Natthaphong questions NACC action on 44 ex-MPs, hints motive behind it
People’s Party leader Natthaphong says he has not seen any NACC ruling on the “44 ex-MPs” Section 112 case, and questions any political motive
Natthaphong says he has not seen the NACC’s finding in the “44 MPs” case, says he faces the least risk, and questions whether there is a motive behind it; calls for agencies to act straightforwardly and not be used as tools for political destruction
On February 9, 2026, at the Future Forward Building, the headquarters of the People’s Party, Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, leader of the People’s Party, gave an interview about reports that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) was preparing to consider whether there had been serious ethical misconduct in the case involving 44 former Move Forward MPs who signed a petition to amend Section 112 of the Criminal Code.
Natthaphong said the update he had received was only the morning news report claiming that wrongdoing had already been established in the case. He said that was not true, and that the matter had not been sent out.
Asked again, in light of reports stating that wrongdoing had already been determined, Natthaphong said that if it were true, then the case would simply proceed according to the process. He said the party’s legal team would wait to provide further facts, led by Dr Wayo Assawarungruang, deputy leader of the People’s Party in charge of legal affairs. He added that before speaking to the media, he had just called Dr Wayo, and was told that the case had not been sent to them.
Natthaphong added that he had previously addressed parts of the allegations. He said the NACC’s case file alleged, among other things, that he had used his position as an MP to provide bail for suspects or defendants, which he said was not true. He said that, in terms of the alleged elements in the NACC file against him, he had only one issue—his signature on the proposal to amend Section 112. He said there were no other elements involved in his case, and he called for the matter to be considered straightforwardly and fairly.
The People’s Party leader said he faced the least risk compared with others. Therefore, he said, if any legal action were pursued that appeared unfair, it could raise questions about whether there were other reasons behind it.
He said he wanted independent agencies to carry out their duties straightforwardly. He said this was one reason the party placed importance on amending the constitution—because it wanted independent agencies to fully perform their roles in punishing wrongdoing and scrutinising corruption, and not be used as tools to destroy opponents politically.
