Bhumjaithai MP files police report against People’s Party’s Rangsiman Rome over scammer link remarks

October 2, 2026 at 11:52 pm

in Living , Media , Politics , Thailand

An extraordinary showdown in Parliament has turned into a criminal defamation battle after People’s Party MP Rangsiman Rome raised questions about international scam links involving a Bhumjaithai MP’s husband. Suchada Sangtanasap hit back, demanded evidence and went to police within 24 hours. Now nearly ฿2 billion in declared family assets are under scrutiny, including more than ฿1.44 billion listed as loans. Meanwhile, Mr Rangsiman is preparing a House inquiry involving key financial agencies as Ms Suchada fiercely denies any scam connection.

Suchada Sangtanasap goes to police after Rangsiman Rome raises scam-link questions about her husband as nearly ฿2 billion in family assets comes under widening House scrutiny. ( Source: Khaosod )

Extraordinary exchanges gripped Thailand’s Parliament on Thursday as People’s Party MP Rangsiman Rome turned a ฿40 million bribery debate onto Bhumjaithai. He questioned possible links between a Chaiyaphum MP’s husband and international scam operations.

Bhumjaithai MP Suchada Sangtanasap immediately identified herself, stood up and demanded evidence. She then challenged Mr Rangsiman to withdraw his remarks before the confrontation descended into uproar.

“There’s only one female MP for Chaiyaphum. I accept this,” Ms Suchada told the chamber. She then issued a direct challenge. “I demand that you retract your statement if you’re a man, because you spoke directly about me,” she said. Moreover, she demanded evidence for what had just been said.

Suchada demands evidence before filing criminal defamation complaint over Rangsiman’s House remarks

“You should have evidence for what you say, not just baseless accusations,” Ms Suchada said. “I will not accept this and demand a retraction.” However, Mr Rangsiman refused to withdraw the reference. First Deputy House Speaker Mallika Jiraphanvanich intervened as tensions mounted. Eventually, Mr Rangsiman left the meeting room, while Ms Suchada also departed and promised legal action.

By Friday, the extraordinary parliamentary clash had become a criminal case. Ms Suchada went to the Central Investigation Bureau and filed a defamation complaint against Mr Rangsiman. There, she lodged the complaint with investigators from the Cyber Crime Investigation Division. The action accuses the prominent People’s Party MP of defamation by publication.

Crucially, the disputed remarks were made during a House sitting broadcast to the public. That detail could become significant because Ms Suchada’s husband is not an MP. Mr Rangsiman is already fighting another unresolved defamation prosecution involving remarks about an outsider made inside Parliament.

At the centre of the latest dispute is Ms Suchada’s husband, Australian national Taiyang Sang. Reports have separately examined whether he is cryptocurrency businessman Taiyang Zhang. However, that identification has not been officially confirmed. Consequently, records involving those two names cannot automatically be attributed to the same person.

Nearly ฿2 billion in declared family assets comes under scrutiny after extraordinary House confrontation

Meanwhile, the controversy has moved far beyond Thursday’s confrontation. The couple’s declared assets of nearly ฿2 billion are now attracting scrutiny. In addition, questions have emerged about investments and more than ฿1.44 billion listed as loans. Mr Rangsiman is preparing to pursue those questions through a powerful House committee.

The row began during questioning of Digital Economy and Society Minister Chaichanok Chidchob. Mr Rangsiman was pressing him about a reported offer of a ฿40 million monthly bribe. The extraordinary offer had already triggered questions about possible connections with scam operations. During that exchange, attention suddenly shifted towards Bhumjaithai.

Mr Rangsiman referred to a female Bhumjaithai MP representing Chaiyaphum. He then questioned whether her husband could have connections with an international scam network. Immediately, Ms Suchada understood the reference as directed at her. She told the chamber there was only one female Chaiyaphum MP.

In response, Ms Suchada confronted Mr Rangsiman across the chamber and demanded an immediate withdrawal. Yet he refused to retract the reference. The confrontation quickly overwhelmed the original debate and forced the presiding officer to intervene.

Suchada follows House clash with police complaint while defending husband and nearly ฿2 billion assets

The following day, Ms Suchada made good on her promise of legal action. She said she was protecting her rights and would allow the legal process to proceed. Furthermore, she said people making public statements must accept the consequences of their actions. She maintained that she and her family were innocent.

In particular, Ms Suchada issued an unequivocal defence of her husband. “I can confirm that my husband is not involved in the scamming process,” she said. She described him as a businessman with diverse investment interests. According to her, his occupation could not easily be confined to one business category.

Ms Suchada then made a more personal defence. “If he wasn’t a good person, I wouldn’t have married him,” she said. Yet the argument has already moved towards the couple’s financial records. Those declarations contain striking figures.

According to records submitted to the National Anti-Corruption Commission, the couple declared almost ฿2 billion in combined assets. Ms Suchada declared ฿130,026,048. Her husband declared another ฿1,843,941,579. Combined, their declared assets totalled ฿1,974,908,877.

Asset declarations reveal income, spending and investments across technology and financial businesses

Separately, the records provide details about Ms Suchada’s income. She declared annual salary income of ฿1,362,720. She also reported ฿336,000 from office rentals. Thus, her total declared annual income stood at ฿1,698,720.

On the expenditure side, Ms Suchada listed ฿500,000 for consumption. Another ฿1 million was declared as educational support for a younger brother. More significantly, she listed ฿5 million for overseas business travel. Those figures were contained in the declarations examined by the supplied report.

Investment records provide another substantial set of figures. Ms Suchada declared investments worth ฿16,147,434. By comparison, her husband declared investments totalling ฿177,970,887. His portfolio included interests across technology, finance, insurance and other businesses.

Among them was Innovest X Co Ltd, described as providing financial and investment services. One Insure Public Company Limited was also listed. That business was associated with insurance services and insurance technology. Blur Lab Co Ltd appeared among the holdings as well.

On another front, the records listed Automala US Co Ltd. Its activities were described as technology development, automation, software or technology distribution. Talo Lab Co Ltd was also included. That business was associated with research, innovation and specialised technology development.

