"Srinakharinwirot University" , issued an update on the "local exam fraud" case. No exam leaks were found, but outsiders interfered with the score announcement process.
On 3 July 2026, Professor Dr. Chonwit Jearajitt, President of Srinakharinwirot University, announced progress on the local exam fraud investigation. He stated that the university takes the incident seriously and is fully cooperating with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and the police. The university authorized the Testing Office to coordinate and has entrusted key documents and secure room data to the NACC for safekeeping and transparency to clarify the matter.
The university immediately established a fact-finding committee to conduct a transparent, fair, and verifiable investigation of internal staff at the Testing Office. Preliminary results indicated some questionable behavior suggesting dishonesty. The information will be forwarded to the NACC and relevant parties. The university has been working with the Department of Local Administration (DLA) to uncover the truth and identify those responsible for fraud.
Associate Professor Dr. Rittichai Onming, Vice President for Legal Affairs and University Council, who chairs the fact-finding committee, said the investigation has been quite challenging. Key evidence, especially original answer sheets and flash drives containing source data, had been sincerely handed over to the NACC, along with all related documents.
The fact-finding revealed several key points, divided into two areas: areas where no irregularities were found, including exam creation, selection, original exam preparation, printing, answer sheets, and distribution to exam centers. The investigation found no abnormalities or exam leaks in these processes.
However, three irregularities potentially leading to fraud were found. The committee discovered links to multiple outsiders who appeared intent on controlling exam preparation and score consideration themselves by contacting the university's Testing Office, which was the contractor.
The second issue concerned the announcement of scores for parts A and B and the English language scores, which are crucial for passing to part C. After scoring each section, the university compiles the scores onto two flash drives, each digitally signed to prevent data tampering, with any changes leaving a trace.
The first set is sent to the Department of Local Administration (DLA) for safekeeping of key data. The DLA then reviews the list of candidates passing parts A, B, and English, sends the results back to the university, which stamps them before returning to the DLA for public announcement.
Another significant point involves part C (the interview), the final step before appointment. This is handled like parts A and B: answer sheets are scored, and scores recorded on two digitally signed flash drives. Data is exchanged between the DLA and the university for verification and stamping before announcing successful candidates by position and district. The available data is sufficient to report to the university president, but some details require further linkage to ensure thoroughness and fairness, so the investigation continues.
Regarding outsiders, the university explained that representatives from related agencies observed every exam step, with 24-hour CCTV monitoring, confirming strict compliance with the terms of reference (TOR). Digitally signed data will reveal who made any edits.
So far, two Testing Office personnel have been questioned, with three more scheduled for interviews. Another case is under consideration for whether an interview is necessary.
Asked if internal staff were involved, the chair said no evidence has yet been found implicating insiders. Regarding reports that the DLA suspended the third payment installment and might sue the university, Associate Professor Dr. Prapaporn explained the university respects the review process and is ready to provide supporting information if requested.
The university reiterated that the flash drives are verifiable. The ones held by the NACC will be compared, and any edits will be detected via the digital signature.
The Testing Office has complied with the TOR regarding the flash drives sent. To clarify the issue, the digital signature will show any alterations, including who made them. The university's role is to verify whether the Testing Office, as the contractor, operated correctly.
When asked if legal action would follow once the process concludes, the chair said that remains a matter for the future.
Regarding a previous claim that a DLA director created a file alleging the university fabricated it, the chair said some initial checks were done, but detailed investigation awaits NACC input, as all evidence, especially digital signatures, has been submitted to them.
The president added that future contracts must be more stringent, requiring a committee rather than just the director accepting work directly. Authorization should consider the TOR and multiple perspectives to ensure careful decision-making aligned with the university's academic service mission. As an administrator, he sympathizes with candidates who should have passed but did not, emphasizing the need for clarity and cooperation among all parties to find the truth.
In closing, the president said, "If the prime minister is impatient, he should ask the NACC to bring the flash drives and open them side by side." He expressed sympathy for those who deserved to pass and condemned those who cheated, saying it is unfair to those who failed. He suggested ordering a comparison of the flash drives to identify discrepancies.