Anti-Corruption Panel Pushes Local Government to Submit 5,925 Names to Five Agencies

The Anti-Corruption Committee is pressing the Department of Local Administration to quickly submit 5,925 names of suspected exam cheaters to five relevant agencies without delay, in order to open financial investigation channels and trace the masterminds.

At a parliament press conference on August 13, Asarathorn Suntaraipap, the committee chair, explained that regarding the 5,925 individuals proposed by the department to the Central Local Government Employee Examination Committee, which then directed the case to the Central Local Government Personnel Committee as the local government human resources management agency, these names have been verified for accuracy. The committee has therefore revised and finalized the pass list.

Asarathorn questioned why the department has not yet submitted these 5,925 names to the five agencies with which memoranda of understanding have been signed—the department itself, the National Anti-Corruption Commission, the Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission, the Anti-Corruption and Misconduct Prevention Unit, and the examination committee. While the central committee's resolution has been sent to provincial authorities, the department has not forwarded the names to allow these agencies to proceed with their respective duties.

When asked about the delay, Asarathorn suggested the agencies may have simply forgotten after signing the MOU, which is why the committee is now pushing for action. He emphasized his determination to ensure that all corrupt individuals face justice and to investigate whether politicians are involved, as the public suspects.

Regarding whether further screening by the Interior Ministry could allow fraudsters to slip through again, Asarathorn said he does not believe this is possible since scores already appear on official answer sheets and represent established facts.

When asked whether the investigation could ultimately reach the top instigators, Asarathorn said the case has reached level 10 officials, who have denied involvement. The committee will pursue financial transaction checks and questioning. He drew a parallel to how scores were altered in earlier rounds, with 97 individuals benefiting from score adjustments appearing on the final pass list despite this misconduct. Even with strong evidence, legal gaps have limited action. He expressed uncertainty whether the Anti-Corruption Commission has sufficient evidence against level 11 or 12 officials but said that if evidence exists, those responsible can be prosecuted.