Crackdown needed to change public perception on corruption

It was the first to announce a policy of declining New Year gifts from well-wishers. This applied to directors, executives, branch managers and employees in general. These individuals are barred from receiving valuable gifts and bank clients are advised against making such offerings.

This year it is again at the forefront, sending out a similar message in November when corporate and individ¬ual clients usually scramble for gift ideas. I have to admire the bank for this initiative.

Many Thai people often refer to a survey that said Thai children nowa¬days were cool about corruption if they were also the beneficiaries. They put the blame on politicians, corporate chiefs and others. But few actions have been taken to eradicate corruption at the individual level.

In Thai society, juniors have a tradi¬tion of presenting gifts to seniors on major occasions, particularly during the New Year and the traditional New Year (Songkran). The seniors are reluc¬tant to decline these offerings, since that would be equivalent to snubbing good wishes.

However, the tradition becomes ugly when people focus more on the price of the gift, rather than viewing it as a token of gratitude or appreciation. The givers feel pressured into finding more valuable gifts the follow¬ing year, while the receivers tend to start expecting more expensive gifts every year.

The act of giving turns ugly when this involves gifts to people considered to have supported certain individuals and corporations.

In the weeks before New Year, news¬rooms in Bangkok welcome a parade of corporate PR people. They come with edible and non-edible items to thank the media for their support in the past year. People in the newsroom use this prac¬tice as a barometer to gauge the eco¬nomic health of the country. When the number of baskets pile up, that means the economy is doing great.

This vicious cycle could go on unchecked without actions from those involved. This year, joining the Bank of Ayudhya is Total Access Communication. It publicly announced a policy against New Year gifts.

What surprises me is that such an action does not appear to be coming from any government unit or agency.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission has fought hard to eradi¬cate corruption. There is a rule in place that government officials must not accept gifts valued at more than Bt3,000, but there is no way to enforce it. As I mentioned in one of my earlier pieces, the government of Singapore requires all officials to report all gifts and their estimated value. All gifts become state property and officials who are interested in any of the gifts have to buy them at their estimated value. In Thailand, it is more or less the judgement of the receiving officials.

Corruption has long been an ugly word in Thai society. It was the reason why many people in Bangkok and the big cities hated the previous govern¬ment and supported the 2014 coup. When General Prayut Chan-o-cha launched the coup and promised to return happiness to the Kingdom, he promised to eradicate corruption.

But it puzzled me greatly why his government has been rather slow on the graft scandal involving the con¬struction of Rajabhakti Park, which was carried out by a group of generals. Despite allegations, it was up to the generals to decide if they should resign or wait till the allegations were dismissed. When a group of red-shirt lead¬ers and activists attempted to visit the park, they were summoned to a military grilling. 

Two weeks ago there was a promise that the amount of money donated and the expen¬diture incurred on the project would be publicised for the sake of transparency. Yet to this day nothing has happened. What society has instead learned about is the arrest of a man who shared on the social media a graphic about alleged corruption in the project. 

The government’s supporters have turned a blind eye to this, but society is puzzled how sharing it is a felony when there is no clarity yet on the scandal. Also puzzling is the fact that the generals were allowed to use their own judgement whether they should resign while the probe is pending.

In the past, in a similar case, many civilian officials were suspended from their jobs or transferred to inactive posts.

All this makes the assumption more convincing that some generals had channelled some of the donations into their own pockets.

There are ways to prove corruption. The first thing is to take serious action. The action by the Bank of Ayudhya and DTAC are efforts to close the gate, to block undesirable temptation. But action is more necessary when a scandal occurs.

Only action and punishment will change people’s attitudes towards cor¬ruption. Society should learn that cor¬ruption can be prevented and that action will be taken regardless of the rank of the people implicated. In Thai society, where a group of people hon¬our rules wholeheartedly and others are looking for loopholes, only action will bring everyone to the same standard. And only that will change the widespread public belief that corruption isn’t such a bad thing.