ARTICLE 207
CDC chief rules out return of power to bureaucrats
NITIPOL KIRAVANICH,
KHANITTHA THEPPHAJORN
THE NATION



BANGKOK: -- THE CHIEF constitution drafter yesterday defended the new system of appointing civil servants under Article 207 of the new charter, insisting that it does not promote 'bureaucratic polity' - more power to the bureaucrats, as many National Reform Council (NRC) members fear.

Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) chairman Borwornsak Uwanno also sought to allay fears that the new constitution would result in weak governments in the future.

Borwornsak said that the country's two largest political parties would still be the same after the new charter takes effect. He said the new constitution was written to try to prevent political parties winning more MP seats than the votes they actually obtain.

He said the clause that allows non-MPs to become prime minister was written to prevent "Thailand's bitter experience" from happening again. He was referring to a political deadlock after the House of Representatives was dissolved in December 2013.

Borwornsak said that allowing a non-MP to become government head was not against international practice.

"There have been many criticisms on the article claiming it would strengthen 'bureaucratic polity', but the system was from the suggestion of English diplomats. This system would prevent the cases similarly to that of Thawil Pliensri," Borwornsak said.

Thawil, who was secretary general of the National Security Council, was transferred to an inactive post as an adviser at the PM's Office Ministry during the Yingluck Shinawatra administration. He challenged the move and won after the Administrative Court ruled that the transfer was unlawful in 2014.

Article 207 stipulates that the process of appointing or transferring government officials must abide by an ethical system. The charter also requires an appointing a committee to give a nod for the transfer or appointment of senior officials of the rank of director general and permanent secretary or the equivalent. The panel would be made up of seven members, with two experts from the Office of Civil Service Commission, three chosen from former permanent secretaries, and two from chairman of ethical committees from each ministry.

Many NRC members voiced concern that this system with the committee would weaken the executive and boost 'bureaucratic polity'. They claimed the process of transferring or appointing a permanent secretary did not stipulate the participation of a minister as before, and this could make Thailand the only country to use such a system. They also reasoned that the Article could obstruct the civil appointments.

CDC member Preecha Vajrabhaya defended the Article before the NRC by insisting that the article would not create a bureaucratic polity, rather it would benefit the country as a whole.

CDC member Jade Donavanik said Article 207 would in fact elevate the standard of Thailand's appointing of senior government officials, reasoning that other European countries have been using a similar system to appoint their officials.

Jade claimed the decision was made after he met with many foreign diplomats from democratic and developed countries such as Britain, Australia, New Zealand and even the United States. "Appointing government officials under an ethical system will benefit the people, and they [the people] will have their officials who possess decent qualifications to help administer the country, rather than the previous system where government officials were appointed because they had good relations and connections with politicians," Jade argued.

But NRC member Narong Buddhichiwin questioned if the system suited Thailand. He proposed that the system should include ministers having authority in scrutinising the transfer and appointment process.

Meanwhile, Alongkorn Ponlaboot, secretary to the NRC's whips committee, warned yesterday that drafters working on the constitution should make changes to the charter draft, as suggested by members of the NRC. He said the council expected CDC members to review their draft as recommended by the NRC.

"The NRC hopes that the CDC will review the draft and consider the proposals reasonably. The NRC members will certainly see if the proposals are followed when they vote on whether to support the draft constitution," he said.

But CDC spokesman Lertrat Ratanavanich said the drafters would not make changes to the clauses involving key matters - such as the electoral system and the way senators gained their positions. "We will leave the original clauses unchanged because these issues are about the political structure and involve so many clauses."

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/CDC-chief-rules-out-return-of-power-to-bureaucrats-30258556.html


-- The Nation 2015-04-23

"the new system of appointing civil servants . . . does not promote 'bureaucratic polity'

And sitting on a hot stove doesn't burn my rear end.

"the new system of appointing civil servants . . . does not promote 'bureaucratic polity'

And sitting on a hot stove doesn't burn my rear end.

and your solution to stopping MP's placing their lapdogs in senior Civil Service positions is ?

IMO this was an absolute no-brainer and one of the most important and required changes to prevent governments placing their own people in high powered positions which ultimately allowed corruption to run unchecked and was one of the major factors that allowed the unpresidented/unchallenged level of abuse propagated by the last government of which only a fraction has been so far exposed, it is part of a structure of change that will make it difficult for politicians to propagate their evil deeds without risk of exposure

One option would be for a committee of bureaucrats to approve an appointment nominated by the government or vice-versa or a short list of nominations to be provided from one group to the other to either select from or reject totally. This would lead to compromise between government and civil service and accountability of bureaucracy to electorate.

In light of the culture that prevails in this country and the general attitude and intellect of the public there is little hope that there will be any significant changes in the modus operandi of any future government, nor is there likely to be any real improvement.

Just more of the same under a different banner. For a country that has been limping for decades it is going to be a hard struggle to walk properly.