As the Bangkok gubernatorial election approaches, top candidate and ex-governor Chadchart Sittipunt is feeling the heat from his sluggish response to the city's controversial exercise equipment procurement projects, in which several items were purchased at unreasonably high cost.
This controversy summons the memory of a similar scandal involving lampposts with kinnaree-shaped tops in neighbouring Samut Prakan province. The overpriced lampposts have become a model, albeit not a good one, for several other provinces to adopt their own symbols from scratch.
To be fair, the city administration under Mr Chadchart -- unlike other administrations in the provinces -- launched a probe that resulted in some officials being punished for the misdeeds. However, critics are still unhappy with the way the ex-governor, who is running for another term, handled those cases.
While Mr Chadchart and his team are believed to have nothing to do with this fraud, inconsistent explanations since the cases were exposed in 2024 only raise doubt about his sincerity and capability to fight corruption in this gigantic state office that runs the city with hundreds of billions of baht annually.
Here's the story: back in June 2024, Mr Chadchart conceded there were irregularities in the exercise equipment procurement projects. Of the 24 projects, only seven -- worth a total of 120 million baht -- were found to be marred by fraud, with most of the equipment priced too high. The officials responsible for the procurement were punished as a result.
In a media interview later on, Mr Chadchart gave the impression that the cases were closed, and that those in the wrong have been slapped with penalties. He even said the city administration had revised the budget process guideline to prevent graft.
That could've been the end of the story. However, People's Party MP for Bangkok Suphanat Minchaiynunt brought to public attention earlier this week the insufficient penalties -- a 2% deduction of the officials' monthly salary or a 600-baht one-time fine. In addition, at least one official who retired was let off the hook.
The MP also said he sent a note at the time, asking Mr Chadchart to update the probe's results and answer why only seven cases were investigated. Mr Suphanat said he never received a response.
His expose has triggered public outrage, as more critics press more questions against the ex-governor.
This prompted Mr Chadchart to make another statement. On June 9, he denied that the investigation was over, as mentioned by Mr Suphanat the previous day.
He claimed that he in fact had vetoed the results of the probe so it "is still under way". The city administration's civil service commission, which is reassessing it, he said, while it's understood that more disciplinary action will follow.
Mr Chadchart may have forgotten that it has already been two years since the cases were dug up. Such sluggishness is a disappointment. He cited limitations of the governor's power in dealing with unscrupulous officials. He is also of the opinion that the National Anti-Corruption Commission should get involved, so that the money trail can be followed and bad officials can face heavier penalties.
Of course, it's unlikely that the resurfacing controversy will turn Mr Chadchart's sympathisers against him. However, he must realise that he needs to do more to meet public expectations on graft eradication.
