Reform council choices fail to dodge whiff of corruption
Play
THERE HAVE been allegations of favouritism in the selection of National Reform Council (NRC) members, particularly those from the provinces.
It is said that selection panels in certain provinces already have their predetermined candidates who are family members or cohorts. In some provinces, people with political connections are expected to be nominated.
Selection committees from all 77 provinces are to nominate five people from their province to be chosen by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) for the NRC, which is to consist of no more than 250 members.
There is also a suspicion as to whether the 11 selection committees appointed by the NCPO to nominate people for 11 areas of reform may be practising favouritism. The growing doubts have prompted the government and the NCPO to assure that they do not condone such practices and will take action against them.
The NCPO’s chief adviser, General Prawit Wongsuwan, who is also a deputy prime minister and the defence minister, appeared annoyed when asked by reporters about suspicions of favouritism in the selection of NRC members. He said it would be unusual for members of the many selection committees to agree over predetermined candidates.
“If you know how to do it, please let me know,” he said, referring to making selection panel members agree on selecting certain predetermined candidates. “They all are respectable people and they want to do their job as best as they can. Please don’t say anything bad about them.”
Suspicions over the selection committees are not surprising, as the selection process has been kept secret. People in general do not know how the committees work. The 11 selection panels meet inside the First Infantry Division of the Royal Guards and no observers are allowed inside the military camp.
The lists of candidates from the provincial selection committees and from the 11 “central” selection panels have been kept secret. We just know that a total of 7,370 applied to be nominated for the NRC but we do not know who will be nominated by the selection panels.
It was explained that the selection committees did not want anyone to pull strings in order to get nominated for the NRC. This excuse, in fact, was quite lame. Keeping the selection process secret was unlikely to prevent ambitious candidates from seeking favours.
It is important for the selection committees to ensure transparency in their work in order to silence critics and sceptics. They should let the public know what kind of candidates they have now and whether those candidates are suitable to be NRC members.
Suspicions about the NRC selection process have adversely affected the credibility of the reform efforts, which in the end could have negative impacts on the reform process as a whole.
The NCPO, which has gained governing power in an undemocratic way, should make sure that its reform process is transparent and legitimate.
If the opening stages of the reform, by selecting people to become reform council members, are done wrongly or unfairly, the entire process will be questioned and wasted. And that is unlikely to lead to the desired result – a success of the reform efforts that would benefit all.
