Public Ethics and Corruption in Thailand 83

to most other philanthropic or civil society organizations. Most allegations against non-profit organizations evolved around the enrichment of the leaders involved.8

To a certain extent, the Thai public is almost numb or has become “used to” petty corruption in everyday life. Small bribes are seen as semi-service charges to get the bureaucratic process moving, to overcome red tape, to shorten the time needed for a transaction, or just simply to appease or placate the public officials in charge who are somewhat underpaid in any case. A bribe could be either solicited or offered. A bribe could also be seen as a welcome mechanism to save time, effort, and money, as in giving 100 baht to the traffic policeman for a traffic violation as opposed to having to pay a 400-baht fine at the police station. Petty corruption is so pervasive. It seems to penetrate into almost every sphere of public sector transaction with citizens in their everyday life. However, when asked how Thai people feel about corruption, the answers often reveal anger, frustration, and resignation.9 When tolerance for and acceptance of petty corruption become an issue for discussion, the general sentiment is that petty corruption should also be curbed because it leads to grand corruption, to the detriment of society. Although corruption has become “a way of life,” it would be wrong to think that it is well accepted. The analogy of Thai people with petty corruption is like having to live with a seemingly incurable disease. No one would like to live with an incurable disease.

4.3 A Deeper Look at Corruption in Thailand

Why is corruption more pervasive today than a few decades ago?10 This is a question often raised. Some may say that petty corruption has always existed in Thai society. Perhaps the media reports on corruption more than ever before. Or maybe information technology has improved so much that Thai people are now learning more about it. However, one cannot deny that corruption has certainly taken on more forms and is prevalent at all levels of Thai society, especially in the public sector. The amount of money involved in corruption has increased and there are certainly more players and actors in corruption today.11 The following conditions have been offered to explain the rise and continuation of corruption.

4.3.1 Vanishing Moral Lessons

In the past few decades, Thailand has been dominated by mainstream growth-led economic development. This has created a gap or a disjuncture in Thai moral and ethical values from its past. Traditionally, Buddhist temples played a crucial role in citizens’ lives and well-being. Neighborhood

8There is a well-known case involving a big and powerful temple where large sums of money were purportedly embezzled. Just as the case was to be decided by the court, the culprit returned the money and the prosecutor dropped the charges. This was suspected of being politically influenced because fraud cases are generally prosecuted to the conclusion. However, generally, no conclusive findings are reported on such allegations and virtually no prosecution or conviction over corruption is publicly known.

9See, for instance, surveys on attitudes toward corruption conducted by Transparency Thailand and the Center for Philanthropy and Civil Society, National Institute of Development Administration in the years 2001,

2002, 2007, and 2008.

10On this issue, the general explanation is that Thai society tends to put the blame on increased materialism and consumerism due to external forces, especially globalization. I would suggest that there are strong internal socio-cultural factors that need to be scrutinized as well.

11See, for instance, various surveys conducted by Sauwanee Thairungroj et al. since 2000 on public-private sector corruption issues, including “Thailand: Business Environment and Governance survey in 2004 and AntiCorruption Strategy in Thailand in the year 2000.”

©2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC

84 Public Administration in Southeast Asia

temples would have an all-inclusive role where the needs of the citizens were generally taken care of: schooling for boys, medical care for the sick, psychological and emotional solace and comfort for troubled persons, entertainment through temple fairs and even a meeting place for acquaintanceship and even courtship for the young men and women. While the elderly without family or relations, and the very poor and marginalized were adopted or fed by the temples, taking care of spiritual needs and dissemination of ethical and moral values would probably reign supreme in the different roles played by temples in those days. It was virtually impossible then for children and youth not to be inculcated by the moral and ethical lessons taught by the monks. Buddhist teachings (Dharma) would emphasize good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, merit vs. de-merits. Temples would also teach compassion and mindfulness. The virtue of rightful actions and refraining from sinful and wrongful acts was emphasized. Religious principles also call for self-restraint and self-censure in committing wrongful acts like lying, lusting, engaging in greedy acts, and taking or stealing what is not rightfully one’s own. Such teachings would only reinforce the formation of a person’s conscience, which serves as an internal control mechanism to keep a person from wrongful acts like corruption.

