Opposition Leader Pushes Probe Into TH-AI Passport Data Risks
Opposition leader Nattapong Ruengpanya is pushing for an investigation into the TH-AI Passport project, citing concerns over data security, specification manipulation, and potential collusion among winning bidders across multiple government
At 3:45 p.m. on August 21, 2025 in Mae Ai district, Chiang Mai, Nattapong Ruengpanya, a list-based MP and leader of the People's Party opposition, discussed Digital Economy and Society Ministry Deputy Secretary Pachon Anantasil's determination to press ahead with the TH-AI Passport project despite alleged Article 157 charges. Nattapong said the opposition is preparing a complaint for relevant agencies to investigate. Dr. Wayo Aswanarung, a list-based MP and party deputy leader, is leading the effort, with MP Ratchanok Srinok also involved. Although the government has the authority to continue the project, the opposition will perform its full oversight duty and submit the matter for further investigation.
When asked if there are grounds to prosecute, particularly for violating the Terms of Reference, Nattapong said the available information clearly indicates specification locking. The People's Party has uncovered additional concerns: the network of companies winning the TH-AI Passport contract also hold other state sector contracts across multiple ministries, displaying bidding and procurement patterns that suggest collusion and specification manipulation.
Regarding concerns that data could leak abroad, despite the ministry's assurances of security, Nattapong said the public must choose whom to trust. The Terms of Reference, he noted, clearly state that both the state and service providers know who accesses the system and what commands are used. He cannot verify whether government claims are true, but urged citizens registering for the program to be aware that the Terms of Reference contain such provisions and to consider how well their personal data will be protected.
Asked whether the current one million registrations constitute success against a five million target, Nattapong said the real issue is larger. While he agrees the government's stated aim to raise Thai skills in AI use is valid, the more important question is how AI is deployed. Beyond raising awareness, meaningful AI applications should address disaster management, detecting state procurement fraud, or investigating local corruption—uses that civil society and activists have already developed. If the state, with its budget and authority, took the lead on such projects using AI, wouldn't the benefits be far greater? If government chose to do what truly needs doing, the impact would be far more significant.