Loans exceeding ฿1.44 billion draw scrutiny as Suchada defends the accuracy of official declarations

The declarations additionally listed QDX Public Company Limited. Its activities were described as technology, digital services or digital asset operations. Still, another category has attracted considerably greater attention. That concerns the huge proportion of assets listed as loans.

Of her husband’s more than ฿1.84 billion in declared assets, over ฿1.44 billion comprised loans. At the same time, the declaration did not specify his occupation. Those two details have subsequently become another focus of the political dispute.

Former Democrat Party MP Sirichok Sopha then publicly questioned the source of the couple’s wealth. He also referred to a reported ฿1.4 billion loan involving a bankrupt company. In response, Ms Suchada strongly defended the accuracy of her official declarations.

She said she had submitted all legally required documents to the NACC. Furthermore, she argued that a former MP should understand asset disclosure requirements. Ms Suchada also questioned where Mr Sirichok had obtained his documents. She said she did not know whether they were legally correct.

“If they were not correct, I would not dare to provide explanations or submit my asset and liability declaration,” she said. Moreover, Ms Suchada warned that she could pursue another lawsuit. She said she would act if documents circulated about her were subsequently shown to be incorrect.

Crypto links face an identity question as Rangsiman prepares October 7 House committee examination

Alongside those questions, cryptocurrency dealings have become another part of the scrutiny. Information examined by the supplied reports contained details appearing to correspond with cryptocurrency entrepreneur Taiyang Zhang. That individual has been identified as a co-founder of Ren Protocol.

In the past, Taiyang Zhang was reported to have lent money to collapsed cryptocurrency hedge fund Three Arrows Capital. The fund is widely known as 3AC. Yet there is a crucial break in the evidential chain. No official evidence confirms Taiyang Sang and Taiyang Zhang are the same person.

Indeed, the original report examining the records explicitly acknowledged that uncertainty. Accordingly, the cryptocurrency information cannot presently be attributed conclusively to Ms Suchada’s husband. Nor does that material establish involvement with scam operations.

Likewise, the couple’s substantial declared assets do not establish criminal conduct. The records show extensive wealth, investments and loans. They do not prove involvement in an international criminal network. Nevertheless, those financial records are now heading towards parliamentary examination.

Mr Rangsiman chairs the House Committee on Legal Affairs, Justice and Human Rights. On Friday, he said the committee intended to invite Ms Suchada and her husband. They are expected to be called for questioning on October 7.

Suchada ready to face House committee as state agencies are called into widening financial examination

For her part, Ms Suchada said she had not yet received an invitation. However, she said she was prepared to appear. First, she wants the documents properly prepared and compliant with legal requirements. If that happens, she said she will attend.

As part of this inquiry, Mr Rangsiman plans to involve several major state agencies. Representatives from the Anti-Money Laundering Office are expected to be invited. The Securities and Exchange Commission is also expected to attend. Officials from the National Anti-Corruption Commission could join them.

That could put the couple’s financial records under detailed parliamentary examination. Loans, investments and the source of declared assets could all face questions. Crucially, however, Mr Rangsiman has not declared that criminal wrongdoing has been established.

Instead, he has said those involved must be presumed innocent during the examination. That distinction has become particularly important since Ms Suchada went to the police. Her complaint also raises another issue with direct relevance to Mr Rangsiman.

The disputed statements were made during parliamentary proceedings. MPs receive extensive constitutional protection for statements made while performing parliamentary duties. However, that protection is not necessarily absolute when remarks concern outsiders and proceedings are publicly broadcast.

Parliamentary privilege comes into focus as unresolved Ben Smith defamation case provides legal parallel

Here, the distinction is particularly important. Ms Suchada is an MP, but her husband is not. Moreover, Thursday’s proceedings were broadcast beyond the House chamber. Therefore, parliamentary privilege may itself become an issue if the criminal complaint advances.

There is also a striking unresolved parallel. Mr Rangsiman is already fighting another criminal defamation prosecution over statements made in Parliament. That case was brought by businessman Benjamin Mauerberger, widely known as Ben Smith.

In September 2025, Mr Rangsiman made accusations concerning Mr Mauerberger during parliamentary proceedings. Those statements involved alleged connections with scam and money-laundering networks. Mr Mauerberger denied wrongdoing and subsequently pursued criminal defamation proceedings.

At the preliminary stage, the Criminal Court found sufficient grounds for the case to proceed. Importantly, the ruling did not find Mr Rangsiman guilty. Neither did it establish the correctness of Mr Mauerberger’s denials. Instead, it cleared the case to move towards substantive hearings.

Parliamentary privilege also featured in that preliminary ruling. Mr Mauerberger was an outsider rather than an MP. In addition, Mr Rangsiman’s statements had been publicly broadcast. The court therefore found parliamentary privilege did not automatically prevent the prosecution from proceeding.

Ben Smith case remains unresolved as separate criminal action adds another layer to Rome’s legal defence

Even so, the Ben Smith case remains unresolved. Mr Rangsiman has not lost it. Rather, he has denied the charge and elected to contest the prosecution. He has also submitted nine proposed witnesses.

Mr Rangsiman has indicated that financial trails and supporting evidence will form part of his defence. Substantive witness hearings are scheduled for May 11-14, 2027. Until then, no final judgment has been made on the criminal defamation charge.

Subsequently, events surrounding Mr Mauerberger took another significant turn. He later faced separate criminal action himself. Those proceedings include accusations involving fraud and money laundering. Those accusations also remain unresolved.

Even so, that later criminal action could provide Mr Rangsiman with evidential material for his defence. It does not itself determine the defamation case. Equally, Mr Mauerberger’s later legal problems do not establish that every earlier statement about him was lawful.

By contrast, no equivalent criminal action against Ms Suchada’s husband is established in the supplied material. That is an important difference between the two disputes. Consequently, the Ben Smith case cannot simply be transplanted onto the latest confrontation.

Rome presses ahead with House scrutiny as Suchada maintains dispute is personal and defends her family

Still, it provides important legal context for Mr Rangsiman’s position. Statements made from the parliamentary floor can still generate criminal proceedings involving outsiders. Public broadcasting and the status of the person concerned can become important legal questions.

