Photo of Netdao Watchainanwong courtesy of Bangkok Post

 

A beauty queen-turned-entrepreneur, Netdao Watchainanwong, has ignited a political scandal by accusing Sutham Jaritngam, an MP from Thailand's ruling Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP), of accepting an illicit cash transfer. Netdao, known widely as Madame Cher, lodged a formal complaint with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), asserting that Sutham unlawfully received 120,000 baht (about 320,000 Thai Baht) from her account.

 

Previously a public relations aide to PPRP leader Prawit Wongsuwan, Netdao claims Sutham violated anti-corruption laws. She provided the NACC with transaction records and chat screenshots to substantiate her allegations. The two reportedly had a close relationship until a fallout with Prawit ended her political involvement.

 

“I’ve handed over everything, the transaction slip, our chat history; the truth will come out,” Netdao stated.

 

Thai law prohibits MPs and state officials from accepting money or gifts from private individuals unless certain criteria are fulfilled. While gifts from family members may be permitted if motivated by personal affection, gifts from others must not exceed 3,000 baht (approximately 8,000 Thai Baht). Any amount above this must be reported to the NACC within 30 days and is considered state property.

 

The 120,000 baht in question far surpasses this limit, prompting Netdao to seek quick action from the NACC, demanding a response within 15 days. “I’m not letting this go,” she insisted. “People need to know who they’re voting for.”

 

The intrigue deepens as Netdao plans another explosive complaint related to an alleged bribery case involving a business operating within a national park. She alleges this case involves a former Cabinet minister, alongside the minister's daughter and son-in-law.

 

Despite the gravity of the accusation, the NACC has not yet publicly responded to her initial complaint.

 

This isn’t the first time Thai politics has been rocked by allegations of financial misconduct, but Madame Cher’s prominent status and decision to publicly confront the issue could amplify pressure on the PPRP.

 

The unfolding drama highlights ongoing challenges in Thai political transparency and accountability, with Netdao’s actions potentially serving as a catalyst for wider scrutiny. As the situation develops, the role of public figures in exposing corruption could become a significant theme in Thailand’s political landscape.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Thaiger 2025-07-22

 

 

15 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

gifts from others must not exceed 3,000 baht (approximately 8,000 Thai Baht)

Some real reporting right there!

"Sutham unlawfully received 120,000 baht (about 320,000 Thai Baht) from her account."

 

" gifts from others must not exceed 3,000 baht (approximately 8,000 Thai Baht)."

 

Are we talking about the same currency here - Thai baht?

35 minutes ago, Chris Renaix said:

Some real reporting right there!

Yes, where 120,000 Baht is  320,000 Baht.

16 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

The two reportedly had a close relationship until a fallout with Prawit ended her political involvement.

A women scorned.... you know the rest.

16 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

“I’m not letting this go,” she insisted. “People need to know who they’re voting for.”

Who people vote for seems to be irrelevant.. 

So it wasn't illegal for her to send it just for him to receive it?

Crooks; the lot of them !

 

20 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Sutham unlawfully received 120,000 baht (about 320,000 Thai Baht) from her account.

Please Explain what is the difference .Isn't one THB one THB ?

4 hours ago, robertyongym said:

"Sutham unlawfully received 120,000 baht (about 320,000 Thai Baht) from her account."

 

" gifts from others must not exceed 3,000 baht (approximately 8,000 Thai Baht)."

 

Are we talking about the same currency here - Thai baht?

I don't know, I'm lost already. She was on the Brown Bladder's advisory team.  According to the report she made an illicit transfer from her account to Sutham and he did not declare it. So she is admitting she broke the law too?

On 7/23/2025 at 10:15 AM, rwill said:

So it wasn't illegal for her to send it just for him to receive it?

Correct, the offence is the accepting of it.

On 7/23/2025 at 1:54 PM, PETERTHEEATER said:

I don't know, I'm lost already. She was on the Brown Bladder's advisory team.  According to the report she made an illicit transfer from her account to Sutham and he did not declare it. So she is admitting she broke the law too?

The illicit part is the acceptance of the gift, not the giving of it.