- •Public Administration And Public Policy
- •Contents
- •Acknowledgments
- •About The Authors
- •Comments On Purpose and Methods
- •Contents
- •1.1 Introduction
- •1.2 Culture
- •1.3 Colonial Legacies
- •1.3.1 British Colonial Legacy
- •1.3.2 Latin Legacy
- •1.3.3 American Legacy
- •1.4 Decentralization
- •1.5 Ethics
- •1.5.1 Types of Corruption
- •1.5.2 Ethics Management
- •1.6 Performance Management
- •1.6.2 Structural Changes
- •1.6.3 New Public Management
- •1.7 Civil Service
- •1.7.1 Size
- •1.7.2 Recruitment and Selection
- •1.7.3 Pay and Performance
- •1.7.4 Training
- •1.8 Conclusion
- •Contents
- •2.1 Introduction
- •2.2 Historical Developments and Legacies
- •2.2.1.1 First Legacy: The Tradition of King as Leader
- •2.2.1.2 Second Legacy: A Tradition of Authoritarian Rule, Centralization, and Big Government
- •2.2.1.3 Third Legacy: Traditions of Hierarchy and Clientelism
- •2.2.1.4 Fourth Legacy: A Tradition of Reconciliation
- •2.2.2.1 First Legacy: The Tradition of Bureaucratic Elites as a Privileged Group
- •2.2.2.2 Second Legacy: A Tradition of Authoritarian Rule, Centralization, and Big Government
- •2.2.2.3 Third Legacy: The Practice of Staging Military Coups
- •2.2.2.4 Fourth Legacy: A Tradition for Military Elites to be Loyal to the King
- •2.2.3.1 First Legacy: Elected Politicians as the New Political Boss
- •2.2.3.2 Second Legacy: Frequent and Unpredictable Changes of Political Bosses
- •2.2.3.3 Third Legacy: Politicians from the Provinces Becoming Bosses
- •2.2.3.4 Fourth Legacy: The Problem with the Credibility of Politicians
- •2.2.4.1 First Emerging Legacy: Big Businessmen in Power
- •2.2.4.2 Second Emerging Legacy: Super CEO Authoritarian Rule, Centralization, and Big Government
- •2.2.4.3 Third Emerging Legacy: Government must Serve Big Business Interests
- •2.2.5.1 Emerging Legacy: The Clash between Governance Values and Thai Realities
- •2.2.5.2 Traits of Governmental Culture Produced by the Five Masters
- •2.3 Uniqueness of the Thai Political Context
- •2.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •Appendix A
- •Contents
- •3.1 Thailand Administrative Structure
- •3.2 History of Decentralization in Thailand
- •3.2.1 Thailand as a Centralized State
- •3.2.2 Towards Decentralization
- •3.3 The Politics of Decentralization in Thailand
- •3.3.2 Shrinking Political Power of the Military and Bureaucracy
- •3.4 Drafting the TAO Law 199421
- •3.5 Impacts of the Decentralization Reform on Local Government in Thailand: Ongoing Challenges
- •3.5.1 Strong Executive System
- •3.5.2 Thai Local Political System
- •3.5.3 Fiscal Decentralization
- •3.5.4 Transferred Responsibilities
- •3.5.5 Limited Spending on Personnel
- •3.5.6 New Local Government Personnel System
- •3.6 Local Governments Reaching Out to Local Community
- •3.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2 Corruption: General Situation in Thailand
- •4.2.1 Transparency International and its Corruption Perception Index
- •4.2.2 Types of Corruption
- •4.3 A Deeper Look at Corruption in Thailand
- •4.3.1 Vanishing Moral Lessons
- •4.3.4 High Premium on Political Stability
- •4.4 Existing State Mechanisms to Fight Corruption
- •4.4.2 Constraints and Limitations of Public Agencies
- •4.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •5.1 Introduction
- •5.2 History of Performance Management
- •5.2.1 National Economic and Social Development Plans
- •5.2.2 Master Plan of Government Administrative Reform
- •5.3 Performance Management Reform: A Move Toward High Performance Organizations
- •5.3.1 Organization Restructuring to Increase Autonomy
- •5.3.2 Process Improvement through Information Technology
- •5.3.3 Knowledge Management Toward Learning Organizations
- •5.3.4 Performance Agreement
- •5.3.5 Challenges and Lessons Learned
