| |
Root cause of
protest : sluggish bureaucracy
EDITORIAL: The Nation, July 28, 2000
The hunger strike by scores of protesting
villagers to pressure the Chuan Administration
to comply unconditionally with their 16-point list
of demands has become a high political drama
that must now be played out. Both the
government and Assembly of the Poor, which
organised the months-long protest, have stated
their cases after having exhausted all due
processes at the negotiating table. The
resulting confrontation is based on both sides'
firm belief in their ability to sway public opinion.
It is easy to understand why Tuesday's Cabinet
resolution did not solve the long-standing
problems facing poverty-stricken farmers, who
have been harshly affected by the construction
of dams and disputes with the Forestry
Department over land ownership in designated
forest reserves.
The Cabinet agreed to demands that the Pak
Mool Dam's gates be opened for four months a
year and that the Rasi Salai Dam's gates be
opened indefinitely, pending an in-depth study
of the dams' impacts on marine life.
But it refused to pay anything to some 2,000
families who claim they have not been
compensated for being evicted to make way for
the Sirindhorn Dam, completed in 1972.
The government also stood firm on its refusal to
review the Cabinet's June 1998 resolution,
which has been used as a guideline in the
demarcation of forest reserves and wildlife
sanctuaries. The villagers who have been
evicted or those who are facing eviction
naturally want the guidelines to be revised in
their favour.
The government had earlier appointed a neutral
committee to investigate the problems. The
committee recommended the government
immediately address the 16 cases as urgent
matters, particularly ecological damage caused
by the Pak Mool Dam that has seriously
affected the livelihoods of fishermen in the
area.
The protesters have accused the government of
failing to take appropriate action in compliance
with many of the committee's
recommendations.
In reaction to the Cabinet decision, the
protesting villagers, who have formed a
nation-wide network under the Assembly of the
Poor, vowed to dig in and intensify their
struggle to pressure the government to be more
accommodating to their demands.
With the latest Cabinet resolution, the Chuan
administration apparently is also prepared to
stick to its legalistic approach and stonewall the
demonstrators.
The wide publicity accorded to the long
drawn-out demonstration by about 3,000
Northeastern villagers, who have camped out in
front of Government House for months, does
not make these cases unique.
In fact, these recurring issues, involving
disputes between state authorities and poor
farmers over access to natural resources, have
hounded every government in recent years.
Most of the official responses have been
piecemeal, involving compensation payments
which may or may not adequately remedy the
often complicated and long-lasting effects on
the environment and the livelihoods of the
affected people.
Whatever the outcome of the showdown
between the Chuan administration and the
Assembly of the Poor, these problems will keep
coming back with the possibility social
disturbances will be created. That is, until
problem-solving mechanisms are put in place
that are universally trusted to provide lasting
solutions and give justice to all involved.
The current lack of public trust that a
democratically elected government can deliver
justice to all while serving to uphold the
interests of the majority of people suggests that
something is terribly wrong in the way
government mechanisms function.
Putting political parties into the seat of
government to run the country through regular
elections is only one aspect of democracy. But
this is hardly enough to ensure that the country
is run efficiently and smoothly. The elected
government must take effective control over the
country's bureaucracy to translate its policies
into practice to provide social justice, enforce
the law and regulations, ensure peace and
orderliness, and take good care of the poor
and the disadvantaged.
This government's and past governments'
failure to settle grievances of poverty-stricken
farmers efficiently, quickly and fairly points to
the root problem: their inability to reform the
bureaucracy through decentralisation of power.
Provincial and local government officials who
are supposed to know best the problems in
their areas are neither competent nor given the
power to provide remedial measures.
Otherwise, protesting villagers would be spared
the trouble of bringing their cases to Bangkok,
let alone staging a hunger strike to call attention
to their grievances.
Nor are these officials trained to be sufficiently
sensitive to the plight of people they are
supposed to serve. The long-term solutions to
these problems have more to do with fair
monetary compensation, strict enforcement of
law, compassion for the poor and
disadvantaged, and reliable scientific methods
to assess environmental impacts.
Unless Thailand successfully reforms the
bureaucracy to become more transparent and
accountable to the public, government policies
and actions will continue to be a blunt
instrument that not only does not solve
problems but often makes them worse.
The real impediment to efficient, timely
problem-solving measures is the unresponsive,
indifferent bureaucracy. If no government can
rely on a responsive bureaucracy to help it
make the right decisions to address people's
sufferings, then what is the point of having
governments go through the revolving door of
elections?
The Nation
|
|
