BANGKOK, THAILAND – A large group of alleged victims filed a complaint with Thailand’s Central Investigation Bureau over a suspected crypto investment fraud worth more than 1.3 billion baht.
Collective complaint to the investigation agency
Led by Tankhun Jitt-itsara, president of the Santiprachadham Club, the complainants submitted a petition at the complaint center of the Central Investigation Bureau.
The Economic Crime Suppression Division (ECD) was responsible for the case and was to examine whether criminal proceedings should be initiated against a former celebrity linked to a digital TV station and his alleged accomplices.
Coins, promises, fantasy returns
According to Tankhun Jitt-itsara, many alleged victims were persuaded by a man known as Ackmee Worawat to buy the cryptocurrencies WOWBiT and ACET ONLY.
The suspect had allegedly promoted returns of up to 500 times the invested capital, drawing investors into the scheme.
1 March deadline and sudden loss of access
Investors had been told that their deposits would mature on 1 March and could then be withdrawn.
When the deadline passed, withdrawals reportedly became impossible, which reinforced suspicions of a systematic fraud among those affected.
Hacking claim and reference to anti-money laundering rules
When questioned, the accused initially claimed that the system had been hacked, according to what the alleged victims told the petitioner.
Later, he reportedly cited foreign anti-money laundering regulations as the reason why transfers of the funds could not be processed.
Allegations dating from 2025 and flight to the Emirates
Tankhun Jitt-itsara said background checks had shown that the man had already been accused of public fraud in 2025, after which police obtained an arrest warrant.
According to the current state of the investigation, the suspect was believed to have fled to the United Arab Emirates, which was expected to significantly complicate law enforcement efforts.
Possible legal framework and missing evidence
The case could involve several legal areas, including the emergency decree on loan-taking with fraudulent characteristics, which was often used in Thailand against suspected Ponzi schemes, as well as the Computer Crime Act and the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
At the same time, proceedings reportedly progressed slowly because many alleged victims had not sufficiently preserved documents and communication records, according to Tankhun Jitt-itsara.
Public debate on responsibility
When proximity to celebrities and crypto hype came together, the promise of rapid multiplication of funds acted for many as a door-opener to costly misjudgments.
“Should authorities and platforms take tougher action against advertising unrealistic returns, or is every investor ultimately responsible on their own – what do you think?”
said bangkokpost.com, source.