- •5.3.5.1 Organizational Restructuring
- •5.3.5.2 Process Improvement through Information Technology
- •5.3.5.3 Knowledge Management
- •5.3.5.4 Performance Agreement
- •5.4.4 Outcome of Budgeting Reform: The Budget Process in Thailand
- •5.4.5 Conclusion
- •5.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •6.1.1 Civil Service Personnel
- •6.1.2 Development of the Civil Service Human Resource System
- •6.1.3 Problems of Civil Service Human Resource
- •6.2 Recruitment and Selection
- •6.2.1 Main Feature
- •6.2.2 Challenges of Recruitment and Selection
- •6.3.1 Main Feature
- •6.4.1 Main Feature
- •6.4.2 Salary Management
- •6.4.2.2 Performance Management and Salary Increase
- •6.4.3 Position Allowance
- •6.4.5 National Compensation Committee
- •6.4.6 Retirement and Pension
- •6.4.7 Challenges in Compensation
- •6.5 Training and Development
- •6.5.1 Main Feature
- •6.5.2 Challenges of Training and Development in the Civil Service
- •6.6 Discipline and Merit Protection
- •6.6.1 Main Feature
- •6.6.2 Challenges of Discipline
- •6.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •English References
- •Contents
- •7.1 Introduction
- •7.2 Setting and Context
- •7.3 Malayan Union and the Birth of the United Malays National Organization
- •7.4 Post Independence, New Economic Policy, and Malay Dominance
- •7.5 Centralization of Executive Powers under Mahathir
- •7.6 Administrative Values
- •7.6.1 Close Ties with the Political Party
- •7.6.2 Laws that Promote Secrecy, Continuing Concerns with Corruption
- •7.6.3 Politics over Performance
- •7.6.4 Increasing Islamization of the Civil Service
- •7.7 Ethnic Politics and Reforms
- •7.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •8.1 Introduction
- •8.2 System of Government in Malaysia
- •8.5 Community Relations and Emerging Recentralization
- •8.6 Process Toward Recentralization and Weakening Decentralization
- •8.7 Reinforcing Centralization
- •8.8 Restructuring and Impact on Decentralization
- •8.9 Where to Decentralization?
- •8.10 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •9.1 Introduction
- •9.2 Ethics and Corruption in Malaysia: General Observations
- •9.2.1 Factors of Corruption
- •9.3 Recent Corruption Scandals
- •9.3.1 Cases Involving Bureaucrats and Executives
- •9.3.2 Procurement Issues
- •9.4 Efforts to Address Corruption and Instill Ethics
- •9.4.1.1 Educational Strategy
- •9.4.1.2 Preventive Strategy
- •9.4.1.3 Punitive Strategy
- •9.4.2 Public Accounts Committee and Public Complaints Bureau
- •9.5 Other Efforts
- •9.6 Assessment and Recommendations
- •9.7 Conclusions
- •References
- •Contents
- •10.1 History of Performance Management in the Administrative System
- •10.1.1 Policy Frameworks
- •10.1.2 Organizational Structures
- •10.1.2.1 Values and Work Ethic
- •10.1.2.2 Administrative Devices
- •10.1.2.3 Performance, Financial, and Budgetary Reporting
- •10.2 Performance Management Reforms in the Past Ten Years
- •10.2.1 Electronic Government
- •10.2.2 Public Service Delivery System
- •10.2.3 Other Management Reforms
- •10.3 Assessment of Performance Management Reforms
- •10.4 Analysis and Recommendations
- •10.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •11.1 Introduction
- •11.2 Malaysian Civil Service
- •11.2.1 Public Service Department
- •11.2.2 Public Service Commission
- •11.2.3 Recruitment and Selection
- •11.2.4 Malaysian Administrative Modernization and Management Planning Unit
- •11.2.5 Administrative and Diplomatic Service
- •11.4 Civil Service Pension Scheme
- •11.5 Civil Service Neutrality
- •11.6 Civil Service Culture
- •11.7 Reform in the Malaysian Civil Service
- •11.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •12.1 Introduction
