Pheu Thai Defends Against Senate Election Bribery Case
The Election Commission named 77 people in a Senate election bribery case, excluding senior Pheu Thai members, with the party's spokesman saying it reflects the EC's findings and urging those implicated to seek legal counsel.
At 9 a.m. on September 15 at Parliament, Nanbunyathida Somchai, Deputy Minister of Digital Economy for Social and Economic Development and Pheu Thai spokesman, commented on the Election Commission's disclosure of 77 names in the Senate election bribery case, which does not include senior Pheu Thai party members. He said this aligns with the Election Commission's determination.
There has been no internal party discussion yet, as the list was only released late on September 14 and party members have been busy with their individual responsibilities.
Regarding the inclusion of former House Deputy Speaker Supachai Pothisu and Somkiart Liangprasoet, father of Interior Ministry Deputy Minister Worrasit Liangprasoet, Somchai said the party seeks further clarification since the Election Commission has 60 days before referring the case to the Supreme Court. He asked individuals named to consult with their lawyers about how to respond to the court.
When asked if Pheu Thai felt relieved, Somchai said the party was not burdened from the start, as it is confident it had no involvement and can clarify matters clearly.
On whether the case will conclude at the Election Commission level or whether party executives could be implicated once it reaches court, Somchai said it is a legal process and declined to speculate on future developments, leaving matters to proceed according to law.
Addressed on how to convince society, given public skepticism that Senate candidates could not have acted alone and may have party backing, Somchai said it is crucial to distinguish between belief and evidence. He criticized the practice of making accusations without clear evidence, comparing it to the case involving "Uncle Pol" where claims were made without supporting proof.
He urged the public not to use unfounded beliefs to guide society. Only those with investigative responsibilities and access to evidence can make such determinations. The case is currently in the legal process, and it is important that all accusations be backed by clear evidence before being made public.