With the advent of major social transformation as a result of societal transition from a traditional society into a “modern” society, religion lost ground to secularism. Most of the previous functions performed by temples were taken over by public sector agencies, yet declining and vanishing moral and ethical lessons from Buddhist religion have not been replaced by secular counterparts. While religious rituals and practices continue to flourish, the role of Buddhism in embedding ethical and moral principles has eroded. The neighborhood temple is no longer the all-encompassing center of people’s life. In this transition, secular institutions like the family, schools, or the media have not substituted the role that religion played in the past. With increased urbanization and a lifestyle that inevitably drives urbanites into the fast lane and a busy life where getting ahead is an imperative, religious learning and socialization no longer takes place for most new generations of Thai people, especially those living in urban areas. In the past few decades, civic education and ethics have been neglected and even discarded from the school curriculum. As a result, we find Thai society today poorer in the understanding or appreciation of moral and ethical values; indeed, a vacuum or void exists in instilling moral and ethical values.12

4.3.2 Lack of Deep-Rooted Public Interest Values

In the public sector, not enough attention is given to the issue of ethics. Perhaps the Office of the Civil Service Commission’s (OCSC) effort to remedy this situation is due to recognition of how lacking it has been in the past. As Frank Mariner argues, ethics needs to be learned and discussed through anecdotes, stories, analogies, or moral injunctions and dilemmas in the form of stories [1]. The Thai public sector in the past has not devoted time and energy to help public officials learn about public ethics to ensure that ethical values and principles about public service are well internalized by them. One also finds a dearth of role models in morals and ethics in the public sector and in Thai society as a whole. It is also interesting that Thai people are less willing to acknowledge living role models than those who have passed away.

Perhaps the most worrisome issue about public ethics is that the notions of public interest, public good, public responsibility, and public accountability are relatively underdeveloped in Thai

12The call for civic education to enhance ethics, public mind, and responsibility are voiced by various sectors today since the political crisis came to a head. Prior to this, very few people paid any attention to the call for value change and the need to instill moral values and ethical principles in Thai society.

©2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC

Public Ethics and Corruption in Thailand 85

society [2]. Public officials may verbalize an ethic of the public interest and well-being of citizens, but public officials’ real or actual behaviors reflect little of public interest; concerns about selfinterest, relationship with bosses, their agency’s role, stature and advantages often exceed public interest. Most agencies are unwilling to delete or downsize some out-dated or even obsolete division or function simply because of fear of losing the total size of their budgetary allocation. Also, when agencies fail to spend their allocated budget toward the end of the budget year, all types of seminars and conferences are hurriedly held just to expend the money. Hotel conference rooms are usually overbooked at the end of each budget year to accommodate the need for spending the money. The fear of being given less allocation prompted unwise and unproductive use of public money, which is counter to protecting public interest.

4.3.3 Continuation of Patron-Client Relations

The traditional Thai social structure, values and beliefs evolve around personal criteria, rather than universalistic principles. A person’s primary duty and allegiance were to his family and then to his kinship network, then to his village or community. Mutual assistance, trust, reciprocity, and social cohesion operated well within the realm of one’s personal affiliation. Traditional Thai society was also hierarchical and highly stratified, and such status differences gave rise to an elaborate and intricate system of patron-client relationship where status unequals entered into a mutually beneficial relationship. While a patron provided protection and connection for his client, he was supported and reciprocated by his client as well. A client could provide resources, both monetary and in-kind payment (like labor), to his patron. Loyal clients also became a member of the patron’s entourage that surrounded and followed the patron to indicate the importance and power of a patron. Key values espoused by the patronage system were loyalty, obedience, and gratitude from the standpoint of a client to his patron. Kindness, compassion, and generosity were required of a patron toward his client. These relations extended from the apex of power—the king—to the lowest client in the social order.13

In this framework of human relations, developed over hundreds of years, a person’s ethical and moral duties are to be a good patron as well as a good client. Thai people perceive moral obligations, social norms, and social values through a personal lens: “what is good for my patron is alright by me.” Interpersonal “debts of gratitude,” favors, care and concern, payment and repayment of kindness and favors reign supreme. Obviously, such close relations are conducive to a lack of transparency and corruption in various small and large ways.

Client-patron relations also explain the poor development of the public interest noted above. Loyalty is pledged and served to person/s and never to a “public” that one did not personally know or interact with. The notion of public interest as an ultimate goal in public ethics and public administration [3] is somewhat foreign to the traditional Thai way of perceiving the ethical/moral obligations of leadership that would lead to good governance. The goodness and benevolence of a leader is inherently good in and of itself. As a result of this goodness, followers are blessed with happiness and well-being. Consequently, the concept of public is not well understood or well developed in Thailand, and it is only a small stretch to state that beyond that personal sphere, a person bears no responsibility or expectations. Perhaps one needs to double efforts in fostering ethical leaders who will not distort laws, abuse power, and formulate policies to their own advantage.

13The many works of Akin Rabhibhand on patron-client system in traditional Thai society explain very well the issue discussed here.

©2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC