NATIONAL REFORM COUNCIL
NRC panels admit they followed different selection procedures
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Committees selecting candidates for the National Reform Council (NRC) may not have followed the same set of procedures for the 11 categories of people on the new body.

Some may have adopted different criteria and methods when choosing 50 applicants for each category from some 6,000 candidates vying for an NRC seat.

Some selection committees admitted yesterday they had a tough job in picking 50 qualified candidates from such a large number of applicants, as they did not know them all and could not cross-check their backgrounds.

Some committees - like that working on the political category - based their decisions on backgrounds and the vision of applicants. But the panel for the miscellaneous category said it allowed members to use their own judgement when picking applicants.

Meanwhile, the selection process at provincial level has been marred by allegations of candidate "fixing", which threatens to delay the process.

Banyong Suwannapong, an NRC selection committee member for the miscellaneous category, said that seven members of his committee separated applicants into five groups. Ten qualified applicants were selected for each group, bringing the total to 50 nominees to be presented to the NCPO.

The seven committee members used their personal judgement to pick candidates they believed were qualified, he said. They then held a consultative discussion before forwarding the list of 50 nominees to the Election Commission.

Banyong said that when his panel could not settle on 50 nominees in the first selection round, they held another meeting to set the selection criteria. The committee focused on applicants whom they knew, applicants who were not well known but with achievements in areas like Chiang Mai and the three southern border provinces, and the applicants' vision on what they want to achieve as NRC members.

After they named 50 nominees, the selection committee voted unanimously to support them.

Banyong admitted the selection was tough because the committee did not know all the applicants well. The committee could not cross-check if any candidates were seen as negative by the public or have been criticised.

The Election Commission, however, assisted the selection committees by checking candidates' backgrounds in terms of legal records. Banyong ensured that his committee picked nominees in a transparent and judicial manner, which the public could check through its meeting records.

He said the panel was confident all applicants they picked were competent and qualified and, regardless of who the NCPO picks, the committee would be satisfied with the final result.

Former Thammasat University rector Suraphol Nitikraipot, who serves as spokesman of the NRC selection committee for the political category, said his seven-member panel allowed members to use their own judgement in choosing applicants and discussing the list of selected nominees. Applicants voted in by four or more committee members secured nomination. Results showed that 40 applicants received four or more votes. Seven selection panel members voted for the same eight applicants and six committee members chose the same six applicants, Suraphol said.

As the number of selected applicants fell short of 50 in the first round, the committee was asked to pick applicants by scrutinising their background and judging them on their vision.

He said the committee also focused on a diversity of applicants, wanting to recruit experts in as many different fields as possible. Suraphol added that his committee did not have a chance to cross-check the backgrounds of applicants.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/NRC-panels-admit-they-followed-different-selection-30243989.html


-- The Nation 2014-09-24

Would it have been too difficult to have a set of standardized criteria issued with the warning that any deviation would result in selections being rendered null and void ?

This type of mess will only add to the suggestions of selections being ' fixed '.

It looks like the reform committees need to be reformed first before we can even think of reforms.

Well at least there was admittance of the facts unlike the previous administration who denied any and all accusations concerning their self promoting power wise, judicial wise and financial wise manipulations of any sorts with totally straight faces and well lined pockets.

"Banyong ensured that his committee picked nominees in a transparent and judicial manner, which the public could check through its meeting records."

It may be the first time in many a year that I see something like this written in Thailand.

Well at least there was admittance of the facts unlike the previous administration who denied any and all accusations concerning their self promoting power wise, judicial wise and financial wise manipulations of any sorts with totally straight faces and well lined pockets.

Yes, all previous administrations were bad, but why try to compare to bad eggs?

We're starting afresh, with ''Reforms'', so ''We're better than crooks'' is not a reassuring boast.

Who is to say one set of procedures is better than another. Always difficult to define the best criteria and procedure, (a little like

porn or/ art, "I may not be able to define it but I sure can tell the difference when I see it") If the candidates chosen were selected by people

who were genuinely trying to pick the best candidates I am sure the majority of the 50 selected will do a good job.