MP urges deeper probe into Phuket officials transfer over ‘Seafood Deputy’ case
A House committee chair has questioned the transfer of Phuket’s governor and two deputy governors, saying the government should dig deeper into alleged benefit-taking linked to officials in the province.
Phakamon Nunanant, chair of the House committee on political development, mass communications and public participation, said on June 16 that the government had not shown genuine intent to solve the Phuket official transfer case and should investigate more deeply into alleged benefit-taking linked to officials in the province.
Her comments followed an order transferring Phuket Governor Nirat Pongsitthaworn and two Phuket deputy governors, described in the report as the “Seafood Deputy” group, after a leaked chat controversy. Phakamon said the move looked like a public power struggle rather than a real attempt to address the underlying allegations.
She said she had information and clear evidence of alleged benefit-taking by a group of Phuket officials dating back to 2023, and questioned why the prime minister had only now moved to order transfers. She also said the official known locally as “Seafood Deputy” was widely seen as influential and well connected.
Phakamon said the public no longer trusted a punishment culture based only on transfers. If the prime minister was sincere about rooting out the problem, she said, the government should investigate who was connected to the alleged large-scale benefits and who had supported the officials involved.
She also criticized the transfer of the parties to Nakhon Si Thammarat, saying moving officials to another province did not mean mafia-style influence would disappear. Instead, she said, it risked becoming a cycle of transfers across all 77 provinces without addressing the root cause.
Phakamon said the issue would be raised for tough questioning in parliament.
She also gave an update on a separate leaked chat case referred to as “Help Nam Ngern.” She said her committee would continue fact-finding this week and had invited the permanent secretary of the Interior Ministry and the interior minister to explain the matter.
She said that at a previous session, Department of Provincial Administration Director-General Lertnara Naruecha did not attend in person and instead sent a deputy director-general who could not answer the committee’s questions. She added that the director-general remained in office and that no disciplinary committee had been set up.
The committee has also invited the Election Commission to explain what offences may apply in relation to alleged interference by state officials in an election and how the agency plans to handle the matter in the interest of transparency.
