Chalit Ratthapana appealed to Rom and Ice regarding his removal from the Social Security Board candidacy list, believing it to be harassment after investigating corruption within the organization. Meanwhile, Ice Rakchanok questioned why the Social Security Office accepted applications initially if candidates lacked the necessary qualifications.
On 20 August 2026, Rangsiman Rome, Chair of the Committee on Law, Justice, and Human Rights, together with Rakchanok Srinok, Chair of the Budget Oversight Committee, and committee member Romadon Panjor, received a letter from Chalit Ratthapana of the Progressive Social Security team concerning the Social Security Office's removal of his name from the Social Security Board candidate list.
Chalit stated that he was elected to the Social Security Board in 2023 and had continuously contributed social security payments for over seven years until his termination. However, between 1–10 July, the SSO Plus app and the Social Security Office website still showed his status as a Section 33 insured person. Since 1 July was the opening day for applications, he believed he fully qualified to apply. Furthermore, social security contributions are calculated monthly, not daily, so having completed the monthly contributions entitled him to full rights.
Chalit continued that his disqualification resulted from inconsistencies within the Social Security system, which did not allow changing to Section 39 insured status on that day, and the system error was then used to penalize candidates. The official who signed off on the disqualification was the same legal department officer who had been controversial over election formula adjustments and requests to cancel or postpone the election date. He views himself as a direct party affected, possibly due to his intense investigations into corruption within the Social Security Office that led to several cases being submitted to the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
Rakchanok observed that this case clearly involved the legal department using its discretion to harass candidates from the Progressive Social Security team. If the Social Security Office believed Chalit lacked qualifications, why did it accept his application on the first day? Announcing disqualification only after the application period closed resulted in one Progressive Social Security candidate losing eligibility out of seven, leaving voters with only six options. This constitutes a loss of voters' rights. She also suspects dissatisfaction with the team’s rigorous investigations and notes the Social Security Office recently lost a case in the administrative court.
Rangsiman concluded that the Social Security Fund is a national interest involving many people, yet this election process has been complicated and suspicious in many ways. The committee will closely monitor the matter to ensure transparency and protect the rights of all insured persons, preventing corruption or power misuse to benefit any party.