Against that background, the evidence supporting Mr Rangsiman’s latest questions could become critical. He has raised serious questions concerning Ms Suchada’s husband. She has categorically denied them. Now, she has challenged him through the criminal justice system.

In parallel, Mr Rangsiman is pressing ahead through Parliament. His committee intends to question Ms Suchada and her husband about their financial affairs. Thus, both sides are advancing through separate institutional channels.

The dispute has also reached Prime Minister and Interior Minister Anutin Charnvirakul. Ms Suchada, however, said the issue remains personal. She said it does not presently involve the Bhumjaithai Party.

According to Ms Suchada, Mr Anutin offered encouragement and advice. She said he told her that an innocent person had nothing to fear. For now, she continues to treat the matter as a personal legal dispute.

Original ฿40 million bribery row expands into police action and scrutiny of nearly ฿2 billion in assets

Beyond that, the original ฿40 million bribery controversy remains unresolved. It was the issue Mr Rangsiman was pursuing when Thursday’s confrontation began. He had been questioning Digital Economy and Society Minister Chaichanok over the reported monthly offer.

Instead, the House sitting rapidly became dominated by Ms Suchada’s furious intervention. Within minutes, the focus had shifted towards her husband. Soon afterwards, the couple’s declared wealth, investments and loans were being examined publicly.

By Friday, the dispute had moved from Parliament to the Central Investigation Bureau. At the same time, Mr Rangsiman was preparing to take the financial questions back into Parliament. The controversy now stretches across police proceedings, parliamentary scrutiny and official asset declarations.

The financial numbers are substantial. Ms Suchada declared more than ฿130 million in assets. Her husband declared more than ฿1.84 billion. Together, their declared holdings approached ฿2 billion.

More strikingly, over ฿1.44 billion of her husband’s declared assets were recorded as loans. His investments totalled almost ฿178 million. Ms Suchada separately declared investments exceeding ฿16.1 million.

Financial declarations fuel further questions as House committee and criminal complaint move in parallel

Those figures have given Mr Rangsiman and other political figures material for further questions. Yet the declarations themselves establish no scam connection. Nor does the supplied material establish criminal wrongdoing involving the couple.

Similarly, the possible link with Ren Protocol requires a firm qualification. The available information does not officially confirm that Taiyang Sang is Taiyang Zhang. Without that confirmation, the records cannot be combined into a single established financial history.

Nonetheless, the money trail is now firmly part of the political confrontation. Mr Rangsiman intends to pursue it through his committee. Ms Suchada says she will answer if she receives a legally compliant invitation.

Potentially, AMLO, the SEC and NACC could all be represented at the October 7 hearing. Their presence would bring financial and regulatory agencies directly into the parliamentary examination. Separately, Ms Suchada’s criminal complaint will proceed through its own legal process.

For Mr Rangsiman, the latest dispute therefore carries two separate tests. Politically, he faces pressure to substantiate the questions raised inside Parliament. Legally, he faces another complaint involving remarks concerning someone outside the House.

Suchada prepares for October 7 inquiry as dispute widens across Parliament, police and family finances

For Ms Suchada, the strategy is equally clear from her public actions. She has issued a categorical denial and defended her husband. She has also defended the accuracy of her NACC declarations. Now, she has gone directly to the police.

The next major stage could arrive on October 7. Mr Rangsiman’s committee intends to call both Ms Suchada and her husband. If correctly summoned, she says she will attend.

Her husband could then face direct questions about investments, loans and his declared wealth. Officials from major financial agencies could also appear. Yet no finding against either spouse has been made.

For now, the central positions remain sharply opposed. Mr Rangsiman has questioned possible connections between Ms Suchada’s husband and international scam operations. Ms Suchada says there are none and demands evidence.

The supplied material establishes nearly ฿2 billion in declared family assets. It establishes investments, substantial loans, a bitter House confrontation and a criminal complaint. It does not establish that Ms Suchada’s husband belongs to a scam network.

What began with questions about a reported ฿40 million monthly bribe has therefore expanded dramatically. It now encompasses a police case, a looming House inquiry and scrutiny of huge declared assets.

Parliamentary privilege returns to focus as Suchada’s complaint follows extraordinary House confrontation

At the same time, the clash has reopened the parliamentary privilege issue already hanging over Mr Rangsiman. His separate Ben Smith prosecution remains unresolved. Substantive hearings in that case are not scheduled until May 2027.

This confrontation has moved much faster. Within one day, Ms Suchada had gone from challenging Mr Rangsiman across the House chamber to filing a police complaint.

Now, Mr Rangsiman is preparing his own next move through the House committee. Ms Suchada says she is ready to appear. Meanwhile, her husband’s financial affairs are set to remain at the centre of the dispute.

The parliamentary clash has therefore become a two-front battle. One front is criminal defamation. The other is parliamentary scrutiny of nearly ฿2 billion in declared family wealth.

Rangsiman Rome defamation case deferred until May 2027. Criticism of scam case prosecutions by police

Former cabinet minister and Pheu Thai highflyer clarifies Ben Smith and luxury Gulfstream jet story

PM Paetongtarn suspended from duties while Deputy Prime Minister Suriya Jungrungruangkit takes power

Teng warns People’s Party to stay clear of rising anti-democratic sentiment as political crisis unfolds

Opinion shows Prime Minister Paetongtarn finished with the public. Huge support for the People’s Party

Bangkok protest passes off with no overnight camp. Meanwhile, the PM prepares for July 1st court date

PM Paetongtarn names herself Culture Minister also in new cabinet ahead of Constitutional Court ruling

Hun Sen’s mask falls. Speech on Friday clearly showed deliberate ill will to collapse Thailand’s democracy

Crazed Hun Sen threatens to expose Thaksin before Bangkok street protests as his evil empire is exposed

Prime Minister Paetongtarn’s casino plan may be the motive following Hun Sen’s betrayal of the Shinawatra clan

Constitutional Court President admits he’s troubled by the audio clip case against the Prime Minister

July 1st set as date for the Constitutional Court to deal with the case that could see the PM removed

PM Paetongtarn reshuffles the deck on the Titanic in a major cabinet shuffle as her government treads water

Joseph Anthony is an expat from Ireland who has lived in Thailand for the last decade. He has worked extensively in the media including editorial positions in Ireland and Thailand. He is focused on economic and business stories in Thailand as well as the expat lifestyle.

