Doubts over ‘graft-busting’ charter

By THE NATION

 

Abhisit Vejjajiva

 

Abhisit dismisses claims of 2017 constitution being ‘anticorruption’; calls it ‘marketing ploy’
 

VETERAN POLITICIANS say they are not convinced the Constitution can live up to its drafters’ claim of suppressing corruption.

 

However, a law professor who sat on the previous constitution drafting panel asserts the current charter will combat graft by preventing crooked people from entering politics – given the tough constitutional requirements for political officeholders.

 

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said the term “corruption-suppressing constitution” used for the present charter was just a “marketing ploy”.

 

The charter was promoted by the Constitution Drafting Commission, particularly its chairman Meechai Ruchupan, as a “corruption-suppressing constitution”.

 

Former prime minister Abhisit said that in reality the Constitution would not actually help combat graft as claimed. He pointed to clauses in the charter that he said would weaken rather than strengthen the fight against corruption.

 

Abhisit said, unlike its predecessor, this Constitution does not require that impeachment be sought against Cabinet members who are accused of corruption in a no-confidence debate. He said that censure debates alone would not lead to removal of corrupt Cabinet members as they would naturally get majority House support from government MPs.

 

Also, the Constitution does not allow MPs to directly sue any member of the National Anti-Corruption Commission suspected of failing to perform their duty, Abhisit noted. Any complaint must be submitted through the Parliament president, which makes it difficult for whistle-blowing politicians, he added.

 

Abhisit also said that although the Constitution has a clause that encourages public members to take part in scrutinising political officeholders, it is not easy for them to do so.

 

He was speaking during a panel discussion, “Will the Corruption-Suppressing Constitution Actually Work?”, held at Bangkok’s Miracle Grand Hotel. The event was organised by the National Legislative Assembly’s committee on political affairs, Public Administration Association, and National Institute of Development Administration (Nida).

 

Phongthep Thepkanjana, a key figure from the Pheu Thai Party, said the claim of suppressing corruption was “just propaganda” for the Constitution, which has been in effect since April last year. 

 

He viewed that the charter instead contains some provisions that actually promote corruption, particularly Article 265 that guarantees the ruling junta’s power to issue orders that are regarded as law. 

 

Phongthep, who previously served as deputy prime minister and justice minister, suggested that the charter must be amended to allow easier scrutiny of people in power and independent organisations charged with scrutinising officeholders.

 

Professor Banjerd Singkaneti said at the panel discussion that the Constitution by itself could not actually suppress corruption, which would need the addition of relevant laws and regulations.

 

“What the Constitution can do about suppressing corruption is to prevent dishonest people from entering the Thai political system. Qualifications have been clearly set,” he said.

 

The academic said a weakness in the charter regarding the fight against graft was that it gave “too much power” to state agencies. He called azfor empowering the civil sector through anti-corruption measures in a new organic law. Banjerd is former dean of Nida’s law faculty and a member of the post-coup Constitution Drafting Committee headed by Professor Borwornsak Uwanno, whose charter draft was rejected by the National Reform Council.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30345567

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-05-17

There are many, many flaws in the constitution in multiple areas. And no, it will not be a "graft-busting" constitution.

 

No piece of paper, however well-intentioned, is going to stop corruption. No law, however well-intentioned, is going to stop corruption. No regulation, however well-intentioned, is going to stop corruption. No rule, however well-intentioned, is going to stop corruption.

 

The flaw is in Thai society, ethics and culture; until Thais believe that corruption is wrong for everyone, not just for 'other' people, nothing will change. If Thais continue to believe that corruption is okay "if I benefit", then there is no hope.

 

There are many methods of combating corruption, but they all begin with society saying that it will not tolerate it anymore.

 

That hasn't happened in Thailand yet. And so it will continue...

 

1 hour ago, webfact said:

Abhisit dismisses claims of 2017 constitution being ‘anticorruption’; calls it ‘marketing ploy’

that's what politics is

Corruption is a way of life and a part of the culture of Thailand and is accepted as such by almost everybody. Those who are not on the take and suffer from it don't necessarily accept that it should happen but they seem to accept the inevitable.  

Those heavyweights who construct the "loose" anti-corruption rules have the most to lose by them; so consequently the rules are conveniently ignored and blind eyes get turned when convenient. 

Despite the anti-corruption rhetoric by the PM nothing will change. That is why he allowed himself 20 years to fix it. By that time he will have likely amassed his fortune and couldn't give a rat's about it.

 

Edited May 16, 20188 yr by Cadbury

You may call me a cynic (I would call myself a political realist), but I am truly not interested in anything Abhisit has to say: he (the happy whistle-blower of 2014 and Suthep hugger) is part of the reason that the country is in the disgraceful condition it is today. Abhisit occupies no position of higher moral ground whatsoever ...

 

 

Edited May 17, 20188 yr by Eligius

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

There are many methods of combating corruption, but they all begin with society saying that it will not tolerate it anymore.

Totally true. Unfortunately there are many hurdles put in place to stop "whistle blowers".

 

Graft busting, I doubt it.

 

 “corruption-suppressing ...." AKA we will hide it from public and media view - yes, I can see that happening.

 

1 minute ago, Eligius said:

You may call me a cynic (I would call myself a political realist), but I really am no longer interested in anything Abhisit has to say: he is part of the reason that the country is in the disgraceful condition it is today. Abhisit holds no position of higher moral ground whatsoever ...

I understand your thinking about Abhisit but his interpretation of the "graft busting" charter maybe correct?

add corruption figures into each budget ....no other solution is possible..period.

Edited May 17, 20188 yr by mok199
speliings

Abhisit.

Who cares now?

2 hours ago, mok199 said:

add corruption figures into each budget ....no other solution is possible..period.

Hypothetically speaking, to stop corruption in it's tracks would likely mean a temporary collapse of the economy. It would certainly take some re-jigging to get it back on an honest track after the corrupt money was suddenly taken out of the total economic cashflow. 

Thailand has one of the largest Black Economies in the world. Last report was that 59% of the Thai economy was legitimate while 41% is not recorded in any shape or form. That doesn't mean that the 41% is all corruption money; a lot of it would be visible and invisible untaxed trading.

Edited May 17, 20188 yr by Cadbury

Corruption is worse. Thats for sure!

2 hours ago, Eligius said:

You may call me a cynic (I would call myself a political realist), but I am truly not interested in anything Abhisit has to say: he (the happy whistle-blower of 2014 and Suthep hugger) is part of the reason that the country is in the disgraceful condition it is today. Abhisit occupies no position of higher moral ground whatsoever ...

 

 

Contrary to the morally high standing PT figures that ooze goodness?

I like Mark, Abhisit, he is a very intelligent man, with political experience.

I found that he is very approachable and good to talk with in English as well.

  He was not afraid of saying his own personal opinion of other political people

when I asked him. Many Thai people do trust him more than some posters on

this forum, and I hope he gets back in a the leader of the next government.