A Pheu Thai MP has questioned the government’s decision to appoint Vorapak Tanyawong as deputy finance minister, citing corruption charges filed against him by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) in relation to the Energy Earth loan scandal.
The issue arose during Monday night’s parliamentary debate on the government’s policy statement under Section 162 of the Constitution, chaired by Deputy House Speaker Mongkol Surasajja.
Loei MP Lertsak Pattanachaikul of Pheu Thai reminded the chamber that in February, the NACC charged Mr Vorapak, then chief executive of Krungthai Bank, and 32 others with allegedly approving loans based on falsified information to benefit Energy Earth Plc. He warned that placing an individual under investigation in charge of financial institutions could erode public trust, particularly in light of the scandal’s scale, which involved tens of billions of baht.
Drawing comparisons with the Stark Corporation fraud, he argued that the Energy Earth case also inflicted widespread economic harm on investors.
Mr Lertsak detailed two key allegations: loans backed by non-existent Indonesian mines used as collateral, and a loan to Earth Holding that was allegedly employed to manipulate Energy Earth’s stock price.
These approvals, he claimed, paved the way for the company to issue debentures worth billions, later sold to thousands of retail investors, thereby deepening financial losses.
“This is not about discrediting the minister’s honour,” Mr Lertsak said. “It is about safeguarding the nation’s interests. Holding a ministerial post is a matter of national dignity.”
He pressed Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul to explain how he could justify the appointment, and what assurances he could offer should the NACC later secure a conviction.
In his response, Mr Vorapak maintained that the allegations were not new and had already been examined when he was appointed advisor to then-Finance Minister Pichai Chunhavajira.
Mr Vorapak further noted that the company only defaulted in 2016, after his departure, due to a sudden withdrawal of creditor support.
“The real damage came after my term ended,” he said. “The facts show this was not fabricated business, but a liquidity crisis beyond management’s control.”