NBTC Chairman Suspended, Questions Arise Over Selection Committee's Legitimacy

A decision by Thailand's National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) selection committee to suspend its chairman, Professor Dr. Saron Boonbaichaiyaphruk, has sparked controversy, with new information revealing internal dissent over the committee's authority. The selection committee, in its ruling 1/2569 dated July 21, 2026, ordered Dr. Saron to cease his duties as NBTC chairman. However, sources indicate that during the committee meeting, which was chaired by Kiattipong Amatayakul, another committee member, Ms. Yupin Chalanonniwat, vehemently objected to the committee's composition and authority before requesting to withdraw from the deliberation on this matter. Ms. Yupin argued that the selection committee's powers are temporary and cease to exist once the selection process is completed. She asserted that once Dr. Saron was appointed as an NBTC commissioner, no law grants the selection committee the authority to retroactively investigate or rule on his qualifications. This stance is echoed by Mr. Narong Rattamaruet, a former member of the National Anti-Corruption Commission and another selection committee member, who had previously written to the Prime Minister to object on the same principle. Mr. Narong maintained that Section 15/1 of the relevant law only grants authority for qualification review prior to selection, not for commissioners who have already been appointed. Significantly, both Ms. Yupin's and Mr. Narong's opinions align with the Constitutional Court's ruling 25-27/2555, which established a precedent that the selection committee's authority ends with the completion of its selection duties. This has led to widespread questions as to why the majority vote of four committee members interpreted the situation differently from the Constitutional Court's ruling. No official comment has yet been provided by the majority members of the selection committee regarding these objections. Public calls are increasing for the relevant agencies to clarify the facts and legal basis to resolve doubts about the legitimacy of the process.