Thais generally believe the National Anti-Corruption Commission should file cases through the Office of the Attorney General instead of directly to the court, an opinion poll by the National Institute for Development Administration has found.
The Nida poll was carried out on Jan 5-9 on 1,250 people of all education levels and occupations throughout the country to gauge their opinion on whether the NACC should file to the court or the OAG.
Most, or 41.6%, of the respondents said the NACC should be required to go through the OAG in line with proper justicial procedures and for the sake of transparency. But 34.72% said it should have the power to take corruption cases directly to the court; 13.92% said the cases should be submitted through the OAG and that the NACC could file directly with the court only if the OAG does not do so within a given period of time; and 9.76% had no comment.
On whether corruption cases should have a statute of limitations, 58.24% said "no", reasoning that this was to ensure suspects do not escape punishment; 25.76% said "yes", reasoning that a fixed time forces authorities to wrap up cases; 14.08% said the statute of limitations should not be used when an accused has escaped; and 1.92% had no comment.
Asked whether government officials should be required to declare their assets and liabilities, 55.20% said this should be a requirement for officials of all levels; 20.16% said the requirement should be applied to officials from the level of division chief and higher; 17.76% said this should apply to heads of departments and higher; 5.28% said government officials should not be required to declare assets; and 1.60% had no comment.
To a proposal that the Anti-Money Laundering Office and the Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission be placed under the NACC, 55.84% agreed, saying it would reduce duplication of work; 34% disagreed, reasoning that these agencies should be independent from one another; and 10.16% no comment.