- •12.2.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.2.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.3.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.3.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.4.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.4.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.5.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.5.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.6.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.6.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.7 Public Administration and Society
- •12.7.1 Public Accountability and Participation
- •12.7.2 Administrative Values
- •12.8 Societal and Political Challenge over Bureaucratic Dominance
- •12.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •13.1 Introduction
- •13.3 Constitutional Framework of the Basic Law
- •13.4 Changing Relations between the Central Authorities and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
- •13.4.1 Constitutional Dimension
- •13.4.1.1 Contending Interpretations over the Basic Law
- •13.4.1.3 New Constitutional Order in the Making
- •13.4.2 Political Dimension
- •13.4.2.3 Contention over Political Reform
- •13.4.3 The Economic Dimension
- •13.4.3.1 Expanding Intergovernmental Links
- •13.4.3.2 Fostering Closer Economic Partnership and Financial Relations
- •13.4.3.3 Seeking Cooperation and Coordination in Regional and National Development
- •13.4.4 External Dimension
- •13.5 Challenges and Prospects in the Relations between the Central Government and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
- •References
- •Contents
- •14.1 Honesty, Integrity, and Adherence to the Law
- •14.2 Accountability, Openness, and Political Neutrality
- •14.2.1 Accountability
- •14.2.2 Openness
- •14.2.3 Political Neutrality
- •14.3 Impartiality and Service to the Community
- •14.4 Conclusions
- •References
- •Contents
- •15.1 Introduction
- •15.2 Brief Overview of Performance Management in Hong Kong
- •15.3.1 Measuring and Assessing Performance
- •15.3.2 Adoption of Performance Pledges
- •15.3.3 Linking Budget to Performance
- •15.3.4 Relating Rewards to Performance
- •15.4 Assessment of Outcomes of Performance Management Reforms
- •15.4.1 Are Departments Properly Measuring their Performance?
- •15.4.2 Are Budget Decisions Based on Performance Results?
- •15.4.5 Overall Evaluation
- •15.5 Measurability of Performance
- •15.6 Ownership of, and Responsibility for, Performance
- •15.7 The Politics of Performance
- •15.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •16.1 Introduction
- •16.2 Structure of the Public Sector
- •16.2.1 Core Government
- •16.2.2 Hybrid Agencies
- •16.2.4 Private Businesses that Deliver Public Services
- •16.3 Administrative Values
- •16.4 Politicians and Bureaucrats
- •16.5 Management Tools and their Reform
- •16.5.1 Selection
- •16.5.2 Performance Management
- •16.5.3 Compensation
- •16.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •17.1 Introduction
- •17.2 The Philippines: A Brief Background
- •17.4 Philippine Bureaucracy during the Spanish Colonial Regime
- •17.6 American Colonial Regime and the Philippine Commonwealth
- •17.8 Independence Period and the Establishment of the Institute of Public Administration
- •17.9 Administrative Values in the Philippines
- •17.11 Conclusions
- •References
- •Contents
- •18.1 Introduction
- •18.2 Toward a Genuine Local Autonomy and Decentralization in the Philippines
- •18.2.1 Evolution of Local Autonomy
- •18.2.2 Government Structure and the Local Government System
- •18.2.3 Devolution under the Local Government Code of 1991
- •18.2.4 Local Government Finance
- •18.2.5 Local Government Bureaucracy and Personnel
- •18.3 Review of the Local Government Code of 1991 and its Implementation
- •18.3.1 Gains and Successes of Decentralization
- •18.3.2 Assessing the Impact of Decentralization
