
“The censure debate might uncover fresh evidence with a direct bearing on the investigation,” Tharit Pengdith said.
Tharit said the investigation, led by his deputy Naras Savetanan, found evidence of possible foul play involving officials of the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation.
Examples of possible irregularities included dereliction of duty by taking delivery of substandard relief supplies and a flawed procurement process, he said.
Yesterday’s censure targeted Justice Minister Pracha Promnok in his capacity as the director of the Flood Relief Operations Centre.
Some eight in 10 people suspected politicians were involved in foul play related to the relief supplies, according to recent polling.
More than nine in 10 people wanted the government to fully disclose spending on flood-relief operations.
More than six in 10 voiced confidence that anti-graft agencies, including the Auditor General’s Office, the DSI and the Anti Money Laundering Office, could unmask the culprits behind the mishandled flood relief.
Almost eight in 10 people did not believe the censure debate would trigger a change of government. –