"Rome" taunted "Chaiyachonok" as probably the most cheerful and happiest person after the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) dismissed the 40 million baht bribery complaint, mocking that he will likely boast about this in various places. He said society is questioning whether the NACC is truly performing its duties to the best of its ability and asked if "Mr. Q" has so much influence that various agencies are inactive.
On 15 November 2026, Mr. Rangsiman Rome, party-list MP and deputy leader of the People’s Party, spoke about former Phatthalung MP Nipit Intarasombat of the Democrat Party publishing a letter from the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) dismissing a complaint against Minister of Digital Economy and Society (DES) Chaiyachonok Chidchob and others regarding a 40 million baht bribery case. He said this issue has been ongoing since 30 September 2025 when Chaiyachonok spoke in parliament. The public has long wanted to know whether there was an attempt to bribe 40 million baht and whether the 4,000 gambling websites, later revealed, would be dealt with or not. That is the answer people seek, noting it has been over a year.
Mr. Rangsiman added that what appears to be the most progress is merely the NACC stating that Chaiyachonok is not at fault and there is no basis for prosecution, effectively clearing his name from serious allegations. Looking at the facts of the 40 million baht bribery case, it appears that a gambling website kingpin silenced Chaiyachonok, preventing further legal action related to the gambling sites.
He continued by questioning that currently the DES Ministry does not even know the status of the 4,000 websites, and there has been no case filed by DES against Phuwasit Chayarunroj, or "Mr. Q," regarding those sites. It seems just like empty talk. Simply put, the purpose of the 40 million baht bribe was fulfilled, with only the question remaining whether the money was actually paid. Proving this is not easy because such bribes are likely paid in cash without bank transfers, making evidence gathering difficult.
Mr. Rangsiman further questioned why the NACC seemed rushed to clear this matter. He is uncertain if the NACC summoned Chaiyachonok for clarification, as there has been no news on this. Moreover, the NACC should have investigated what actions DES took regarding the 4,000 websites, even if there is no evidence of the 40 million baht payment. Although it seems Chaiyachonok filed complaints about this, the DES Ministry should have more authority and responsibility in handling this issue, but clearly, Chaiyachonok has taken no action.
"It is intriguing that the NACC cleared this matter without examining the results of Chaiyachonok’s performance, raising suspicion whether his inaction aligns with what Mr. Q desired. The NACC does not seem to provide details on this, leading society to question whether the NACC is fully committed to resolving this issue," Mr. Rangsiman said.
When asked if this looks like a whitewash, Mr. Rangsiman said that certainly, if it is so, the person smiling and happiest now must be Chaiyachonok, who will surely use the outcome to boast in various places. Whether this is a whitewash remains to be seen depending on future NACC responses. Regardless of any changes or explanations the NACC offers, the public feels there is something suspicious they do not trust.
"Society will question the NACC’s investigation and whether the favorable outcome for Chaiyachonok means that the NACC truly performed its duties to the fullest," Mr. Rangsiman said.
Asked about Chaiyachonok’s lack of effort to clarify the issue so far and whether he should show more initiative, Mr. Rangsiman admitted he did not expect the 40 million baht bribery case to become so suspicious. He said that with Mr. Q deeply involved, it is plausible that Mr. Q is connected to the gambling websites, and thus legal action should be pursued.
Mr. Rangsiman added that instead, the bribery case has dragged on with delays and it seems all parties agree not to act. He does not know if Mr. Q has such influence that agencies are inactive or if the matter involves powerful figures related to this issue.
"Therefore, Chaiyachonok’s inaction clearly indicates there is an issue here, and society should pay attention. His failure to use his authority honestly to address this matter warrants stricter scrutiny of Chaiyachonok," said Mr. Rangsiman.
When asked if, as chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Law, Justice, and Human Rights, he will continue investigating this matter, Mr. Rangsiman said it is still under committee consideration and they have not concluded yet. The facts will definitely be further pursued.
Asked if he worries that pro-government committee members might cite the NACC’s dismissal as a reason to stall the committee’s review, Mr. Rangsiman said there are two issues: the NACC’s dismissal of Chaiyachonok’s case does not remove the committee’s or society’s right to demand explanation on the evidence and judgment used. The case involving Mr. Q, which the NACC found has merit, can still be pursued if the NACC’s findings are cited.