- •18.3.2.1 Overall Policy Design
- •18.3.2.2 Administrative and Political Issues
- •18.3.2.2.1 Central and Sub-National Role in Devolution
- •18.3.2.2.3 High Budget for Personnel at the Local Level
- •18.3.2.2.4 Political Capture by the Elite
- •18.3.2.3 Fiscal Decentralization Issues
- •18.3.2.3.1 Macroeconomic Stability
- •18.3.2.3.2 Policy Design Issues of the Internal Revenue Allotment
- •18.3.2.3.4 Disruptive Effect of the Creation of New Local Government Units
- •18.3.2.3.5 Disparate Planning, Unhealthy Competition, and Corruption
- •18.4 Local Governance Reforms, Capacity Building, and Research Agenda
- •18.4.1 Financial Resources and Reforming the Internal Revenue Allotment
- •18.4.3 Government Functions and Powers
- •18.4.6 Local Government Performance Measurement
- •18.4.7 Capacity Building
- •18.4.8 People Participation
- •18.4.9 Political Concerns
- •18.4.10 Federalism
- •18.5 Conclusions and the Way Forward
- •References
- •Annexes
- •Contents
- •19.1 Introduction
- •19.2 Control
- •19.2.1 Laws that Break Up the Alignment of Forces to Minimize State Capture
- •19.2.2 Executive Measures that Optimize Deterrence
- •19.2.3 Initiatives that Close Regulatory Gaps
- •19.2.4 Collateral Measures on Electoral Reform
- •19.3 Guidance
- •19.3.1 Leadership that Casts a Wide Net over Corrupt Acts
- •19.3.2 Limiting Monopoly and Discretion to Constrain Abuse of Power
- •19.3.3 Participatory Appraisal that Increases Agency Resistance against Misconduct
- •19.3.4 Steps that Encourage Public Vigilance and the Growth of Civil Society Watchdogs
- •19.3.5 Decentralized Guidance that eases Log Jams in Centralized Decision Making
- •19.4 Management
- •19.5 Creating Virtuous Circles in Public Ethics and Accountability
- •19.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •20.1 Introduction
- •20.2 Problems and Challenges Facing Bureaucracy in the Philippines Today
- •20.3 Past Reform Initiatives of the Philippine Public Administrative System
- •20.4.1 Rebuilding Institutions and Improving Performance
- •20.4.1.1 Size and Effectiveness of the Bureaucracy
- •20.4.1.2 Privatization
- •20.4.1.3 Addressing Corruption
- •20.4.1.5 Improving Work Processes
- •20.4.2 Performance Management Initiatives for the New Millennium
- •20.4.2.1 Financial Management
- •20.4.2.2 New Government Accounting System
- •20.4.2.3 Public Expenditure Management
- •20.4.2.4 Procurement Reforms
- •20.4.3 Human Resource Management
- •20.4.3.1 Organizing for Performance
- •20.4.3.2 Performance Evaluation
- •20.4.3.3 Rationalizing the Bureaucracy
- •20.4.3.4 Public Sector Compensation
- •20.4.3.5 Quality Management Systems
- •20.4.3.6 Local Government Initiatives
- •20.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •21.1 Introduction
- •21.2 Country Development Context
- •21.3 Evolution and Current State of the Philippine Civil Service System
- •21.3.1 Beginnings of a Modern Civil Service
- •21.3.2 Inventory of Government Personnel
- •21.3.3 Recruitment and Selection
- •21.3.6 Training and Development
- •21.3.7 Incentive Structure in the Bureaucracy
- •21.3.8 Filipino Culture
- •21.3.9 Bureaucratic Values and Performance Culture
- •21.3.10 Grievance and Redress System
- •21.4 Development Performance of the Philippine Civil Service
- •21.5 Key Development Challenges
- •21.5.1 Corruption
- •21.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Annexes
- •Contents
- •22.1 Introduction
- •22.2 History
- •22.3 Major Reform Measures since the Handover
- •22.4 Analysis of the Reform Roadmap
- •22.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •23.1 Decentralization, Autonomy, and Democracy
- •23.3.1 From Recession to Take Off
- •23.3.2 Politics of Growth
- •23.3.3 Government Inertia
- •23.4 Autonomy as Collective Identity
