Big Joke on the brink: Former deputy police chief Surachate faces a decisive Supreme Court ruling as explosive claims of a ฿10m gold bribe drag in the NACC, Parliament and senior police, with loyal aides turning against him.
On Friday, the Supreme Administrative Court will decide the fate of former Deputy National Police Chief General Surachate Hakparn. In the run-up to the ruling, the former top cop has dominated Thai headlines. On Wednesday, his lawyer pressed the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to investigate allegations that General Surachate tried to bribe one of its commissioners with ฿10 million worth of gold. Surachate, known as Big Joke, denies the charge, as does the commissioner, Mr. Ekawit Watchawakku. He says he is being framed by former subordinates and claims inducements, including police reinstatement, were offered for testimony against him. The same day, a former subordinate took the case to the Senate President.
On the eve of a Supreme Court ruling that may determine his future, former Deputy National Police Chief Pol. Gen. Surachate Hakparn remains, nonetheless, at the centre of a widening legal conflict. In particular, the case involves senior police figures, the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and Parliament. Consequently, the dispute now spans criminal allegations, constitutional mechanisms, and internal police divisions.
Pol. Gen. Surachate is, moreover, widely known in Thailand by his nickname, Big Joke. Previously, he served as Deputy Commissioner General of the Royal Thai Police. However, he was removed from active service and has since sought reinstatement through the courts. Ultimately, a Supreme Court decision is expected to have final authority on that effort.
Allegations of gold offered to a sitting NACC commissioner as Anti Corruption case handed over
Meanwhile, this week, Police Major General Jaroonkiat Pankaew, on behalf of the Anti-Corruption police division, submitted a case file to the National Anti-Corruption Commission. Specifically, the file alleges an attempted bribe involving Pol. Gen. Surachate. Notably, the allegation centres on events dated September 1 last year.
According to the submission, specifically, 246 baht of gold was offered to an NACC commissioner. The commissioner named in the file is Mr. Ekawit Watchawakku. Notably, the gold is valued at more than 10 million baht.
Under the law, in principle, the National Anti-Corruption Commission may investigate the matter itself. Alternatively, it may return the file to the Royal Thai Police for further handling. At present, that decision remains pending.
On Wednesday, in response, a lawyer representing Pol. Gen. Surachate formally opposed returning the file to police investigators. Accordingly, the lawyer urged the NACC to retain the case and complete the investigation itself.
The objection was filed on Wednesday, January 7, 2026. At that time, it was submitted to the Office of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. Notably, Pol. Gen. Surachate’s lawyer, Mr. Sanyapat Samart, was present in person.
Lawyers challenge return of case file citing fairness concerns over investigative procedures
Mr. Sanyapat submitted a written petition requesting fairness in the investigation. In doing so, he cited Section 61, Paragraph 2 of the Organic Act on Prevention and Suppression of Corruption B.E. 2561. Accordingly, he argued that the law allows the NACC to proceed without returning the case to police investigators.
The investigating team had submitted the file to the NACC on January 5. Meanwhile, the defence noted that the submission occurred before a January 15 deadline. Importantly, that deadline allowed Pol. Gen. Surachate to provide additional testimony.
Mr. Sanyapat outlined four reasons for objecting to a return of the file. First, he said the origin of evidence may be legally disputed. In particular, he claimed some evidence sources could be unlawful.
Second, he said some witnesses may have been induced or coerced. Specifically, he alleged promises or benefits may have been offered. Additionally, he alleged pressure to provide incriminating statements.
Third, he noted that investigators did not pursue charges against Pol. Col. Pakphum Phismai. Notably, Pol. Col. Pakphum has admitted to handing over the gold.
Lawyer lists disputed evidence, coerced witnesses and no charges against officer involved
Fourthly, he questioned the legitimacy of the investigative team. In particular, he said some officers have conflicts with Pol. Gen. Surachate. As a result, he argued that this raises concerns about impartiality.
The lawyer also raised objections to a police press conference held on January 6. In that context, he said the presentation of evidence may have disclosed protected information. Consequently, he argued that the disclosure could violate anti-corruption laws and criminal provisions.
He cited Articles 36 and 37 of the corruption law. In addition, he cited Clause 6 of the NACC investigation regulations. Further, he cited Article 164 of the Criminal Code.