All posts by Joseph O' Connor

USS George HW Bush heading for Phuket for 6 days R&R. Docks October 5 with over five thousand sailors September 29, 2026 Phuket braces for 5,120 US personnel as USS George

Thai Airways CEO apologises for ongoing flooding crisis issues with defective carts and delayed flights September 29, 2026 Defective baggage equipment and staff shortages hammer

Foreign tourist arrivals already down 3.65% with fears the flooding crisis may impact the Chinese market September 29, 2026 Thailand’s tourism engine sputters into high season

Anutin rejects appeal against deportation made by French man Kevin Dimino despite wife’s submission September 28, 2026 French zoo owner Kevin Dimino faces deportation after

32 year old Ranger killed in one shot incident in Narathiwat on Sunday evening as he took up position September 28, 2026 One gunshot kills Ranger Sukran Lateh, 32, as his

Tourism minister directs acute airport baggage crisis caused by workers who failed to turn up for shifts September 28, 2026 Tourism Minister Surasak rushes to Suvarnabhumi as the

Prime Minister Anutin wades into flood hit areas to be met with a mixed reaction including seething anger September 28, 2026 Bangkok flood victims confront Prime Minister Anutin

Nene Royal after conquering the showbiz world this week returns home to Phuket to her granny’s embrace September 27, 2026 Thailand’s Nene Royal returns to Phuket after

Bangkok airports open and flights running but there are delays and baggage issues at Suvarnabhumi September 27, 2026 Flood chaos hits Suvarnabhumi as passengers wait six

Bangkok flooding eases as front moves to Myanmar but Governor warns city needs 2-3 days to recover September 27, 2026 The Thai capital races to drain vast floodwater after

Figures for opening 8 months of 2026 show a gaping trade deficit as Thailand imports more from China September 27, 2026 Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul visited London

PM directs flash flooding crisis which has hit Bangkok making all 50 districts disaster zones from London September 26, 2026 Bangkok battles severe flooding after almost 300mm of

Prime Minister Anutin’s US visit this week yielded a closer ties pact between Bangkok and Wall Street September 26, 2026 Wall Street opens its doors to closer Thai links as

Horror in Phuket as policeman’s Glock gun misfires in slider action fatally wounding his 49 year old mother September 25, 2026 Phuket policeman faces a fatal shooting probe after

Bombshell Supreme Court ruling links Bhumjaithai Party figure with orchestrated Senate poll collusion September 25, 2026 Supreme Court exposes corrupt conduct in the 2024

Prime Minister and his team grilled by Wall Street on Thailand’s geopolitical stance and growth plans September 25, 2026 Hard-boiled Wall Street investors put PM Anutin and

Four sentenced to life for deadly 2022 insurgency bombing in Pattani. Death sentences commuted to life September 24, 2026 Death sentences for four men are reduced to life

Turkish arsonist arrested. His Thai girlfriend hired him to destroy evidence at her former workplace September 29, 2026

Race against time and water flows as PM Anutin works round the clock tackling flooding emergency September 29, 2026

Thailand moves carefully with AI regulation as US tech warns over key provisions hindering investment September 29, 2026

Military operations are expanded at Suvarnabhumi Airport as crisis is still not brought under control September 28, 2026

PM’s relief as Constitutional Court upholds February 8th General Election despite a barcode warning September 28, 2026

Royal Thai Army deployed to Suvarnabhumi Airport after baggage chaos gets the better of exhausted staff September 28, 2026

Love triangle horror in Chumphon sees all three dead after government officer goes on a killing rampage September 27, 2026

NIDA opinion poll shows rising apathy among the Thai public as Prime Minister Anutin’s base crashes September 27, 2026

Flooding tragedy in Samut Prakan near Bangkok. Two die from electrocution after family car is submerged September 27, 2026

Crucial ballot decision of Constitutional Court on Monday could upend government and Thai politics September 27, 2026

American arrested in Pattaya after a joint agency raid found an illicit narcotics factory in his suburban home September 26, 2026

Warning in Thailand over fake cough syrup bottles. Police smash counterfeit medicine empire in 4 raids September 26, 2026

Spanish chef (32) who murdered and dismembered a Colombian surgeon on Koh Phangan loses appeal September 26, 2026

Dizziness, headaches in a Pattaya locale after a cannabis farm fire at a residence on Friday morning guts the property September 25, 2026

33 year old sets fire to Honda Scooby in Udon Thani after mother refused to buy him a more powerful ride September 25, 2026

Ministers accused of neglecting Thai farmers. Crucial aid support has not yet reached the cabinet table September 25, 2026

Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul formally summoned by parliament over local government exam scandal September 24, 2026

Former Justice Minister hails major bankruptcy bill which could help reduce the household debt burden September 24, 2026

Nene Royal wins big for Thailand with blistering ‘Seven Nation Army’ final act. Nets $1 million prize September 24, 2026

Chinese men arrested on rape and extortion charges after Pattaya raid. Woman locked up and chained September 23, 2026

Digital Minister (36) and heir to powerful Chidchob dynasty has a fortune of hundreds of millions September 23, 2026

Latest cannabis bill agreed by cabinet on Tuesday to rein in the out of control weed industry in Thailand September 23, 2026

© 2026 Thai Examiner. All rights reserved.

