CDC adds new mechanism for independent bodies to check government policies or projects

BANGKOK, 16 January 2016 (NNT) - Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) president Meechai Ruchupan said the panel has added a new mechanism for independent organizations to work proactively.

Apart from inspecting complaints, they can look into any issues which might allegedly lack transparency without any filed complaints and reduce probe process by having other independent agencies help or cooperate with them.

In addition, the new mechanism will allow the Office of the Auditor General, the Office of the National Anti-Corruption Commission and the Election Commission to take joint steps if the government is found to have implemented any policy or project which might probably damage the country. For that reason, they can submit a motion to the cabinet or parliament to have such policy or project suspended, pending investigation.

-- NNT 2016-01-17

Hooray! Another level of bureaucracy! This should speed things up.

The entire article is about as clear as mud.

Edited January 16, 201610 yr by jaywalker

' INDEPENDENT ' ! Yes right !

' INDEPENDENT ' ! Yes right !

Agree! The problem is that these so-called "independent" organisations are obviously tainted by a particular political colour.

Great, another body that will be ' independent ' and free of all external pressures.

Now all that's needed is to free these bodies from all the internal pressure and requirement to comply with what they're told to do from those who appoint them.

they need honest people to fill the posts

I expect even Abhisit will have an objection to such undemocratic intrusion into the operation of the executive branch.

I thought I had my fair share of education. However it turns out I’m not smart enough to understand this country.

Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) president Meechai Ruchupan said they want:

“independent bodies to check government policies or projects”

How the hell is this possible to have anything independent under the rule of a military junta?

And who can explain to me how this is compatible with article 44?

Before you reply. If the answer turns out like: This is Thai-style democracy- I have no further questions...

The NNT strikes again! Sowing confusion among English speakers is all in a day's work.

Of course all posters till now come from countries where there are independent watchdogs who even pro-actively look into government matters to warn the government of possible issues.

Now if only we would get some info on how those watchdogs are 'protected' to be independent of political, commercial or pressure groups influence. That would help to advise the CDC in how it could be in Thailand's charter.

"Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) president Meechai Ruchupan said the panel has added a new mechanism for independent organizations to work proactively."

Ah...The fox has chosen other foxes to watch over the hens, declaring them to be independent with no obligation or need to fear those with the power to destroy them. This is getting curiouser and curiouser.

Land of oxymorons... and just morons.

Of course all posters till now come from countries where there are independent watchdogs who even pro-actively look into government matters to warn the government of possible issues.

Now if only we would get some info on how those watchdogs are 'protected' to be independent of political, commercial or pressure groups influence. That would help to advise the CDC in how it could be in Thailand's charter.

Agree. Yet the primary mechanism is simple: freedom of speech and freedom of association. Followed closely by reform of LM and libel laws, and expansion of the office of Auditor General.

In fact, if systemic reform was really in the offing, ideas like combining NACC and the Auditor General would be in play.

The combination of watchdog organisations whose memebers are appointed by a particular political faction, with vaguely defined principles that can be interpreted in any possible way! It makes the prefect weapon!

Of course all posters till now come from countries where there are independent watchdogs who even pro-actively look into government matters to warn the government of possible issues.

Now if only we would get some info on how those watchdogs are 'protected' to be independent of political, commercial or pressure groups influence. That would help to advise the CDC in how it could be in Thailand's charter.

Agree. Yet the primary mechanism is simple: freedom of speech and freedom of association. Followed closely by reform of LM and libel laws, and expansion of the office of Auditor General.

In fact, if systemic reform was really in the offing, ideas like combining NACC and the Auditor General would be in play.

'freedom of speech' and 'freedom of association' doesn't seem to help prevent politicians and/or government bureaucrats to be fraudulent.

I rather like the NACC to be independent but think the responsibilities of NACC/OAG and procedure of turning a case over from NACC to OAG needs much more thoughts.

The combination of watchdog organisations whose memebers are appointed by a particular political faction, with vaguely defined principles that can be interpreted in any possible way! It makes the prefect weapon!

Indeed 2006 saw someone trying just that. These watchdog agencies are set up independent without involvement of politicians and should be protected from such involvement.

The combination of watchdog organisations whose memebers are appointed by a particular political faction, with vaguely defined principles that can be interpreted in any possible way! It makes the prefect weapon!

Indeed 2006 saw someone trying just that. These watchdog agencies are set up independent without involvement of politicians and should be protected from such involvement.

I did not write politicians, but "political faction" which doesn't include only politicians.

Your post suggests that you think that in the current system, their members are chosen without any political bias. Let's look at a few examples:

- NACC's spokeman known for stating "We all know elections are evil"

- NHRC members nomination process highly criticised by international HR organisations (i.e. HRW). List of nominees include a hardcore proponent of LM law, known for having called for more aggressive application of LM Law

- all new nominees in these organisations (i.e. NACC) have to be endorsed by the Junta's NLA.

So, selected without direct involvement of politicians, maybe.... chosen without involving political motivers, I doubt it