Thailand’s corruption index in crisis as perceived graft score falls “below” Laos and Vietnam

According to the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) report published by Transparency International on Tuesday (10 Feb 2026), corruption remains a serious, persistent threat across the Asia-Pacific region. The region’s average score stands at 45 out of 100, showing that high levels of corruption have not been addressed in any meaningful way over the past decade.

In the 2025 ranking, Thailand scored 33/100, placing it 116th out of 182 countries/territories—down one place from 2024—and the decline has continued since 2022, when Thailand scored 36/100. Between 2012 and 2021, Thailand’s score ranged between 35 and 38.

The CPI rankings measure perceptions of public-sector corruption, scoring from 0 (very high corruption) to 100 (very clean).

Compared with other ASEAN countries in 2025, Thailand’s perceived corruption score is lower than Singapore, Brunei, Malaysia, Timor-Leste, Vietnam, Indonesia and Laos, but higher than the Philippines, Cambodia and Myanmar.

CPI 2025 rankings in ASEAN

Source: transparency

The report notes a key observation in the region: both Thailand and Mongolia (31/100) continue to have very poor perceived corruption scores, showing a downward trend since 2012. In Mongolia, the rule of law and accountability have declined, while public freedoms have become more restricted.

Meanwhile, countries whose scores have improved since 2012 total 32 countries/territories, including eight that have made statistically significant gains, such as Bhutan (71/100), Brunei and Laos.

The highest-scoring countries in the region are Singapore, New Zealand and Australia, ranking 3rd, 4th and 12th globally.

Countries near the bottom of the index include Afghanistan (16/100), Myanmar, and North Korea (15/100).

In addition, most countries in the region—21 out of 31—still score below the global average of 42, including major democracies such as India (39/100), Bangladesh (24/100) and Indonesia (34/100).

Young people protest as a sign corruption is worsening

The report says that in 2025, dissatisfaction across the Asia-Pacific region grew over weak governance and limited accountability—seen in more young people taking to the streets to demand action and responsibility from their governments.

In the Philippines, which is heavily affected by climate change, the public has been angered by numerous allegations that large sums of public funds were lost to fake flood-relief projects. In Indonesia, 12 people died and hundreds more were injured in protests against the government, with officials responding with violence and disinformation.

In Nepal (score 34/100), protests led to the collapse of the government after a broad social media ban and rising public dissatisfaction over corruption.

The report says these situations have been driven by a public feeling that “those in power” are abusing their authority for personal gain while failing to provide public services, ensure economic stability, and offer fair opportunities.

By contrast, countries such as the Maldives (39/100), Vietnam and Timor-Leste have seen continued improvements—and statistically significant gains since 2012—due to structural reforms that strengthened governance institutions. In Vietnam’s case, this is attributed to effective handling of petty corruption. However, these countries still score below the index’s average, meaning there remains substantial room for improvement.

In other regions with fragile states, such as Afghanistan (16/100), Myanmar, and North Korea (15/100), scores remain near the bottom of the index due to restricted civic freedoms, opaque political finance systems, and a lack of oversight and democratic checks and balances, as well as an independent judiciary—factors that make these countries particularly vulnerable to corruption.

The world’s top five highest-scoring countries for perceived corruption are:

• Denmark (89/100)
• Finland (88/100)
• Singapore (84/100)
• New Zealand and Norway (tied at 81/100)

Fears corruption is rising and trapping Thailand’s competitiveness

• Thailand’s CPI 2025 score fell to 33 out of 100, the lowest in 19 years, with the country’s ranking sliding continuously to 116th out of 182 worldwide.
• The private sector says corruption is a structural cost that erodes national competitiveness, estimating losses of up to 500 billion baht per year, particularly due to “under-the-table” payments of 20–30% in public procurement.
• Corruption drags on economic growth, with estimates suggesting GDP losses of up to 2% per year; if the problem were solved, Thailand’s economy could grow by as much as 4%, shedding the image of the “sick man of Asia”.
• The chairman of the Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand (ACT) says the last three governments have had no serious anti-corruption policies, embedding corruption as a structural problem rooted in the bureaucracy and justice process.
• Corruption undermines investor confidence and creates openings for “grey capital” and scammers to infiltrate Thailand’s economy; stimulus measures will not work unless corruption is addressed in parallel.

According to Transparency International’s CPI report published on 10 Feb 2026, corruption remains a serious threat in Asia-Pacific, with the regional average at 45/100, showing that high levels of corruption have not been seriously addressed over the past decade.