2026年10月2日晚上11:52

在生活、媒体、政治、泰国

一场非同寻常的议会对峙演变成一场刑事诽谤之争。起因是人民党议员朗西曼·罗姆质疑泰自豪党议员苏查达·桑塔纳萨普的丈夫涉嫌国际诈骗。苏查达随即予以反击，要求提供证据，并在24小时内报警。目前，苏查达家族近20亿泰铢的申报资产正接受审查，其中包括超过14.4亿泰铢的贷款。与此同时，朗西曼正准备发起一项涉及主要金融机构的议会调查，而苏查达则强烈否认与任何诈骗案有关。

在兰西曼·罗姆（Rangsiman Rome）质疑其丈夫涉嫌诈骗后，苏查达·桑塔纳萨普（Suchada Sangtanasap）向警方报案。与此同时，近20亿泰铢的家族资产正受到国会的广泛审查。（来源：考索德报）

周四，泰国国会爆发了一场非同寻常的辩论。人民党议员朗西曼·罗姆将原本关于4000万泰铢贿赂案的辩论引向了泰自豪党。他质疑猜也奔府一位议员的丈夫是否与国际诈骗活动有关联。

泰自豪党议员苏查达·桑塔纳萨普立即表明身份，起身要求提供证据。随后，她挑战朗西曼先生收回其言论，双方随即爆发冲突。

“猜也奔府只有一位女议员，我承认这一点。”苏查达女士在议会说道。随后，她直接质问道：“如果你是男性，我要求你收回你的言论，因为你直接针对我说话。”她还要求对方提供刚才所说内容的证据。

苏查达要求在就兰西曼的众议院言论提起刑事诽谤诉讼前提供证据。

“你应该拿出证据来支持你的说法，而不是毫无根据的指控，”苏查达女士说道。“我不会接受这种说法，并要求你撤回。”然而，朗西曼先生拒绝撤回指控。随着紧张局势升级，众议院第一副议长马利卡·吉拉潘瓦尼奇介入调解。最终，朗西曼先生离开了会议室，苏查达女士也离开了，并承诺将采取法律行动。

到周五，这场非同寻常的议会冲突已升级为刑事案件。苏查达女士前往中央调查局，对朗西曼先生提起诽谤诉讼。她向网络犯罪调查部门的调查人员提交了投诉。该诉讼指控这位人民党知名议员通过发布诽谤信息进行诽谤。

至关重要的是，这些引发争议的言论是在一次向公众直播的议会会议上发表的。这一细节可能意义重大，因为苏查达女士的丈夫并非国会议员。朗西曼先生目前正面临另一项尚未结案的诽谤诉讼，该诉讼涉及他在议会内发表的针对一位非议员的言论。

最新争议的焦点是苏查达女士的丈夫，澳大利亚公民桑泰阳。有报道分别调查了他是否就是加密货币商人张泰阳。然而，这一身份尚未得到官方确认。因此，涉及这两个名字的记录不能自动归于同一人。

在众议院发生激烈冲突后，近20亿泰铢的家族申报资产受到审查。

与此同时，这场争议早已超越了周四的冲突。这对夫妇申报的近20亿泰铢资产如今正受到密切关注。此外，有关投资以及超过14.4亿泰铢的贷款也引发了质疑。朗西曼先生正准备通过一个权力强大的众议院委员会来追究这些问题。

这场争论始于对数字经济与社会部长柴查诺·奇乔布的质询。朗西曼先生就据称有人每月行贿4000万泰铢一事向他施压。这一惊人的提议已经引发了人们对其可能与诈骗活动有关的质疑。在质询过程中，人们的注意力突然转向了泰自豪党。

朗西曼先生提到了代表猜也奔府的泰自豪党女议员。随后，他质疑她的丈夫是否可能与国际诈骗团伙有关联。苏查达女士立刻明白朗西曼先生指的是她。她告诉议会，猜也奔府只有一位女议员。

对此，苏查达女士在议事厅内当面质问朗西曼先生，要求他立即撤回提案。然而，朗西曼先生拒绝撤回提案。这场冲突迅速扰乱了原有的辩论，迫使议长介入。

苏查达在与众议院发生冲突后向警方报案，同时为丈夫和近20亿泰铢的资产辩护。

第二天，苏查达女士兑现了采取法律行动的承诺。她说，她正在维护自己的权利，并将允许法律程序继续进行。此外，她还表示，发表公开言论的人必须承担其行为的后果。她坚称自己和家人是无辜的。

苏查达女士尤其明确地为她的丈夫辩护。她说：“我可以确认，我的丈夫没有参与诈骗活动。”她形容丈夫是一位投资多元化的商人，他的职业不能简单地归类于某一类业务。

苏查达女士随后进行了更个人化的辩护。“如果他不是个好人，我就不会嫁给他，”她说。然而，争论的焦点已经转移到了这对夫妇的财务记录上。这些财务报表包含着一些令人震惊的数字。

根据提交给国家反腐败委员会的记录，这对夫妇申报的资产总额近20亿泰铢。苏查达女士申报了130,026,048泰铢，她的丈夫申报了1,843,941,579泰铢。两人申报的资产总额合计为1,974,908,877泰铢。

资产申报揭示了科技和金融企业的收入、支出和投资情况。

此外，记录还提供了苏查达女士的收入详情。她申报的年薪收入为1,362,720泰铢。她还申报了336,000泰铢的办公场所租金收入。因此，她申报的年总收入为1,698,720泰铢。

在支出方面，苏查达女士申报了50万泰铢用于消费。另有100万泰铢申报用于资助弟弟的教育。更重要的是，她申报了500万泰铢用于海外商务旅行。这些数据均包含在所提供报告审查的申报表中。

投资记录提供了另一组重要数据。苏查达女士申报的投资额为16,147,434泰铢。相比之下，她的丈夫申报的投资总额为177,970,887泰铢。他的投资组合涵盖科技、金融、保险和其他行业。

其中包括Innovest X Co Ltd，该公司提供金融和投资服务。One Insure Public Company Limited也在名单之列，该公司业务涉及保险服务和保险技术。Blur Lab Co Ltd也出现在持股名单中。

另一方面，记录中列出了 Automala US Co Ltd.，其业务活动包括技术开发、自动化、软件或技术分销。Talo Lab Co Ltd. 也位列其中，该公司从事研究、创新和专业技术开发。

超过14.4亿泰铢的贷款引发审查，苏查达为官方申报的准确性辩护

申报文件中还列出了QDX Public Company Limited。该公司的业务活动被描述为技术、数字服务或数字资产运营。然而，另一类资产引起了更多关注，那就是其所列资产中占比巨大的贷款。

在她丈夫申报的超过18.4亿泰铢的资产中，超过14.4亿泰铢是贷款。与此同时，申报文件中并未说明他的职业。这两个细节后来成为政治争议的另一个焦点。

前民主党议员西里乔克·索帕随后公开质疑这对夫妇的财富来源。他还提及据称涉及一家破产公司的14亿泰铢贷款。对此，苏查达女士强烈捍卫了其官方申报的真实性。

她表示已向国家反腐败委员会（NACC）提交了所有法律要求的资料。此外，她认为前议员应该了解资产披露的要求。苏查达女士还质疑西里乔克先生的资料来源，并表示她不​​确定这些资料是否合法。