Mr. Sanyapat said returning the file would move the case backward. Therefore, he said it could undermine fairness. Instead, he argued that the proper route is through the NACC, prosecutors, and the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.
He acknowledged that the final decision rests with the NACC. At the same time, he said the defence could not interfere with that authority. Accordingly, he added that the case should move forward, not backwards.
Defence confident of NACC process as Surachate denies allegations and remains in Thailand
When asked about concerns of conflict within the NACC, Mr. Sanyapat expressed confidence in the system. In this regard, he said he has practised law for over 32 years. Accordingly, he said he believes there will be no collusion.
He stated that Pol. Gen. Surachate remains in Thailand. Furthermore, he said his client will not flee. Instead, he said Pol. Gen. Surachate is prepared to fight the case through legal channels.
He said his client denies all allegations. Likewise, he said Pol. Gen. Surachate maintains his innocence. Therefore, he said the defence only seeks lawful evidence and procedure.
Mr. Sanyapat declined to comment on other accused individuals. In that context, he said he was unaware of details concerning the remaining five suspects. As a result, he said he would not disclose further information.
Thai reports and the media have particularly focused on Police Colonel Pakphum Phisamai and his younger brother, Police Colonel Khemarin Phisamai, both loyal subordinates of General Surachate, before the crisis erupted and even afterwards. However, they have now come out against him.
Media focus on Pakphum and Khemarin Phismai as former loyal aides publicly turn on Big Joke
In particular, they accused him of brutality towards other officers and of making allegations against former National Police Commissioner General Torsak Sukwimol in March 2024.
Notably, the Police Complaints Review Board (PCRB) in October appeared to endorse General Surachate’s claims when it recommended charges against 200 senior policemen. Significantly, these included General Torsak.
On Wednesday, the dispute expanded into Parliament. Pol. Col. Pakphum Phismai submitted a letter to the President of the Senate. The submission took place at Parliament at 4 p.m.
The letter was addressed to Mr. Mongkol Surasajja. Mr. Mongkol is President of the Senate and acting President of Parliament. The letter was submitted through Senator Phisit Apinyapong.
The request asked Parliament to forward the matter to the President of the Supreme Court. The goal was to seek legal action against Mr. Ekawit Watchawakku. The allegation concerns the acceptance of the gold bribe.
Case in Parliament as Senators seek constitutional route to probe the NACC commissioner
Senator Phisit said the document would be circulated to all 200 senators. In addition, he said further steps would follow Article 236 of the Constitution. Notably, that article requires support from one-fifth of lawmakers.
At least 40 members must support the request. If so, the President of the Supreme Court may establish an investigative panel. In that case, the panel would examine alleged wrongdoing by an NACC commissioner.
Pol. Col. Pakphum said he submitted documentary and physical evidence. Specifically, he said the evidence related to the 246 baht gold allegation. Accordingly, he said his decision followed what he described as a shifting of blame.
He said responsibility for the alleged bribe was placed on him. As a result, he said the consequences exceeded his capacity. Consequently, he said the penalties involved were severe.
He referred to a March 19, 2024, press conference. At that time, the event involved the BNK gambling website case. In turn, the case involved ฿38 million and implicated a former police chief. This was organised by General Surchate and his lawyers. It sparked a crisis with the Royal Thai Police that is still unfolding.
Pakphum cites blame shifting and BNK gambling press conference as turning points in break
The policeman revealed that he and his brother disagreed with the accusations made at that time. In short, the problem was that there was no evidence presented. Afterwards, the disagreement escalated into a confrontation with superiors.
Furthermore, he described other incidents involving subordinates. He said blame was often shifted downward. Significantly, he claimed some subordinates were physically assaulted. He said some incidents were witnessed directly.
In turn, subordinates were promised future assistance. Nevertheless, those promises did not materialise. He said once cases enter the judicial process, resolution is difficult.
Pol. Col. Pakphum emphasised his disclosure was not motivated by any deal. Certainly, there was no quid pro quo. He notes that presently his involvement concerns only the Minnie gambling website case. That case is now with the NACC. Therefore, dealing with the police would not help. He said the police no longer control that matter.