- •23.4.3 Social Group Dynamics
- •23.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •24.1 Introduction
- •24.2 Functions and Performance of the Commission Against Corruption of Macao
- •24.2.1 Functions
- •24.2.2 Guidelines on the Professional Ethics and Conduct of Public Servants
- •24.2.3 Performance
- •24.2.4 Structure
- •24.2.5 Personnel Establishment
- •24.3 New Challenges
- •24.3.1 The Case of Ao Man Long
- •24.3.2 Dilemma of Sunshine Law
- •24.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •Appendix A
- •Contents
- •25.1 Introduction
- •25.2 Theoretical Basis of the Reform
- •25.3 Historical Background
- •25.4 Problems in the Civil Service Culture
- •25.5 Systemic Problems
- •25.6 Performance Management Reform
- •25.6.1 Performance Pledges
- •25.6.2 Employee Performance Assessment
- •25.7 Results and Problems
- •25.7.1 Performance Pledge
- •25.7.2 Employee Performance Assessment
- •25.8 Conclusion and Future Development
- •References
- •Contents
- •26.1 Introduction
- •26.2 Civil Service System
- •26.2.1 Types of Civil Servants
- •26.2.2 Bureaucratic Structure
- •26.2.4 Personnel Management
- •26.4 Civil Service Reform
- •26.5 Conclusion
- •References
Decentralization and Local Governance in Thailand 65
including those of the association of tambon and village headmen. Ironically, this official pressure made the headmen more aware of the importance of gaining real independence from the MOI through the introduction of elections at the TC and TAO levels.
3.4.2 Reflections
The TAO bill was finally passed on November 26, 1994. The result was not a triumph for any particular actor, but more the product of compromises among policy formulators and policy stakeholders. The MOI had perhaps gained more of its objectives than others had. The village and tambon headmen were ex o cio members of the new TAO, and provincial officials retained a supervisory role. But this victory proved to be relatively short term.
Decentralization became a national issue in Thailand in the mid 1990s. This resurgence began in the special atmosphere following the May 1992 incident when the military was forced back to barracks by a largely urban-based “democratic movement,” and subsequently academics and politicians demanded many different reforms in the Thai state. One of these demands was to make the post of provincial governor elective. National politicians took up this proposal because they could not ignore an issue that might be popular with the electorate on which they depended. But many of these politicians were reluctant to introduce dramatic change at the local level, which might actually undermine their existing electoral base among local canvassers and other influential forces. The permanent government officials of the MOI, for whom the proposal to make governors elective was a direct threat, made common ground with the national politicians to divert the demand for decentralization away from the issue of the governor toward reforms at the tambon level.
The more radical proponents of reform proposed that the new form of local government at the tambon level should be fully elective. However, this was opposed by the MOI, which hoped to maintain a supervisory role over any new local bodies, and by the village and tambon headmen, who hoped to maintain their local influence through ex o cio roles in the new local bodies. These two powerful pressure groups were able to persuade some political parties, especially the NAP, that introducing over-radical reform at the local level might damage the electoral base of their member of Parliament. As a result, the TAO law passed in 1994 severely compromised the electoral principle by giving village and tambon heads ex o cio positions, and by allocating supervisory roles to the governor and district officials.