“如果这些文件不属实，我不敢做出解释，也不敢提交资产负债申报表，”她说道。此外，苏查达女士警告说，她可能会提起另一项诉讼。她表示，如果有关她的文件事后被证实不实，她将采取行动。

兰西曼准备于10月7日对加密货币链接进行审查，该链接面临身份问题。

除了这些问题之外，加密货币交易也成为审查的重点。相关报告披露的信息中包含一些细节，似乎与加密货币企业家张太阳（Taiyang Zhang）有关。此人已被确认为Ren Protocol的联合创始人。

过去曾有报道称，张太阳曾向已倒闭的加密货币对冲基金三箭资本（Three Arrows Capital，简称3AC）提供贷款。然而，证据链中存在关键性断裂。目前尚无官方证据证实桑太阳和张太阳是同一人。

事实上，最初审查这些记录的报告明确承认了这种不确定性。因此，目前尚不能确凿地将加密货币信息归因于苏查达女士的丈夫。这些材料也无法证明她参与了诈骗活动。

同样，这对夫妇申报的大量资产并不能证明他们有犯罪行为。记录显示他们拥有巨额财富、投资和贷款，但这些并不能证明他们参与了国际犯罪网络。尽管如此，这些财务记录目前正接受议会审查。

朗西曼先生是众议院法律事务、司法和人权委员会主席。周五，他表示该委员会计划传唤苏查达女士及其丈夫。预计他们将于10月7日接受质询。

苏查达已准备好接受众议院委员会的质询，与此同时，各州政府机构也被要求接受扩大后的财务审查。

苏查达女士表示，她尚未收到邀请。不过，她表示已做好出席的准备。她首先希望相关文件准备妥当，符合法律要求。如果一切顺利，她将出席。

作为此次调查的一部分，朗西曼先生计划邀请几个主要的政府机构参与。预计反洗钱办公室的代表将应邀出席。证券交易委员会预计也会出席。国家反腐败委员会的官员也可能加入。

这可能导致这对夫妇的财务记录受到议会的详细审查。贷款、投资以及申报资产的来源都可能受到质询。然而，至关重要的是，朗西曼先生尚未宣布已证实存在犯罪行为。

相反，他表示，在调查过程中，所有涉案人员都必须被推定为无罪。自从苏查达女士报警后，这一区别变得尤为重要。她的投诉也引出了另一个与朗西曼先生直接相关的问题。

这些引发争议的言论是在议会程序中发表的。议员在履行议会职责时发表的言论受到广泛的宪法保护。然而，当言论涉及议会外人士且议会程序被公开直播时，这种保护并非绝对有效。

议会特权因悬而未决的本·史密斯诽谤案而成为关注焦点，该案提供了法律上的相似之处。

在此，区别尤为重要。苏查达女士是国会议员，但她的丈夫并非如此。此外，周四的庭审过程在议会之外进行了直播。因此，如果刑事诉讼继续进行，议会特权本身可能成为一个问题。

此外，还有一个引人注目的未解之谜。朗西曼先生目前正因在议会发表的言论而面临另一项刑事诽谤诉讼。该案由商人本杰明·毛尔伯格（Benjamin Mauerberger，又名本·史密斯）提起。

2025年9月，朗西曼先生在议会听证会上对毛尔贝格先生提出指控。这些指控涉及毛尔贝格先生涉嫌与诈骗和洗钱网络有关联。毛尔贝格先生否认有任何不当行为，并随后提起刑事诽谤诉讼。

在初步审理阶段，刑事法院认定有充分理由继续审理此案。值得注意的是，该裁决并未认定朗西曼先生有罪，也未证实毛尔贝格先生的否认属实。相反，该裁决允许此案进入实质性审理阶段。

议会特权也是该初步裁决中的一个重要因素。毛尔贝格先生并非议员，而是一位非议员人士。此外，朗西曼先生的言论已被公开传播。因此，法院认定议会特权并非自动阻止检方继续进行诉讼。

本·史密斯案仍未结案，另一起刑事诉讼又为罗马的法律辩护增添了新的层面。

即便如此，本·史密斯案仍未结案。朗西曼先生并未败诉。相反，他否认了指控，并选择抗辩检方。他还提交了九名拟出庭作证的证人。

朗西曼先生表示，财务往来记录和相关证据将构成其辩护的一部分。实质性证人听证会定于2027年5月11日至14日举行。在此之前，刑事诽谤指控尚未作出最终判决。

随后，围绕莫尔贝格先生的事件又发生了重大转折。他后来面临另一项刑事诉讼，其中包括欺诈和洗钱指控。这些指控至今仍未得到解决。

即便如此，后来的刑事诉讼或许能为朗西曼先生的辩护提供证据。但这本身并不能决定诽谤案的成败。同样，毛尔贝格先生后来的法律问题也不能证明之前所有关于他的言论都是合法的。