Afterwards, when his identity as a whistleblower was made public, attempts were made to contact him. In particular, senior officers contacted him on behalf of Pol. Gen. Surachate. He said there was nothing to discuss.
Ex aide describes pressure over Wan Nor Matha video and failed efforts to talk with Surachate
He referred to a video recorded at the home of Wan Muhammad Nor Matha. Mr. Wan is the former Speaker of the House. Pol. Col. Pakphum said he was pressured over the video. He said there was an attempt to make him admit to filming it.
He said the goal was to pressure Suchart Trakulkesemsook. Mr. Suchart is Chairman of the NACC.
In particular, he said this incident angered his father. He said it led to a decisive break in relationships. The former police aide said he had previously admired Pol. Gen. Surachate’s work. However, he said his view changed after observing certain methods. Some actions went beyond professional duties. He said some actions conflicted with his own principles.
Pol. Col. Pakphum also addressed comments by Pol. Maj. Gen. Jaroonkiat Pankaew. Pol. Maj. Gen. Jaroonkiat said certain methods were difficult to trace. He admitted that senior officers often use subordinates. In particular, financial transactions are handled indirectly. He said this makes direct evidence difficult.
Witness explains indirect command structures, concealed evidence and efforts to return gold
Of course, he admitted that the concealment of evidence was necessary in such machinations. Afterwards, his concerns grew after the video incident. He said that, after that, they increased during the gold bribery matter.
Pol. Col. Pakphum said there was an attempt to return the gold. Significantly, the policeman pointed out he and Mr. Ekawit did not know each other. He said a middleman was used to communicate.
At length, the interaction was recorded on video. He said he initially refused to accept the gold. Nonetheless, he was asked to claim ownership so it could be returned. He refused because it was not his property. Indeed, he insisted that accepting it would imply ownership. Following this, repeated calls followed. Offers were even made to give him the gold.
He said he continued to refuse. Finally, the gold was eventually returned by others.
Pol. Col. Pakphum commented on an upcoming Administrative Court ruling. The ruling is scheduled for January 9. It concerns the possible reinstatement of Pol. Gen. Surachate.
Pakphum backs Surachate reinstatement while urging the bribery case to run independently
Surprisingly, Pol. Col. Pakphum still claims he wants Pol. Gen. Surachate to return to work. Certainly, he hopes there will be no lingering doubts. In the meantime, the legal process should continue independently.
The police officer suggests the case should proceed through the NACC, prosecutors, courts and police. He said fairness by all institutions is essential. Notably, public scrutiny prevents interference. Pol. Col. Pakphum revealed that public reaction to his disclosure was stronger than expected. He said he was prepared for backlash. At the same time, he understood he could become a suspect.
However, he would accept that outcome. He noted that it all now depends on the NACC. The process should take its course. When asked about betrayal, he rejected that suggestion or point of view. He said he still respects some superiors. However, he was forced to act for himself and the institution.
Officer accepts backlash and possible suspect status, saying public duty outweighs loyalty
Notably, he recalled the first person betrayed was Mr. Ekawit. Mr. Ekawit was filmed for blackmail.
After that, he said he was the second person targeted. He recalled that attempts were made to stage a scene. Again, he was asked to collect the gold. The former subordinate officer resisted, saying this would create false ownership.
He said whether this constitutes betrayal depends on perspective. He said the sequence of actions matters. Mr. Ekawit has denied any involvement in a bribery scheme. Furthermore, he has denied wrongdoing with the anti-corruption police.
Big Joke faces key hurdles over the coming days as evidence is made public and Supreme Court decides
Police top brass introduce former Big Joke sidekick as a witness in the prosecution of the former cop
Pol. Gen. Surachate has also challenged the investigation. He has questioned the mode and truthfulness of evidence gathering. He has questioned procedures used by the anti-corruption police unit. The file now sits with the National Anti-Corruption Commission. Its next step remains undecided. The Supreme Court ruling on Pol. Gen. Surachate’s reinstatement is pending.
Join the Thai News forum, follow Thai Examiner on Facebook here
Receive all our stories as they come out on Telegram here
Follow Thai Examiner here
Further reading:
Big Joke faces key hurdles over the coming days as evidence is made public and Supreme Court decides
People’s Party on campaign but on guard against potential legal complaints to oversight agencies
