Bangkok: A former Director-General of the Department of Provincial Administration has filed a complaint with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to investigate Phumtham, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Interior, regarding allegedly illegal transfers, following a ruling by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) that violated the merit system.
According to Thai News Agency, on May 22, 2026, Mr. Chaiwat Junthirapong, former Director-General of the Department of Provincial Administration, filed a complaint with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). He requested an investigation into his transfer from the position of Director-General of the Department of Provincial Administration to the position of Inspector-General of the Ministry of Interior before his retirement.
The complaint alleges that Mr. Phumtham Wechayachai, while serving as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Interior, and Mr. Arsit Sampanrat, while serving as Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Interior, were involved in proposing and implementing the illegal transfer of the complainant. The actions are said to violate merit principles and may constitute an offense under Section 157, in conjunction with Section 83 of the Criminal Code, concerning malfeasance in office, and other laws related to the prevention and suppression of corruption.
The petitioner stated that the transfer occurred shortly after the policy was announced, without any specific reasons for shortcomings in the petitioner's performance, without a performance evaluation, without an opportunity to explain, and without evidence that the transfer from the position of Director-General of the Department of Provincial Administration was a genuine necessity for the government.
The core issue of the petition is that the petitioner argues that being transferred to the position of Inspector-General of the Ministry of Interior was not a normal reassignment, but rather a reduction in their role, authority, responsibilities, and opportunities in the civil service, especially as they are nearing retirement. This change makes it impossible to return to their original position and negatively impacts their reputation, honor, and post-retirement opportunities.
The petition also cites a ruling by the Civil Service Ethics Committee (CSEC), which by a majority vote determined that the transfer constituted an unlawful exercise of discretion and was not in line with the merit system. The petitioner therefore requests the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to investigate, examine relevant documents and witnesses, and determine whether anyone was the mastermind, instigator, or accomplice in the said act.
The petitioner affirmed that they did not wish for the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to prejudge the case, but rather requested a thorough, fair, and verifiable investigation to protect the rule of law, the merit system in public administration, and fairness to civil servants affected by the exercise of power by both political and administrative officials. This case is not merely about the transfer of high-ranking officials but raises a crucial question for the "merit system" in the Thai civil service: must the exercise of power to transfer civil servants have specific, verifiable reasons and must not infringe upon the rights, reputation, and fairness of those transferred? Since the Civil Service Commission (CSC) ruled that the transfer was unlawful, the aggrieved party has the right to petition the NACC to further investigate whether the action was merely an unlawful administrative order or potentially constituted malfeasance in office under criminal law.