The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) sent a letter to the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) asking for facts regarding the NBTC Chairman, focusing on three major points of potential disqualification, and ordering the submission of documents within 15 days.
Dr. Saran Boonbaichaiyapruk, Chairman of the NBTC, and the role of Mr. Trairat Wiriyasirikul, Acting Secretary-General of the NBTC, have resurfaced amid controversy after the NACC office sent a letter to the NBTC Secretary-General requesting facts and evidence about allegations of neglecting to submit a royal petition to remove the NBTC Chairman from office despite possible disqualification or prohibitive characteristics. The letter raises three direct questions: who has the authority to verify qualifications, who is responsible for action, and what legal steps follow if disqualification is confirmed, setting a deadline of 15 days for response.
A source from the NBTC office revealed that the organizational atmosphere has become tense again after the NACC sent a letter to the NBTC Secretary-General requesting facts and documents regarding allegations that a political officeholder may have committed misconduct or neglected duty, including serious breaches of ethical standards.
The issue centers on allegations of neglect in submitting a royal petition to remove Dr. Saran from the NBTC Chairman position despite doubts about his qualifications or prohibitive traits. There is also a related matter concerning possible violations of the Frequency Allocation Act B.E. 2553 (2010).
The NACC letter dated 1 April 2026 clearly requests facts and supporting documents for legal action under NACC law, posing three straightforward key questions:
Issue 1: Which agency or individual has the authority to verify the qualifications of NBTC members?
Issue 2: If an NBTC commissioner is found lacking qualifications or having prohibitive traits, what must the NBTC office do?
Issue 3: If such a case involves the NBTC Chairman himself, what powers and duties does the NBTC board have to proceed legally?
A source said this letter is not a technical or procedural inquiry but directly targets the "responsibility structure"—if doubts about qualifications arise, who must point it out, who must act, and who is accountable if the issue is left unresolved without legal action.
The letter also instructs the NBTC office to report facts and submit certified true copies of related documents to the NACC within 15 days from receipt, reflecting that the matter has escalated from internal debate to an official information request, although it is not yet a final ruling.
A source at the NBTC office said that since receiving the NACC letter, there have been efforts to prevent the matter from being raised at NBTC meetings, citing that Dr. Saran instructed Acting Secretary-General Trairat not to bring the issue to the meeting or inform NBTC commissioners under any circumstances.
The confirmed stance internally is that the NBTC Chairman underwent qualification and prohibitive characteristic checks by the NBTC selection committee and was subsequently officially appointed by royal command, with the Prime Minister endorsing it. Therefore, no interpretation or action beyond the established process should be taken.
It was also affirmed that the previous Senate ICT Committee, which reviewed the Chairman's qualifications and prohibitive traits, had no legal authority to make a final determination. The interpretation remains that qualification verification for NBTC positions is the authority of the selection committee, as previously interpreted by the Council of State.
However, reviewing the timeline shows the issue is not as simple as explained. On 4 September 2021, Dr. Saran was selected by the NBTC selection committee along with six others as suitable candidates, having passed qualification checks and lacking prohibitive traits as required by law.
The selection committee then forwarded the list of seven candidates to the Senate for approval. Strictly following legal procedures, the selection committee's role may be interpreted as ending once the names are submitted to the Senate process.
Subsequently, on 20 December 2021, the Senate approved five of the selected candidates for NBTC commissioner positions. By 10 January 2022, those still having prohibitive traits under Section 8 had to present evidence of resignation or cessation of such occupations to the Senate President within the deadline before the Prime Minister submitted the royal petition, all under Section 18 of the Frequency Allocation Act.
On 13 April 2022, Dr. Saran and the five approved NBTC commissioners were officially appointed by royal command. Under Section 5 of the same law, the Prime Minister acts as the official under this statute.
The lingering doubt stems from other facts cited in documents and previous reviews, summarizing that although Dr. Saran resigned as Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at Mahidol University on 8 January 2022—serving as evidence of resignation from a state agency as required by Section 18—there is information indicating he continued to examine and treat patients and received compensation until 12 April 2022.
Based on cited laws and conclusions, such facts could be interpreted as a "conclusive presumption" under Section 18 that he forfeited the right to be appointed as an NBTC commissioner. If interpreted this way, the legal consequences would extend beyond mere allegations to questioning whether the entire appointment process should be redone.
"The most critical danger in this matter is the legal practical gap, because despite numerous facts and laws cited, there is no clear provision addressing who has authority to establish facts or who must initiate legal processes if the NBTC Chairman is later found disqualified or prohibited," the source said.
The source pointed out that shifting responsibility back to the NBTC selection committee is problematic since it completed its duties once the list was sent to the Senate, while many problematic facts surfaced or were raised after that stage.
"Thus, the big question is not only whether the NBTC Chairman truly lacks qualifications or has prohibitive traits," the source said, "but also who must be held accountable for neglecting duty and seriously violating ethical standards if someone knew or had reasonable suspicion but failed to act."
Therefore, this NACC letter carries more weight than a typical information request, as it pressures the NBTC office to clarify how the legal system addresses such cases and, when doubts directly involve the organization's chairman, who decides, acts, and accepts consequences if no action is taken.
Timeline of Selection and Approval
• 4 Sep 2021: Dr. Saran was selected by the NBTC selection committee as one of seven suitable candidates for NBTC commissioner.
• 20 Dec 2021: The Senate approved five of the selected candidates for NBTC commissioner positions.
• 8 Jan 2022: Information indicates Dr. Saran resigned as Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Mahidol University.
• 10 Jan 2022: Deadline for approved candidates with prohibitive traits under Section 8 to submit proof of resignation or cessation of occupation to the Senate President before the Prime Minister submits the royal petition, as per Section 18.
• 12 Apr 2022: Information claims Dr. Saran continued patient care and received compensation until this date.
• 13 Apr 2022: Royal command officially appointed the five NBTC commissioners.
• 1 Apr 2026: NACC office sent a letter to the NBTC Secretary-General requesting facts and documents, setting a 15-day deadline for response.
If there are further developments, Thairath Online News will continue to report to ensure fairness and factual accuracy for all parties involved.