Design and construction flaws blamed for State Audit Office collapse: PM
The collapse of the State Audit Office (SAO) building in Bangkok was due to flaws in its design and construction, Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra confirmed on Monday.
She made the statement after chairing a meeting at Government House to follow up on the investigation into the building's collapse, which occurred during the earthquake on March 28.
The findings from the investigation were consistent across all institutions involved. The analysis was reinforced by simulation technology, which recreated the building’s response to seismic forces and pinpointed the causes of the collapse, Paetongtarn said.
She explained that all four institutions tasked with inspecting the incident found clear deficiencies in the building’s design and construction methods — particularly the shear wall systems around the lift shafts and stairwells.
Paetongtarn added that substandard concrete and faulty construction practices were also to blame.
“From the reports received, it’s clear that many aspects of the construction did not comply with legal standards — both in terms of design and execution. Simulations confirmed that had the legal standards been followed, the building would have been more structurally sound and better able to withstand the tremor,” she noted.
The Prime Minister assured the public that other projects have been subject to strict inspections and that no similar issues have been found.
A full report would be compiled within two weeks and submitted to the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) and police for further action, she added.
When asked who would be held accountable, Paetongtarn replied: “We’ve clearly stated that the root cause was in the design and construction. As for who is at fault, that is for the police and DSI to determine. All relevant information is now available, and legal proceedings will follow.”
When questioned specifically about whether steel materials were to blame, the Prime Minister said experts had confirmed the steel used was not faulty.
“The materials themselves were not the issue. But in this particular project, the steel was cut down in size and used in a way that did not comply with regulations — making it effectively illegal,” she said.
“I was worried at first that poor-quality materials were being used across other projects, but that turned out not to be the case. The problem was confined to this project.”
