Akkaradej criticized Rom, advising him not to obsess over summoning the Prime Minister to explain to the parliamentary committee. He recommended focusing on tangible outcomes rather than fixating on the individual providing the explanation. He emphasized that the priority should be the success in solving problems for the public, rather than winning disputes.
14 Nov 2026 GMT+7 Akkaradej Wongpitakroj Member of Parliament (MP) for Ratchaburi from the Bhumjaithai Party and government whip, spoke regarding the case where Rangsiman Rome List MP from the People’s Party and chairman of the parliamentary committee on law, justice, and human rights, confirmed his intention to proceed with summoning Prime Minister and Minister of Interior Anutin Charnvirakul to explain before the committee. He urged Rangsiman to consider the effectiveness of the work, especially in solving problems for the people. He did not want the committee’s mechanism to be used as a political game or to focus on winning legal disputes, thereby neglecting the true objectives.
Akkaradej continued that, having once chaired a committee himself, the important thing when inviting someone to explain is whether the information and facts provided can effectively address the public’s problems. It is not necessary for the invited person to always appear in person. In practice, committees have often invited department heads—whether ministry permanent secretaries, directors-general, or provincial governors—who sometimes appear personally, delegate a responsible representative, or send written documents. In this case, the Prime Minister has significant duties, and the assigned director-general has urgent work, so they delegated representatives or submitted documents. The focus should be on the substance and results, not on who physically attends.
“If we prioritize solving problems for the people, it does not matter who explains or whether it is done through documents. What matters is whether the information leads to solutions for the public. This should not become a political game.”
Akkaradej further explained the legal dispute about the committee chair’s procedures, saying that the chair’s belief that his actions are legal does not mean a final conclusion. When there is disagreement over legal issues, especially regarding parliamentary rules, others may see those actions as unlawful or against regulations.
Therefore, the committee chair cannot unilaterally decide who is right or wrong. If legal conflict arises, the final authority to adjudicate is the court, not a party’s affirmation as final.
He added that the Prime Minister values the legislature and committee work continuously. Delegating representatives to explain does not mean neglect or disregard for the parliament, as the Prime Minister manages the administration of 20 ministries plus many other duties. The representatives assigned are often those directly responsible, who may answer committee questions more thoroughly and precisely than the Prime Minister, who operates at the policy level, while direct officials have detailed knowledge of problems and solutions.
“I want to remind Mr. Rome, whom I have worked with in many forums, to focus on achieving results in solving problems for the people rather than winning legal battles. Ultimately, cooperative work that centers on the public interest will bring the greatest benefit. We should spend time working for the people, not wasting it on winning disputes that do not improve people’s lives.”