Pheu Thai MP claims he has more evidence on BMA-BTS case

Jirayu claimed that the BMA had twisted facts to glorify itself and only partially revealed the State Council’s ruling for its own benefit. He claimed the ruling was comprised of 10 sentences but only three of these were revealed. 

He said the party had found new information revealing that the BTS had been invested in by Thai people and that only the BMA was meant to manage it, but it hired its subsidiary Krungthep Thanakom (KT), to do the job. KT then allowed BTSC, a subsidiary of BTS Group Holdings, to buy train bogies, which were then run on the inner city rail track that had been built using taxpayers’ money. Hence, he said, the private firm had only invested in the bogies. 

He added that the BMA needed to notify Interior Ministry and, since the investment was more than Bt1 billion, the Joint Venture Act should be applied. Also, the fact that the BMA hired the current operator without hosting a bid might fall under the Act on Offences Relating to Price Compromising in a Public Body, he said.

After the Committee on Special Cases took up the BTS case on Wednesday, Department of Special Investigation (DSI) chief Tarit Pengdith said yesterday that DSI investigators, led by Pol Lt-Colonel Thawal Mangkhang, would next week discuss guidelines with the public prosecutors. Tarit said the committee was concerned about the agencies’ different views. 

Meanwhile, the Interior Ministry’s belief is that though the city’s recent move was to have the current operator of the BTS system continue managing and operating the system for another 13 years, it could be regarded as a concession amendment. Hence, the move affected the main contract and in order to do that, the BMA should have obtained the ministry’s permission first. However, the BMA insists that it has not amended the contract. 

Deputy PM Chalerm Yoobamrung, meanwhile, said the committee had only agreed to take this case up for initial investigation and that no fingers were being pointed at anyone. He said if a politician was found involved in the case it would be sent to the NACC, but if no wrongdoing was discovered the case would be dropped. Insisting that he personally did not vote in this case for fear it might be seen as him politicking, Chalerm added that the DSI was not used to going after only Democrat Party-related cases. 

Sukhumbhand said he was not worried about the DSI investigation, adding that he had already had his legal team check if the committee’s resolution was legitimate, because some of the committee members had reportedly disagreed with the move.