Thailand scored 33/100 in 2025, ranking 116th out of 182 countries/territories—down one place from 2024—and has declined continuously since 2022, when it scored 36. Between 2012 and 2021, Thailand’s score ranged between 35 and 38.

The CPI ranks countries by perceived public-sector corruption, scoring from 0 (very high corruption) to 100 (very clean). Within ASEAN in 2025, Thailand scored lower than Singapore, Brunei, Malaysia, Timor-Leste, Vietnam, Indonesia and Laos, but higher than the Philippines, Cambodia and Myanmar.

The report says a key regional observation is that both Thailand and Mongolia, with 33 points, still have very poor perceived corruption scores and show a downward trend since 2012. Mongolia has seen declines in the rule of law and accountability, while civic freedoms have become more restricted.

The highest-scoring countries in the region are Singapore, New Zealand and Australia, ranking 3rd, 4th and 12th globally.

Low-scoring countries near the bottom include Afghanistan (16 points), Myanmar, and North Korea (15 points).

Most countries in the region—21 out of 31—remain below the global average of 42, including major democracies such as India (39 points), Bangladesh (24 points) and Indonesia (34 points).

The global top five for perceived corruption are Denmark (89), Finland (88), Singapore (84), and New Zealand and Norway (tied at 81).

Last three governments ignored anti-corruption, says ACT chief

Dr Mana Nimitmongkol, chairman of Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand (ACT), said Thailand’s decline is extremely bad. He said Thailand’s score of 33 points is the lowest in 19 years, and the lowest ranking Thailand has had since TI began publishing the index. Over the past two-plus years, across three governments, there have been no serious anti-corruption policies or measures, which has clearly dragged the country down.

Dr Mana said that when governments do not pay attention to the issue, corrupt actors—both state officials and private-sector players—become less fearful and more emboldened to cheat the country. The situation shows that corruption in Thailand is not just a problem of a few bad individuals, but a structural problem that continues to expand and worsen.

He said the structural aspect lies in a bureaucracy accustomed to operating without good governance—lacking disclosure and transparency—while the justice process itself is a major problem. Thailand faces issues from police operations through prosecutors and courts, and even independent bodies are unable to serve as reliable mechanisms for the public to investigate and catch corrupt actors. As a result, the public lacks opportunities to know the truth or to demand legal action against those who commit corruption.

Private sector alarmed as ranking continues to plunge

Before the CPI results were released, Thailand’s private sector moved proactively. The Joint Standing Committee on Commerce, Industry and Banking (JSCCIB) set up a “Zero Corruption” working group to compile policy proposals from business and civil society and push for concrete structural reform—aiming to raise anti-corruption efforts from symbolic campaigning to sustainable solutions.

Dr Poj Aramwattananont, chairman of Thai Chamber of Commerce and Board of Trade of Thailand, in his role as chairman of JSCCIB’s Zero Corruption working group, said previously that corruption undermines investor confidence because it is a very high hidden cost. He said the new government must prioritise serious and continuous anti-corruption action.

Kriengkrai Thiennukul, chairman of Federation of Thai Industries (FTI), said corruption is a structural cost that corrodes national competitiveness, estimating losses as high as 500 billion baht per year, particularly in public procurement where “under-the-table” payments can be as high as 20–30% of project value.

He added that corruption drags on economic growth: without corruption, Thailand’s GDP growth could reach 4%, but at present the country is losing as much as 2% of GDP to corruption. Solving the problem, he said, would help Thailand shed the “sick man of Asia” image.

Thailand’s corruption situation continues to worsen and spread across all sectors. The latest CPI leaves Thailand with only 33 points, and the most worrying point is that Thailand has fallen behind even Laos and Vietnam.

He said the problem affects not only image, but is directly linked to the direction of a slowing economy—echoing the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) projection that Thailand’s economy in 2026 will grow by only 1.6%. Thailand used to rank 2nd in ASEAN but has dropped to 3rd; by 2030, it is expected to slip to 5th or 6th—moving in the same direction as a worsening corruption index.

Private sector urges new government to “guillotine laws” and use AI to plug loopholes

The private sector called on the new government to make anti-corruption a concrete “national agenda” and proposed the following measures:

1. Regulatory Guillotine — revise and repeal vast numbers of outdated laws that create loopholes allowing officials to use discretion to demand bribes.
2. AI & Open Data — apply artificial intelligence and open data systems in the public sector to reduce duplication, streamline processes and increase transparency in oversight.
3. Change the role of the state — shift from regulator to facilitator to make it easier to do business.

Kriengkrai said what matters is that the new government must be stable enough to push policy consistently, and must assemble a professional economic team with a transparent image and no corruption record to restore investor confidence. He warned that “grey capital” and scammers are exploiting gaps created by corruption to launder money and infiltrate Thailand’s economy.

He added that economic stimulus will not work if corruption is not tackled at the same time—comparing it to pouring money or water into a boat with holes: if the holes are not fixed, the money will leak away, and eventually the boat will sink, triggering knock-on impacts including inequality and household hardship. If the problem is not addressed quickly, he warned, everything will collapse.

People’s Party: “With us, no grey capital”

In the 2026 election campaign, many political parties presented anti-corruption policies. Even if this is sometimes dismissed as political rhetoric, it reflects a political commitment in governing—often framed as a key selling point to voters.

A review of party policies found the following priorities:

People’s Party promoted the campaign slogan “With us, no grey capital” and proposed building a transparent state through procurement reform, using technology to reduce official discretion, closing corruption loopholes, and emphasising open public data that is easy to access. It said this would allow the public to help monitor budget spending effectively, creating a system designed to make corruption impossible, under a package titled “Transparent state, free of corruption”.

It proposed eight measures, including converting the Official Information Act into a “Public Information Act” based on the principle “disclosure as the rule, secrecy as the exception”, especially for key state databases.

It also proposed developing systems using technology to reduce official discretion; expanding ethical scrutiny in major procurement projects; reviewing outdated laws—repealing or amending laws that make it difficult for citizens to comply legally and create channels for officials to demand bribes.

It proposed amending laws so technology-based enforcement can be used, and revising various laws to increase serious technology-based enforcement instead of relying on officials’ discretion. It proposed strengthening a mechanism of “Expose corruption safely, get rewarded” by improving rules to protect and reward whistleblowers.

It also proposed pushing a “corruption ring breaks apart” law, where those involved in corruption who are first to provide information to the state could receive reduced penalties or be treated as witnesses—intended to destroy trust within corruption networks and make them harder to sustain.

Pheu Thai: “Dismantle – cleanse – unlock”

Pheu Thai proposed an “AI Government” policy: a smart, digital, transparent, fast state. It pledged to dismantle laws, cleanse the system and unlock the state by developing one-stop public services, a central platform for citizens and businesses, and enabling major permits to be approved within one day.

It proposed creating a Digital Governance Dashboard to display real-time data on budgets, procurement and project status, open for the public to view.

It pledged a comprehensive legal overhaul in one sweep, with a major law to cut outdated rules, reduce duplication, and make it easier for people to earn a living; speed up business; and make the civil service faster.

It proposed digitising all services so every permit can be applied for online 100%, with transparent status tracking to reduce opportunities for officials to demand benefits. It also proposed producing “citizen versions” of laws to reduce discretionary interpretation by officials, which it described as a root cause of delays and corruption.

Democrat Party: 11 policies to curb corruption on all fronts

The Democrat Party proposed 11 anti-corruption policies, including pushing draft legislation on revising and repealing unnecessary laws to reduce hidden economic costs and business obstacles, improve national competitiveness and attract foreign investment, and raise Thailand’s ease-of-doing-business ranking.

It proposed restructuring anti-corruption oversight bodies and constitutional independent agencies by urgently amending the constitution and related laws.

It proposed preventing corruption among political office-holders by increasing public participation in analysing irregularities in asset accounts; raising Thailand’s CPI ranking; and having parliament vet qualifications before appointing ministers to reduce the risk of appointing individuals with conflicts of interest to manage state budgets.

It proposed transparent, auditable budgets through a ThailandGovernment Watch platform, allowing the public to track project status in their areas and report suspected corruption immediately when delays or lack of transparency are detected.

It proposed draft legislation requiring the state to disclose information, and developing mobile government services to increase transparency and reduce corruption—while opening opportunities for the private sector to build on public data to create new businesses and return income to the country.

“Kla Tham” declares crackdown on grey capital

The Kla Tham Party proposed anti-corruption policies through two main initiatives:

1. “Fast state in 30 days – Thai business can move forward” — review and improve laws and regulations; develop a digital OnePlatform and central databases; improve workflows; train personnel; implement change management; and apply monitoring, evaluation and transparency checks.
2. Crack down on grey capital and dismantle corruption — tackle corruption at the source by making laws clearer, fairer and more modern; reduce vague wording and loopholes; and reduce legal ambiguity that forces enforcement to rely on officials’ discretion, which leads to selective enforcement and demands for benefits. It argued this approach is more cost-effective than simply increasing penalties or expanding powers at the “end of the chain”, because it makes corruption “harder, riskier, and not worth it.”