MP Claims Navy Lied, Gun in Lawmaker Shooting Not Destroyed

MP Rangsiman Rome reveals the firearm used in the assassination attempt on Narathiwat MP Kamolsak Liewa-mae may not have been destroyed as the Navy claimed. He alleges the Navy gave false testimony to the House committee and suspects an influential figure is obstructing justice. Region 9 Police investigators were blocked from accessing phone data after the police commander appointed an anonymous proxy to hold the information, and the DSI suspiciously ordered the investigation halted despite it qualifying as a special case.

At 1:20 PM on November 5, 2026, at Parliament, People's Party list MP Rangsiman Rome, in his capacity as chair of the House Committee on Legal Affairs, Justice and Human Rights, spoke to reporters after a meeting reviewing the case of a gunman shooting Chart Thai Pattana Party MP Kamolsak Liewa-mae from Narathiwat. He said the committee has resolved to summon the Narathiwat governor to give explanations, as there are several pieces of relevant information useful for fact-finding. Previous invitations had been ignored, so the committee exercised its subpoena power hoping to obtain useful information and trace those obstructing or behind the scenes.

Rangsiman said the committee also resolved to summon the disciplinary ruling of Sunthon Phromphakdi, the investigative order the governor issued regarding misuse of official vehicles, and a fact-finding report on Navy firearms. The committee wants Navy cooperation to confirm whether the gun used to shoot Kamolsak belongs to the Navy. The Navy claimed it had been destroyed and buried, but information obtained suggests the weapon appears not to have been destroyed.

Therefore, when it emerges that this firearm was used in an assassination attempt, questions arise whether the Navy's explanation to the committee was false. This could lead to something even more alarming: some guns claimed destroyed may have entered the system and been used in multiple crimes. It may not be just a single barrel; the question is how many other firearms have been used in the same manner.

Regarding phone numbers, the data held by service providers should already be sent to Region 9 Provincial Police daily. This surrounding data could help track perpetrators. Yet strangely, the Region 9 investigative team and the Border Patrol Police task force could not use this data. It is bizarre that no one discloses who can access this information. Only the Region 9 police commander is known to have access, but there was an appointment allowing another person to access it, while the head of the investigative team could not answer the committee who that person was. The investigative team found it easier to request data from private entities than from their own holdings.

Consequently, the investigation is delayed and data may expire, even though it should be retained for at least five years. Those explaining did not know how long data must be kept, believing only 90 days, which is far too short. This confirms the case has a major obstructing figure capable of distorting the justice process to this extent.

Additionally, it is strange that investigators chose to exclude certain phone numbers or not pursue them. There are believed to be at least 30 numbers that should be traced, yet only 11 primary numbers are known to be crucial for securing convictions.

Regarding the shell casings and the known non-prosecution order for Lieutenant Commander Decha Rattanaphan, a suspect in this case, there is hope for prosecution. However, the obstruction is that the investigative report sent over is considered weak, creating disagreement between investigators and prosecutors.