Police reform panel’s first duties clear enough

The Cabinet on Tuesday endorsed plans to establish a 36-member committee to recommend reforms in the police force, as required by the Constitution that came into effect on April 6. Headed by retired General Boonsang Niampradit, a former supreme commander of the armed forces, the panel will consist of five senior state officials – the permanent secretaries of Finance, Interior and Justice, the attorney general and the secretary general of the Courts of Justice. It also has 15 current and former police officers and 15 academics and other specialists in pertinent fields.
Seeking to improve efficiency in the police force, the Constitution directs the panel to amend and revise laws related to its duties, powers and objectives and the management of personnel. It is to “guarantee that police officers receive appropriate remuneration, that appointments and transfers are handled with fairness, and that consideration of allowances and merits is done clearly in accordance with a merit system. 
“In considering appointments and transfers,” the charter states, “regard must be given to seniority in combination with knowledge and competence, so that police officers can perform the duties independently without being under the mandate of any person, efficiently, and with pride in the performance of their duties.”
The 200,000-strong police force has been tainted with frequent accusations and occasional proof of corruption, along with internal complaints of unfair appointments and transfers. There have been charges of prime police positions being offered to the highest-bidding candidate. The winner gets to share in the massive windfall from underground and illegal businesses operating with tacit police approval. Such lofty posts are said to command millions of baht each, varying with the jurisdiction and scope of power.
The Constitution does not directly mention corruption, but it does cite common issues that prompt police officers to seek and accept bribes, such as inadequate salaries.
The reform panel doesn’t have a lot of time to get the job done. It is constitutionally bound to complete its mission within a year of the charter’s promulgation, which means its mandate expires in nine months. To save time, the committee should start by boning up on police-reform studies and recommendations that have been around for years. There are already plenty of experts who could offer advice and expedite the process further.
There is no “penalty” in the Constitution should the panel fail to complete its work on time, nor any requirement for follow-up efforts. If the work is incomplete when the deadline arrives, it says, “the appointment and transfer of police personnel shall be carried out on the basis of seniority in accordance with rules prescribed by the Cabinet”.
Committee members will have to quickly establish that they deserve their positions. Everyone is counting on seeing effective reforms at long last. At the very least, we expect to see measures proposed to enhance efficiency and, since the wholesale elimination of corruption seems too much to wish for, its curtailment. 
Reforming the police force should not stop at revising existing laws. Efforts should also be 
undertaken to make honest police officers proud about what they do, while at the same time assuring their corrupt colleagues of severe punishment or sacking. Increasing salaries for junior ranks is an obvious first step, enabling the honest ones to live decently.