Only summary of politicians’ assets ‘will hurt anti-graft fight’

[rooster59]

Only summary of politicians’ assets ‘will hurt anti-graft fight’

By KASAMAKORN CHANWANPEN 
PIYAPORN WONGRUANG 
THE NATION 

 

 

GRAFT BUSTERS fear the provision in the new National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) organic bill that the agency only publicly publish a “summary”, not a detailed report of the assets declared by political office holders and commissioners of independent bodies, could weaken transparency and cripple public scrutiny of corruption.

 

The bill has already passed the first reading by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) earlier this month and is currently being revised by an ad hoc committee before returning to the table again for the second and third readings.

 

Mana Nimitmongkol, director of the Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand (ACT), said the new provision would unnecessarily undermine scrutiny of corruption by the media and the general people.

 

In the past, the media and the people could help scrutinise politicians, as they were allowed to see the complete reports, he said. More than half of the scrutiny had been initiated by the public, and the government agencies took them from there, he added.

 

“Remember, the people have more eyes and ears than a handful of busy government officials,” Mana pointed out.

 

Jade Donavanik, an adviser to the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) responsible for the initial draft, said the new provision was the result of the drafters’ opinion that it could help lighten the workload of the NACC.

Jade explained that in reality, the general people as well as the media did not really use the detailed report. He pointed out that of the 500 asset items, people usually were interested in and highlighted only 10 or 20.

 

Although the NACC would only produce and publish a summary of the assets, Jade said people and the media could still have access to the detailed assets list. This, however, might require a little paperwork, he said.

 

Mana did not agree with the argument that publishing the detailed assets list would impose a huge burden on the NACC.

 

“Everything is provided by the politicians,” he said. All that the NACC has to do is disclose the papers to the people, Mana added.

 

Review of suggestion likely

 

Despite the contention that people could still have access to the report, Mana was concerned that there might be some conditions. For instance, they would perhaps allow only stakeholders or people affected by the matter, he added.

 

Jade, who is a member of the ad hoc committee revising the NACC bill, said this provision was not found to be controversial at all in the meeting. However, since it had received the media attention maybe when the committee discusses the stipulation again in detail, they could reconsider it, he added.

 

Another CDC member, Chartchai na Chiangmai, provided another reason for the controversial provision, saying there must be a balance between transparency and privacy.

 

Chartchai rejected the notion that this would compromise the transparency secured in the old law, which requires political holders taking or leaving office to report their assets, which would be later released in detail to the public.

 

The drafter said the NACC is given the authority by the new charter to handle the issue, including determining who must report their assets. By law, the NACC would be required to scrutinise the assets in detail and safeguard the information in case irregularities occur.

 

Since the 1997 Constitution, Cabinet members have been required to declare their assets when entering and leaving office to the NACC to reveal them to the public. Several politicians had been scrutinised because of this law such as the late Maj-General Sanan Kachornprasart who was later ousted from his interior minister post and banned from politics for five years for making a false declaration of assets.

 

*************************************

MATTERS OF CONCERN IN BILL

 

Controversial points surrounding the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) organic bill

• Declaration of assets by government officials at all levels

   

  Many legislators viewed that only higher-ranking officials needed to report their assets to the NACC. The rest could report to their superiors only. Otherwise, the agency would have too heavy a workload.

• No publication of the complete assets list

   

  The law requires not only political office holders but also |commissioners in independence agencies, as well as judges of the Constitutional Court, to disclose their assets. However, the controversial point was that the detailed list would not be open to the public. Critics are concerned this might undermine public scrutiny of potential corruption.

• Checks and balances

   

  The bill tasks the Office of the Auditor-General with scrutinising the NACC. It is concerned that the anti-graft agency might lose its |independence and its work might be compromised. The NACC argued that there were already existing measures to efficiently prevent |misconduct and fraud. But the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC), which drafted the bill, insisted that the NACC must be held in check by other agencies, too.

• Resetting the commissioners to square one

   

  The CDC held on to its principle that any commissioners failing to meet the new qualifications set out in the Constitution should be |dismissed. However, opponents fear the reset could affect the NACC’s work. The agency was working on many cases and requiring the new commissioners to take up all the work might prove too difficult.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30331340

 

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-11-11

[stephen tracy]

"For instance, they would perhaps allow only stakeholders or people affected by the matter, he added. "... All people are affected by state corruption.  All of Thailand has suffered due the corruption of those at the top forever and a day, and this looks set to continue.  I would love to see the anti-corruption, white knights of the Junta explain how they became so incredibly rich.  

[Samui Bodoh]

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

Although the NACC would only produce and publish a summary of the assets, Jade said people and the media could still have access to the detailed assets list. This, however, might require a little paperwork, he said.

 

Mana did not agree with the argument that publishing the detailed assets list would impose a huge burden on the NACC.

 

“Everything is provided by the politicians,” he said. All that the NACC has to do is disclose the papers to the people, Mana added.

The idea that all could be seen by the public by way of "a little paperwork" is a red herring. If there were no issues releasing the declarations after some paperwork, there should be no issues releasing it without paperwork.

 

This provision would allow the NACC to decide whose assets get declared publicly and whose don't.  

 

In light of the very low regard many people have for the NACC, this is a terrible provision.

 

If you want to be in Parliament or the hold a high level post in an 'independent agency', then release it all. Or don't take the job.

 

Period

[stephen tracy]

3 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

The idea that all could be seen by the public by way of "a little paperwork" is a red herring. If there were no issues releasing the declarations after some paperwork, there should be no issues releasing it without paperwork.

 

This provision would allow the NACC to decide whose assets get declared publicly and whose don't.  

 

In light of the very low regard many people have for the NACC, this is a terrible provision.

 

If you want to be in Parliament or the hold a high level post in an 'independent agency', then release it all. Or don't take the job.

 

Period

Sorry Samui Bodoh, but you don't understand "Thainess".  Only civilian politicians steal, the military and their masters are perfectly entitled to loot the country.  

[Jip99]

5 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

Sorry Samui Bodoh, but you don't understand "Thainess".  Only civilian politicians steal, the military and their masters are perfectly entitled to loot the country.  

 

The precedent being set most recently by your idol... although he tried to dress it up 5hrough Shin Corporation and other devious family related robbing corporates.

[Bob12345]

6 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

The precedent being set most recently by your idol... although he tried to dress it up 5hrough Shin Corporation and other devious family related robbing corporates.

If you really think that Taksin invented corruption in thailand, or even stands out in thai history, then you are up for a big surprise if you ever open up a thai history book ( not one rewritten by the junta).

[wavemanwww]

What a crock of lies. Such as too much paper work to investigate.. What working out their corrupt money and where it came from and this so called agency is as corrupt as the rest. Love Thailand

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jip99]

6 hours ago, Bob12345 said:

If you really think that Taksin invented corruption in thailand, or even stands out in thai history, then you are up for a big surprise if you ever open up a thai history book ( not one rewritten by the junta).

 

Well done Bob...... Thai rak Thaksin.

 

 

[seajae]

this is not good, they need to show full disclosure so everyone knows the truth or what they claim is the truth, this is just a way of hiding it. It also needs to include the  top people  from all the govt departments as well as police and armed forces hierachy so corruption is well and truly covered as this is where a lot of it takes place. This way people that may know the truth can then report false claims as needed. This is just one group taking care of themselves and all their mates