The TAO law thus seemed to have achieved the MOI strategy of deflecting attention away from the issue of elective governors, and limiting the extent to which local self-government would challenge bureaucratic power in the provinces. But this victory was relatively short term, because the passage of the TAO act precipitated a broader trend toward democratic decentralization,37 which continued over the following decade.
3.5Impacts of the Decentralization Reform on Local Government in Thailand: Ongoing Challenges
The Chuan government (November 1997 to February 2001) established the Committee for Revision of Local Government Acts and Decentralization Promotion. The Chuan cabinet also enacted and amended implementing legislation for the realization of the local autonomy mandated
37For details of the development of decentralization in Thailand during 1994–2006, please read Achakorn (2004, 2005, 2005a, 2006, 2007).
©2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
66 Public Administration in Southeast Asia
by the new charter. Article 78 (282–290) of the 1997 Constitution requires the promotion of decentralization as a basic policy of the government, the definition of plans and procedures for decentralization in separate legislation, and the establishment of a decentralization committee. Accordingly, the Decentralization Plan and Procedures Act was enacted in November 1999. The act established a National Decentralization Committee (NDC) responsible for defining decentralization, elaborating decentralization plans and procedures, and promoting and monitoring the government’s decentralization policy.38
The Decentralization Plan and Procedure Acts of 1999, implementing legislation stemming from the 1997 Constitution, has set a new local political and administrative environment. The new strong executive system in all forms of local government, ongoing process of fiscal decentralization, unfamiliar transferred responsibilities, limited spending on personnel, and the new local personnel system have forced all local governments to adapt themselves to handle this new environment.
3.5.1 Strong Executive System
Major critical change in local administration concerns the new directly elected chief executives. Mayors and chairs of PAOs and TAOs are now directly chosen through local elections. Previously, mayors had been selected through negotiations among members of the municipal assembly, PAO Assembly, and TAO Assembly. Following are the descriptions of the current political structure of each of the five forms of local government in Thailand.
Based on the Provincial Administrative Organization Act of 1997 (subsequently amended in 1999), the PAO is divided into legislative and executive branches. Members of the PAO Assembly (4-year terms) are directly elected by local citizens.39 During the first meeting of the PAO Assembly, chair and deputy chair of the PAO Assembly will be elected (2-year terms). Chairman of the PAO is the head of the PAO executive branch and is directly elected by the local constituencies. The chairman then selects his deputy, the number based on the number of assembly members.40 Levels below includes the PAO clerk who is responsible for supervising all PAO employees within each division.
Municipal government, the oldest form of local government in Thailand, originated in 1933. There are three different types of municipal government—city level, town level, and sub-district
38The National Decentralization Committee (NDC) itself is composed of 36 members, led by the prime minister. Other members include politicians (from three parties), central (12) and local (12) government officials, and intellectuals or qualified authorities from the fields of governmental affairs, public law, economics, and local politics (12). The National Decentralization Committee has four subcommittees: (1) Strategic Planning, (2) Finance/Budget/Personnel, (3) Law and Legislation, and (4) Monitoring and Evaluation (Japan International Cooperation Agency, 2001, p. 43). The Strategic Planning subcommittee was responsible for guiding the NDC in developing the Decentralization Action Plan, finalized in November 2001; allocating functions among levels of governments; and establishing guidelines for transferring responsibilities to local governments (Thailand Ministry of Interior, 2003). The Finance/Budget/Personnel Subcommittee was responsible for providing recommendations regarding taxes and local personnel issues in accord with the Decentralization Action Plan. The Law and Legislation Subcommittee was responsible for giving recommendations regarding the revision of laws and regulations to enable the devolution and delegation of responsibilities, personnel, and financial issues to local governments. The Monitoring and Evaluation Subcommittee was responsible for assessing the progress and problems of the decentralization process (Japan International Cooperation Agency, 2001, p. 47).
39Population less than 500,000 → 24 members; between 500,000 and 1,000,000 → 30 members; between 1,000,000 and 1,500,000 → 36 members; between 1,500,000 and 2,000,000 → 42 members; more than 2,000,000 → 48 members.