相比之下，所提供的材料中并未发现针对苏查达女士丈夫的任何类似刑事诉讼。这是两起纠纷之间的一个重要区别。因此，本·史密斯案不能简单地套用到最新的冲突中。

罗马方面继续推进众议院的审查，而苏查达则坚称这场纠纷纯属个人恩怨，并为自己的家人辩护。

尽管如此，这为朗西曼先生的立场提供了重要的法律背景。在议会发言仍可能引发涉及外部人员的刑事诉讼。公共广播以及相关人员的身份都可能成为重要的法律问题。

在此背景下，支持朗西曼先生最新质疑的证据可能至关重要。他提出了有关苏查达女士丈夫的严重问题，而苏查达女士断然否认。如今，她已通过刑事司法系统对其丈夫提起诉讼。

与此同时，朗西曼先生正通过议会推进此事。他的委员会计划就苏查达女士及其丈夫的财务状况进行质询。因此，双方正通过不同的制度渠道推进此事。

这场争端也传到了总理兼内政部长阿努廷·查恩维拉库尔耳中。然而，苏查达女士表示，此事仍属个人私事，目前与泰自豪党无关。

苏查达女士表示，阿努廷先生给予了她鼓励和建议。她说，阿努廷先生告诉她，无辜的人没有什么好怕的。目前，她仍将此事视为个人法律纠纷处理。

最初涉及4000万泰铢的贿赂案扩大为警方介入调查，并涉及近20亿泰铢的资产。

除此之外，最初的4000万泰铢贿赂丑闻仍未解决。周四的冲突爆发时，朗西曼先生正在追问此事。他一直在就报道中提到的每月贿赂款项质询数字经济和社会部长柴查诺。

然而，议会会议很快就被苏查达女士的激烈干预所主导。几分钟之内，焦点就转移到了她的丈夫身上。随后，这对夫妇申报的财富、投资和贷款情况被公开审查。

到周五，这场纠纷已从议会转移到中央调查局。与此同时，朗西曼先生正准备将财务问题重新提交议会。如今，这场争议已蔓延至警方调查、议会审查和官方资产申报等多个层面。

这些财务数字相当可观。苏查达女士申报的资产超过1.3亿泰铢，她的丈夫申报的资产超过18.4亿泰铢。两人申报的资产总额接近20亿泰铢。

更令人震惊的是，她丈夫申报的资产中，超过14.4亿泰铢被列为贷款。他的投资总额接近1.78亿泰铢。苏查达女士单独申报的投资超过1610万泰铢。

随着众议院委员会和刑事诉讼的同步推进，财务申报引发了更多疑问。

这些数据为朗西曼先生和其他政治人物提供了进一步质询的素材。然而，这些声明本身并未证实存在任何诈骗关联。所提供的材料也未能证明这对夫妇存在任何犯罪行为。

同样，与任氏协议的潜在关联也需要确凿的证据加以证实。现有信息并未正式确认桑太阳就是张太阳。在获得这一确认之前，这些记录无法合并成一份完整的财务历史记录。

然而，资金流向如今已成为政治对抗中不可分割的一部分。朗西曼先生打算通过他的委员会对此进行调查。苏查达女士表示，如果收到符合法律规定的邀请，她会作出回应。

洛佩斯·奥夫拉多尔、证券交易委员会和国家反腐败委员会都有可能派代表出席10月7日的听证会。他们的出席将使金融和监管机构直接参与议会的审查。与此同时，苏查达女士的刑事诉讼将按照其自身的法律程序进行。

对朗西曼先生而言，这场最新的争议因此面临双重考验。政治上，他面临着证实议会内部提出的问题的压力。法律上，他还面临着另一项针对议会外人士的投诉。

苏查达准备参加10月7日的听证会，争议范围扩大到议会、警方和家庭财务等领域。

从苏查达女士的公开行动来看，她的策略同样清晰明了。她断然否认指控，并为丈夫辩护。她还为自己向国家反腐败委员会（NACC）提交的声明辩护，坚称其真实性。如今，她已直接向警方报案。

下一阶段的重要进展可能在10月7日到来。朗西曼先生的委员会计划传唤苏查达女士及其丈夫。苏查达女士表示，如果传唤属实，她将会出席。

届时，她的丈夫可能会面临有关投资、贷款和申报财产的直接质询。主要金融机构的官员也可能出庭。然而，目前尚未对夫妻双方做出任何不利裁决。

目前，双方立场依然截然相反。朗西曼先生质疑苏查达女士的丈夫是否与国际诈骗活动有关联。苏查达女士则否认存在任何关联，并要求提供证据。

所提供的材料证实，该家庭申报的资产近20亿泰铢。材料还证实了投资、巨额贷款、与众议院的激烈冲突以及一项刑事指控。但材料并未证实苏查达女士的丈夫属于诈骗团伙。

最初只是对每月高达4000万泰铢的贿赂指控提出质疑，如今事件已迅速扩大。现在，它涵盖了警方调查、即将进行的国会质询以及对巨额申报资产的审查。

苏查达的投诉引发了议会内部一场非同寻常的冲突，议会特权再次成为关注焦点。

与此同时，这场冲突再次引发了兰西曼先生此前一直面临的议会特权问题。他单独起诉本·史密斯一案仍未结案，该案的实质性听证会要到2027年5月才会举行。

这场冲突发展得如此迅速。仅仅一天之内，苏查达女士就从在议会大厅质问朗西曼先生，转变为向警方报案。

现在，朗西曼先生正准备通过众议院委员会采取下一步行动。苏查达女士表示她已准备好出席听证会。与此同时，她丈夫的财务状况仍将是这场纠纷的焦点。

因此，议会冲突已演变为两线作战。一线是刑事诽谤，另一线是对近20亿泰铢申报的家族财富进行议会审查。

兰西曼·罗姆诽谤案延期至2027年5月审理。警方对诈骗案的起诉受到批评。

前内阁部长兼为泰党高层澄清本·史密斯与豪华湾流喷气式飞机的故事

总理帕通坦被停职，副总理苏里亚·荣伦伦吉接任总理一职。

邓小平警告人民党要远离日益高涨的反民主情绪，因为政治危机正在不断演变。

民意调查显示，总理佩通坦已失去民心。人民党获得巨大支持。

曼谷抗议活动结束，没有出现过夜露营的情况。与此同时，总理正准备参加7月1日的庭审。

在宪法法院裁决前夕，总理佩通坦在新内阁中任命自己为文化部长。

洪森的伪装被揭穿了。周五的讲话清楚地表明了他蓄意破坏泰国民主的恶意。

疯狂的洪森威胁要在曼谷街头抗议活动爆发前揭露他信的真面目，因为他的邪恶帝国即将暴露。

洪森背叛西那瓦家族后，首相佩通坦的赌场计划或许是其动机所在。

宪法法院院长承认，他对总理的录音案件感到不安。

7月1日被定为宪法法院审理可能导致总理下台案件的日期。

总理佩通坦对内阁进行了一次重大改组，如同泰坦尼克号上的甲板重新洗牌，而她的政府却在原地踏步。

约瑟夫·安东尼是一位来自爱尔兰的侨民，过去十年一直居住在泰国。他曾在爱尔兰和泰国的媒体行业担任过编辑职务，拥有丰富的媒体从业经验。他主要关注泰国的经济和商业新闻，以及侨民的生活方式。

