug, the Central Administrative Court dismissed Dr. Sorn’s lawsuit and request to suspend enforcement of the selection committee’s ruling. This means the court did not grant protection or suspension of that ruling and even advised proceeding with the process to submit the matter for royal dismissal under Section 20, paragraph two.
Air Marshal Thanaphon continued, According to Section 20, paragraph two, removal from office takes effect immediately from the date of losing qualifications or possessing disqualifying characteristics, applying retroactively without waiting for the royal dismissal decree. Moreover, Section 20, paragraph three clearly states that in such cases, the remaining commissioners may continue performing their duties, and the NBTC board shall consist of the remaining commissioners. The law intends to prevent abuse of royal authority and avoid using the wait for the royal decree as an excuse to delay duties.
“I want to emphasize my readiness to attend meetings and perform NBTC duties with the six remaining commissioners, which is legally permissible. In the past, the NBTC board has met with only five or six members. But if the NBTC office insists on Dr. Sorn attending meetings or acting as chairman, I cannot participate due to the legal risks this poses,” he said.
Air Marshal Thanaphon confirmed to reporters that Dr. Sorn’s position ended from the date the selection committee ruled he lacked qualifications, and that any orders or resolutions he signed should be considered terminated.
Ms. Orada Thepyayen, special expert acting for the NBTC deputy secretary, explained to the committee that she was assigned to act for Mr. Trirat Wiriyasirikul, Deputy Secretary and acting Secretary-General of the NBTC. She clarified why the NBTC office continues to issue invitations to all seven commissioners, including Dr. Sorn as chairman, despite the selection committee’s ruling that he lacks qualifications or has forfeited his rights.
Ms. Orada added that the NBTC office has acknowledged and received memoranda from all commissioners. However, regarding legal provisions on removal under the Frequency Allocation Act, Section 20 explicitly covers removal due to death, resignation, reaching age 70, lacking qualifications under Section 7, or possessing disqualifications under Section 8.
For the case where the selection committee ruled Dr. Sorn forfeited rights under Section 18 in conjunction with Section 8(2), this is not directly listed as a removal cause under Section 20 but falls under Section 20(5). Paragraph two of the same section stipulates that the matter must be submitted for royal dismissal by decree before removal is official.
Furthermore, both the Grand Council of State’s ruling and the Supreme Court’s judgment have consistently indicated that when law requires a royal decree for removal, it is essential to await the official promulgation of that decree before it takes effect.
At the end, Ms. Orada added, practically, the NBTC office must comply with meeting regulations by organizing meetings and inviting all seven commissioners as usual, without excluding anyone. Regarding the authority of the selection committee, Dr. Sorn must pursue legal processes accordingly. It is known that the Prime Minister has already submitted the matter for royal consideration. Once the royal decree officially removes him, the condition under Section 20 will be complete, and the NBTC office is ready to proceed with related legal steps.