Clad in official khaki uniforms, a group of kamnan and phuyai ban, local leaders at the subdistrict and village levels respectively, recently made their presence felt in Bangkok as they gathered to call for the National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) to rethink its proposal to limit their terms in office.
Currently, the Local Administration Act enables kamnan and phuyai ban to keep their posts, once they are elected, until they reach the retirement age of 60. But the NRSA is proposing to lawmakers and the government that the law be amended to limit the tenure of these local leaders to five years when they would have to run for another election, similar to MPs.
As members of the Association of Tambon and Village Heads of Thailand, those kamnan and phuyai ban, who appeared upset, submitted a petition calling on the NRSA to reconsider its proposal which suggests kamnan will be elected by villagers, not by phuyai ban as has been the case.
While the amendment proposes the five-year rule will have immediate effects on kamnan, it allows current village heads to keep their jobs until the age of 60 and then the five-year limit will be applied in their constituencies.
Anchalee Kongrut writes about the environment in the Life section, Bangkok Post.
Their grudges are understandable. Yet their resistance is too much to bear. Both positions are part of Thailand's unique decentralisation of administrative functions that has shaped our political landscape. The first elections for these posts were held in Ayutthaya province 125 years ago, during the reign of King Rama V. In the old days, these village and tambon heads kept their jobs until the day they died.
Both positions were created to serve as a "bridge" between the central governing body in Bangkok and peripheral regions and villages. They are more like officials of the Interior Ministry and wear khaki uniforms. Like officials, they retire at the age of 60 and receive just 8,000 baht a month as a salary. They are perceived as the "white police", with power to enforce the law on small criminal and civil offences and help the government combat illicit drug problems.
Their existence is in parallel to Thailand's modern decentralisation system in which local people elected leaders and councillors of the Tambon Administration Office and the Provincial Administration Office which are assigned to develop and legislate in their localities.
Over the past two decades, politicians tried to control and manipulate both positions because they are gatekeepers to almost 80,000 villages and potential voters. Civilian governments, like those run by the Pheu Thai Party, tried to make both positions electable every four years. But junta regimes and pro-centralisation governments were adamant about the need to keep both positions under state control.
I am a native of Bangkok, so I never have had a chance to vote for phuyai ban or kamnan. But I wished I could as there should be an intermediary in every community to serve as a bridge between authorities and people.
I wonder why the NRSA does not start holding a public consultation on the roles, terms and selection methods for both positions. These local leaders need to air their views. Under Section 70 in the new charter, they need to arrange public consultation prior to any law amendment which affects the livelihoods of people.
Indeed, there are many topics for such public consultation, besides the pitch that an election is a magic pill to solve all problems.
Additionally, the debate does not include the evaluation process needed for both positions. Currently, the Ministry of Interior evaluates their performance. I think this lopsided form of evaluation must be revised too. The evaluation must include the public.
There is a question over the merit of elections too. Villagers elected kamnan and phuyai ban every four years during the 1990s. The elections went on for about a decade, before money politics and the patronage system reasserted themselves.
Even though position allowances for both jobs are meagre -- only 7,000-8,000 baht a month -- Matichon newspaper reported some candidates spent as much as three million baht on their election campaigns.
Don't get me wrong. I am in favour of democracy and elections, as it is the only way we get the chance to remove public office-holders we dislike. You cannot do that with a military government.
But if we cannot clean up the patronage system and educate our voters not to expect short-term favours, the regular election of kamnan and phuyai ban will become another fanfare of vote-buying.