Deputy Government Spokesperson Lalida Perwivattana responded to MP Ice Rakchanok's accusation that the Ministry of Digital Economy is conducting an IO, emphasizing that investigations into the government must be based on evidence and not on turning suspicions into facts.
On 20 August 2026, Ms. Lalida Perwivattana, Deputy Government Spokesperson at the Prime Minister’s Office, addressed MP Rakchanok Srinok’s observation about new social media user accounts commenting in support of the TH-AI Passport (AiPASS) project. Rakchanok questioned whether this could be an information operation (IO) linked to the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (DES). Lalida stated that while questioning and scrutinizing the government’s work is a full right, confusing suspicion with confirmed fact is different, and any accusations involving state agencies should be clearly supported by evidence.
The Deputy Government Spokesperson further explained that finding some user accounts recently created, without posts or expressing aligned opinions, may justify further inquiry but is insufficient to conclude these accounts are IOs, and even less so to accuse a ministry or state agency of orchestrating them. It is necessary to prove who owns these accounts, who ordered or hired their use, what budget or resources were employed, and to provide evidence directly linking these accounts to any government agency.
"If there is evidence that a ministry ordered or was behind this, please present it publicly for citizens to review — whether orders, contracts, expenditures, coordination routes, or evidence linking directly to the decision-makers. The government is ready for investigation. But without such evidence, what exists is suspicion, not fact, and it is inappropriate to jump from observation to accusing the ministry of conducting an IO," she said.
Accounts newly created or with low activity may be signals worth checking, but cannot alone prove an account is fake or part of a state-run operation. Similarly, some citizens commenting that registering via the "government" app was easier or faster is not in itself proof that those individuals are government-directed, because communicating information about public services is different from organizing an IO network.
"What should be questioned is the standard of investigation. If in other cases the opposition demands the government produce evidence before accusing anyone, the same principle should apply when they are the accusers. Drawing conclusions beyond the available evidence is not rigorous scrutiny but applying double standards — requiring the state to prove every claim, while relying only on suspicion or screenshots to accuse the state," she added.
Ms. Lalida also said the government does not reject audits of the TH-AI Passport project and is ready for reviews of its operations, budget use, and outcomes for citizens. If doubts or irregularities arise, evidence can be brought forward for full examination, as evidence-based investigation benefits both the public and government by enhancing transparency and efficiency.
"The opposition’s role is to scrutinize the government, and the government’s role is to answer questions. But good scrutiny should not start by assuming guilt and forcing others to prove their innocence. If an IO exists, investigation should trace to the decision-makers, contractors, and resource sources, presenting evidence publicly. The government will accept responsibility if facts emerge, but until then, such matters should be called suspicions, not declared as facts to society," she said.
In closing, the Deputy Government Spokesperson emphasized the government respects the opposition’s role and welcomes all critiques of the TH-AI Passport project. However, investigations should follow uniform standards for all parties, especially for accusations involving misuse of state power or resources, which must have verifiable, traceable evidence. The government is not afraid of scrutiny and does not ask for questions to stop. The only request is that if concerns escalate to accusations, the evidence must escalate accordingly. Quality investigation is not about making the loudest claims but presenting the strongest evidence to the public, because ultimately, standards of truth should be the same for both government and opposition.