约瑟夫·奥康纳的所有帖子

“乔治·H·W·布什”号航空母舰即将前往普吉岛进行为期6天的休整。该舰将于10月5日靠岸，届时将有超过5000名水兵抵达。2026年9月29日，普吉岛准备迎接5120名美国人员，届时“乔治·H·W·布什”号将抵达普吉岛。

泰国航空首席执行官就持续不断的行李搬运车故障和航班延误问题致歉（2026年9月29日） 行李搬运设备故障和人手短缺严重影响了泰国航空的运营。

外国游客到访量已下降3.65%，人们担心洪灾危机可能影响中国市场（2026年9月29日） 泰国旅游业在旺季来临之际步履蹒跚

尽管妻子提交了上诉，但阿努廷驳回了法国男子凯文·迪米诺针对其驱逐出境的上诉 2026年9月28日 法国动物园老板凯文·迪米诺面临被驱逐出境

2026年9月28日星期日晚，32岁的护林员苏克兰·拉特在纳拉提瓦府执勤时遭枪击身亡。

旅游部长指示处理因工人未按时上班而导致的机场行李危机 2026年9月28日 旅游部长素拉萨赶赴素万那普机场

2026年9月28日，阿努廷总理亲临洪灾地区，遭遇民众褒贬不一的反应，其中不乏愤怒之声。曼谷洪灾灾民与阿努廷总理对峙。

泰国女星妮妮·罗亚尔 (Nene Royal) 本周在演艺圈大获成功后，于2026年9月27日返回普吉岛，与祖母团聚。

曼谷机场已开放并恢复航班，但素万那普机场出现延误和行李问题（2026年9月27日）。洪水袭击素万那普机场，乘客等待六小时。

随着锋面移向缅甸，曼谷洪水有所缓解，但曼谷市长警告称，该市需要2-3天才能恢复正常。2026年9月27日，泰国首都曼谷正全力排水。

2026年前8个月的数据显示，由于泰国从中国的进口增加，贸易逆差巨大。2026年9月27日，泰国总理阿努廷·查恩维拉库尔访问伦敦。

总理指示应对袭击曼谷的突发性洪水危机，曼谷所有50个区均被列为灾区（2026年9月26日，伦敦报道）。曼谷在近300毫米降雨后正与严重洪灾作斗争。

阿努廷总理本周访美，促成了曼谷与华尔街之间更紧密联系的协议。2026年9月26日，华尔街向泰国敞开大门，寻求更紧密的联系。

2026年9月25日，普吉岛发生一起骇人听闻的事件：一名警察的格洛克手枪在滑套动作中走火，导致其49岁的母亲不幸身亡。事发后，这名普吉岛警察将面临致命枪击案的调查。

最高法院重磅裁决将泰自豪党成员与精心策划的参议院选举舞弊案联系起来 2026年9月25日 最高法院揭露2024年选举中的腐败行为

2026年9月25日，华尔街就泰国的地缘政治立场和增长计划对总理及其团队进行了质询。强硬的华尔街投资者对阿努廷总理及其团队提出了质疑。

四人因2022年北大年府致命叛乱爆炸案被判处终身监禁。2026年9月24日，四人的死刑被改判为终身监禁。

土耳其纵火犯被捕。他的泰国女友雇佣他销毁其前工作场所的证据。2026年9月29日

与时间赛跑，与洪水赛跑，阿努廷总理夜以继日地应对洪灾紧急情况 2026年9月29日

泰国谨慎推进人工智能监管，美国科技公司警告称关键条款可能阻碍投资 2026年9月29日

2026年9月28日，由于危机仍未得到控制，素万那普机场的军事行动范围扩大。

尽管有条形码警告，宪法法院仍维持2月8日大选的合法性，总理松了一口气 2026年9月28日

2026年9月28日，行李混乱导致疲惫不堪的机场工作人员不堪重负，泰国皇家陆军被派往素万那普机场。

2026年9月27日，春蓬府发生一起三角恋恐怖事件，一名政府官员突然发狂，三人全部遇害。

2026年9月27日，泰国国家发展研究所（NIDA）民意调查显示，随着总理阿努廷的基地坠毁，泰国公众的冷漠情绪日益加剧。

2026年9月27日，曼谷附近北榄府发生洪水悲剧，一辆汽车被淹，两人触电身亡。

宪法法院周一的关键投票裁决或将颠覆泰国政府和政治格局 2026年9月27日

2026年9月26日，一名美国公民在芭堤雅被捕，此前联合执法机构突袭了他的郊区住宅，在其住所内发现了一个非法毒品工厂。

泰国警方发出警告，警惕假冒止咳糖浆。2026年9月26日，警方在四次突击行动中捣毁了一个假药帝国。

2026年9月26日，在帕岸岛谋杀并肢解哥伦比亚外科医生的32岁西班牙厨师上诉被驳回。

2026年9月25日星期五上午，芭堤雅一处民宅发生大麻种植场火灾，房屋被烧毁，当地居民出现头晕、头痛等症状。

2026年9月25日，一名33岁男子因母亲拒绝给他买一辆动力更强的车，在乌隆他尼纵火焚烧了自己的本田史酷比汽车。

部长们被指责忽视泰国农民。关键援助资金尚未提交内阁审议（2026年9月25日）

2026年9月24日，总理阿努廷·查恩维拉库尔因地方政府考试丑闻被议会正式传唤。

前司法部长称赞一项重大破产法案，该法案有望减轻家庭债务负担 2026年9月24日

妮妮·罗亚尔凭借精彩绝伦的《七国军队》压轴表演为泰国赢得大奖，斩获100万美元奖金（2026年9月24日）。

芭堤雅突袭行动后，几名中国男子因涉嫌强奸和敲诈勒索被捕。一名女子于2026年9月23日被关押并戴上镣铐。

数字部长（36岁）兼强大的奇德乔布王朝继承人拥有数亿美元的财富 2026年9月23日

泰国内阁周二通过最新大麻法案，旨在遏制该国失控的大麻产业（2026年9月23日）

© 2026 Thai Examiner。版权所有。