40Assembly with 48 members → chairman selects four deputy chairmen; 36–42 members → chairman selects three deputies; 24–30 members → chairman selects two deputies.
©2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Decentralization and Local Governance in Thailand 67 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PAO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PAO Assembly |
|
|
|
|
|
Chairman of PAO (directly elected) |
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
Chair & Deputy Chair |
|
|
|
|
|
Deputy Chairmen of PAO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
of PAO assembly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PAO Clerk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
PAO Secretary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Committee & Sub-committee |
|
|
|
Division |
|
|
Division |
|
|
Division |
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 3.2 Structure of Provincial Administrative Organization (PAO).
level. The categories are based on the number of population in the municipal area. Members of the municipal assembly and mayors are directly elected by local citizens.41
Members of the TAO Assembly are directly elected from each village (two from each village) located within the TAO area. The head of the executive committee is also directly elected from the local constituencies.
The BMA is a special form of local government (Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Act 1985). It is responsible for the well-being of Bangkok residents with some financial support from central government. The structure is also divided into two branches, the BMA Assembly and BMA governor. The governor is the chief of the city administration and is directly elected by popular vote for a 4-year term. The governor appoints four deputy governors as executive administrators. The governor and his team are responsible for policy formulation, supervision,
Municipal Government
City-level pop. more than 50,000 Town-level pop. 10,000–50,000 Sub-district-level pop. Less than 10,000
Municipal Assembly
City-level with 24 members Town-level with 18 members Sub-district-level with 12 members
Mayor (directly elected)
Deputy mayors (selected by the mayor)
City = 4
Town = 3 Sub-district = 2
Municipal Clerk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Division |
|
Division |
|
|
Division |
|
|
Division |
|
Division |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 3.3 Structure of municipal government (Tessaban).
41The new direct-elected mayor system or the strong-mayor system is a result of the Decentralization Plan and Procedure Act of 1999.
©2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
68 Public Administration in Southeast Asia
TAO
TAO Assembly Members are directly elected
-2 members from each village
-TAOs that cover only 2 villages 3 members/village
-TAOs that cover only 1 village 6 members/village
Assembly chair & deputy
Assembly Secretary
Executive committee
-Committee Chairman
-2 Deputy Chairmen
TAO Clerk (also acts as administrative secretary of executive committee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Division |
|
Division |
|
Division |
Figure 3.4 Structure of Tambon (sub-district) Administrative Organization (TAO).
and control of all functions undertaken by the manpower of the BMA headed by the BMA clerk. The BMA Assembly is the legislative body. The assembly is responsible for making local laws, ordinances, regulations, rules, and by-laws as measures for city development and management. Members of the BMA Assembly are directly elected for a 4-year term by the citizens of Bangkok.42 The BMA Assembly will then select one assembly chairman and now more than two deputy assembly chairmen (with 2-year terms).
Pattaya City is another special form of local government in Thailand (Pattaya City Administration Act of 1978). The structure of Pattaya City is divided into two parts—Pattaya City Assembly and the mayor of Pattaya City (Pattaya City Administrative Act of 1999). The assembly consists of 24 members (4-year terms) who are directly elected by eligible citizens in Pattaya City. The assembly then selects one assembly chairman and two deputy assembly chairmen. The mayor of Pattaya City is also directly elected for a 4-year term by citizens of Pattaya City.
3.5.2 Thai Local Political System
In the case of municipalities, before the local executives were directly elected, they typically were the head of a team of candidates that secured a majority of the seats in the municipal assembly. However, the position of the mayor usually rotated among the members of the dominant assembly team over their term. In cases in which there were no serious confl icts between executive councils and assemblymen, mayors and municipal assemblymen would negotiate the budget with each other and the assembly would then pass the budget proposal without delays. As a result, the budget approval process had little effect on the future of the executive councils.
42 One assembly member represents 100,000 people.
© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC