National Reform Council or a talking shop?

Nearly 7,000 people from various walks of life, many of them belonging to the “famous and prominent” category, have allowed themselves to be nominated to go before the “screening committees”.

But don’t ask them whether they are confident that genuine reform can really take place. Nobody is sure what the ground rules for the debate are. But public expectations are high and that could mean we are in for some disappointment.

Those who have applied may not be “the best and the brightest” in the country but a good number are certainly among the best-known and most prominent figures in society.

There is no doubt in my mind that some are deadly serious about shaking up the country in various fields. But if the rules of the game aren’t laid down beforehand, they could be engaged in a free-for-all that may not reach any real conclusions that offer substantial reform policies in the end.

For one thing, it is still not clear how General Prayuth Chan-ocha, chief of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), will handpick those short-listed by the 11 panels appointed by the NCPO. He has said that no prescriptions have been laid down in advance and that he will base his judgements on merit. But then, one man’s choices will always come under scrutiny. And Prayuth’s decisions will inevitably come under the microscope since so many good people have stepped forward to offer their services and yet only a handful will be chosen.

The “chosen few”, however, won’t necessarily come up with a national reform agenda that represents the general views of the people. They may publicly represent respective non-profit organisations’ preferences, but since they won’t be chosen under a democratic system, their conclusions will be subject to some tough questioning – especially if their successful implementation can’t be guaranteed.

It is still not clear whether the 250 members of the NRC will be split into groups under headings of the 11 groups to discuss only their respective topics – or whether all members can express their opinions on all the issues covered by the NRC.

Neither has it been clarified how “free” the members will be to make proposals, challenge established views and raise “controversial” views in debate.

General Prayuth has said the NCPO won’t interfere with the NRC’s deliberations and that there will be no guidance from the military for NRC members. But since the members will be handpicked by the NCPO chief, the fear is that the discussions will fail to touch on some of the country’s most sensitive – and therefore most relevant – issues that will have far-reaching impacts on the future of Thailand.

Will the question, for example, of reform in the military establishment be raised and debated openly? What if some members propose that one of the key questions of national reform is how to prevent another coup being staged in the future?

Another question: Will the NRC be allowed to vote on whether the final list of proposed reform measures should be put to a national referendum? And if the issue should come up, will the NCPO chief reserve the right to veto the proposal? Nobody has been able to answer these vital questions, which will determine the quality of the reform process.

And despite all the hoopla about a “new reform agenda”, the risk of the National Reform Council becoming just another “talking shop” remains high – unless some serious effort is given to ensuring a robust, transparent and democratic process, all the way down from the very top of the current political pyramid.