The public has been in uproar for more than a week over the restoration of stupas at the iconic Temple of Dawn, a national heritage and landmark tourist destination of the capital.
Critics have lashed out at the restoration work, a five-year effort that kicked off in 2013, alleging that it is not up to standard and is a disgrace to national pride. Suspicions have also lingered over the mass removal of old ceramic items, priceless artefacts in the art market, from the restored stupas. Many have alleged some involved in the project may have made inappropriate gains, as the Fine Arts Department allows the sale of those artefacts as items for worship.
It was reported that nearly 40% of old ceramic items or about 120,000 from a total of 300,000 were removed, with many not replaced properly.
The Fine Arts Department, however, has strongly defended the work which has been completed just in time for the celebration of 250 years since the founding of Thon Buri, the former capital before Bangkok was established by the Chakri Dynasty on the eastern side of the Chao Phraya River.
The work was carried out by the construction firm Preeyakij. According to local media reports, the company won the bid for the 28.9-million-baht restoration contract, and is scheduled to complete its task by Oct 30 this year.
The company, formerly named Preeya Thurakij at the time it won the bid, is a general construction firm that does all kinds of building work. Some critics cast doubt on the company's ability to do a job that requires artistic skills like the restoration of ancient stupas at the Temple of Dawn.
The debate then broadened to materials used in the work.
The Fine Arts Department conceded that the craftsmanship of workers today is inferior to that of the old days, but said it was still acceptable.
More importantly, the controversy raises major questions about regulations governing the minimal bid price system for state projects. Media reports said seven construction firms participated in the bidding contest for the Temple of Dawn restoration in 2014, but Preeyakij won the contest with two huge bid discounts that it submitted within half an hour.
The public has the right to question whether the lowest price offer means compromises over the quality of work where skilled craftsmanship is required.
The price bidding system may be fine for general construction work, but not for a project involving historical buildings that are our national heritage.
Before this, the Fine Arts Department had its own craftsmen to take care of restoration work at historical buildings across the country. However, the department's limited workforce generally caused lengthy delays, and to solve the problem it gave up doing the work itself.
The turning point was in 1992 when the restoration of Phanom Rung historical park in Buri Ram dragged on for some two decades. That forced the Fine Arts Department to consider hiring construction firms to do the job under a price bidding system in the hope it would accelerate the work.
Under the system, the agency would hand the work to the company that submitted the lowest bid.
Since then, the agency has faced a series of controversies as some construction firms have lacked the expertise and skills required for restoration work at historical sites. The case of the Chiang Mai-based Wat Chedi Luang restoration is still vivid in people's memories after more than 20 years.
The Temple of Dawn case is just the latest, and most controversial scandal to rock the Fine Arts Department.
It is high time the agency reviews its restoration practices and comes up with a new system that enables it to complete its mission: maintaining national heritage and pride.