Experts want reform of independent bodies

Independent government agencies have come under criticism from politicians, academics and reformers in the past several years.
The critics say they need to be more effective, while their working process and appointment of committee members must be more transparent.
The reform of these independent organisations – which are executive branch agencies and function outside Cabinet ministries – has become a key talking point and they have been subjected to mounting public criticism over the years.
Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) member Paiboon Nititawan said the solution was to require these organisations to reveal to the public the way they operate.
“Their working processes and methods are very secretive, revealing little about how they form a consensus, how they vote and which committee members take what stance. What is said in their meetings is not revealed,” he said.
“All of this should be recorded and made available to the public, so the people can help regulate these organisations and make them more transparent.”
Paiboon also pointed out civil-society networks that needed to be strengthened. A good example was the Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand, an independent organisation that regulates various public offices.
Sirote Klampaiboon, a political scientist, proposed that under the constitution, people should be
able to regulate and control independent organisations – even submit impeachment cases against
their committee members to the courts.
There was also a call for independent organisations to improve their effectiveness and efficiency “to respond to the public demand” said Sombat Thamrongthanyawong, National Reform Council (NRC) member for political reform.
The organisations’ work processes need to be redesigned, he said – for example, by setting up an election court to deal specifically with electoral fraud cases. That could ease the burden on the Election Commission, he said.
“Their work philosophy should emphasise an offensive approach rather than defensive,” said Sombat.
The NRC member also gave examples, pointing to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). He said the commission should set its work priorities to the “most extreme cases” first, referring to cases involving the largest amounts of money.
“If, in smaller cases offenders escape [prosecution], it does not look as bad as in big ones,” he said.
Sombat also said there should be expert investigative teams to focus on bigger cases.
The NACC should have its own department to submit cases to the court. The prosecution process would not be delayed and it would help avoid inter-organisation conflict, as has happened in the past, Sombat said.

Problems of staffing independent organisations
Sombat said the hiring of committee members for the organisations must be transparent and apolitical. There was a problem of appointments through the Senate because these members could easily be politically influenced. The Office of the Permanent Secretary of Defence has compiled a report proposing to the NRC guidelines on national reform, concentrating largely on independent organisations.
They include the Constitutional Court, the EC and the NACC, which comprises a large part of the Office’s report on political reform – a key area it has emphasised.
The report said the Constitutional Court has a structure different from the courts of justice. The time in office of the judges is nine years, which is too long, and its role should be strictly limited to interpretation of the constitution.
The EC’s processes needed to be accountable to the public – to be corruption free, and fair in elections, while prosecuting those who commit electoral fraud.
The report said the NACC had failed to process all the cases submitted to it, the investigation process was slow, while its membership was selected by a committee of politicians, making it vulnerable to political influence.

“Too powerful”
Overpowerful and politicised organisations can damage the country’s democracy, rather than upholding and strengthening it, which is their purpose, said Sirote.
The political scientist said many had become too powerful and are “above the democratic system” and had “stepped out of line” in terms of their operational boundaries. The rice-pledging scheme case was an example.
Sirote said this demonstrated the NACC’s political motive as it became committed to an all-out attack against the Pheu Thai’s rice-pledging scheme.
He pointed out too, the anti-graft commission had proposed that the policy be banned without considering its other aspects – such as allocation of money, or its effect on domestic consumption.
Sirote said the NACC’s suggestion to scrap the policy was beyond its responsibility. As a result, the coup-makers and the current administration had abolished it.

‘Some should be abolished’
Paiboon said certain independent organisations with power boundaries not clearly stated in the constitution should be abolished.
Sombat agreed with this notion and pointed to the Office of the National Economic and Social Advisory Council and the Office of the Ombudsman, which he said should be looked at.
The NRC member for Justice Reform, Wanchai Sornsiri, said independent organisations that had overlapping responsibilities should be merged – such as the ombudsman and the Office of the National Human Rights Commission – while those who could not contribute significant benefits to society should be abolished.
However, election commissioner Somchai Srisuthiyakorn said the purpose of establishing independent organisations was the development of the country’s political system, adding to the current branches of power for checks and balances.
He pointed to the example of having the Ministry of the Interior to take over election affairs,
“This was wrong because it meant handing election responsibilities to the executive branch, hence the election would never be transparent and fair. In the past, we have found that the executive [can be] a cause of corruption, if we hand over this responsibility to them, who can effectively regulate them?”