Where is the political will on corruption?

Suthichai Yoon, The Nation, Asia News Network, Bangkok

Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra isn't going to let the opposition steal the thunder from him over the "fake" compost corruption scam. Neither will he tolerate the public perception that he is acting under pressure from ex-PM Anand Panyarachun over this issue.

It has been quite a challenge for local pundits (a species fast approaching extinction due to multi-pronged pressure) to understand how a CEO's mind works, but one never fails to be mystified by the fact that he not infrequently confuses national issues of significant interest with vindictive confrontations.

Once the country's leader takes criticism personally -- and every critic's expression of disagreement with the powers-that-be is taken as a personal salvo -- fruitful and constructive debate simply can't take place. A national common sense of purpose to fight corruption, which formed a very important part of this government's original platform, has thus been sorely thwarted.

The premier is still trying to reclaim the credit for having "quietly" instructed Deputy Agriculture Minister Newin Chidchob (before he boarded the plane to Mexico to attend the APEC summit late last month) to look into the fake compost story before the Democrats exposed the scandal.

If he had really taken that initiative, it would be interesting to know why the government mechanism of catching its own thieves was less responsive than that of the opposition wriggling in from the outside. The clues of suspicious collusion are everywhere. And it wasn't until the public began to get alarmed over the "smelly deal" that a handful of bureaucrats were placed under an official probe.

The public, however, feels insulted. These people are "small fish", mere "operators" -- the corruption facilitators. We want the big ones. After all, that's what the staggering mandate of two and a half years ago was all about -- it was to give the prime minister the power, the confidence and the legitimacy to hook the crooks in his midst.

Much to the surprise of some observers (myself not included), a deadpan PM turned and asked: Where's the proof?

Blaming the press for misrepresenting his remarks, the CEO clarified that what he meant was that if he was to press criminal charges against higher-ups in the ministry, he would need to have more convincing evidence. But "administratively speaking", he of course could mete out punishment without waiting for any substantive proof.

So, what is he waiting for?

Nobody is quite sure. If he is serious about political accountability or sensitive to how people feel about his counter- corruption credentials, the Thai Rak Thai leader (his famous pre- election campaign pledge: "I will crack down on corrupt politicians without waiting for receipts as proof.") could have chosen this great opportunity to show that he means business. Instead, he has strongly implied that it is "business as usual".

Under the intoxicating influence of such an unprecedented majority in the House and virtual control of the country's civil and military establishments, the PM may have developed the dangerous belief that he can muddle through such a crucial controversy.

While an absolute majority in the House could mask temporary misdeeds of the powers-that-be, trust in the leadership is a stubborn fact of political life. A prime minister can't impose trust on the people, no matter how decisive his hold on power. The trumpeting of short-term GDP growth and playing with fiscal numbers may distract public attention for a while. But it's trust, or the lack of it, that decides the fate of a leader.

If the politicians involved in this simple cut-and-dried compost scam can get away with their dirty manipulations, how are we to expect this PM to even dare to step into the most sophisticated and systematic corruption linked to serious cases of conflict of interest, which has become the hallmark of this particular government.

In fact, the kind of cheating, collusion and under-the-table bribery found in the compost scam is going out of fashion. As a recent TDRI study found, it's the more discreet form of "policy- oriented" corruption that's plaguing the country. It's in this field that PM Thaksin may find his credibility most vulnerable -- his weakest link, so to speak.

The PM may want to go down in history as a prime minister with a quick mind -- a visionary who turned the country around. He also wants to be known as an idealist and a statesman of sorts.

On other occasions, when he finds himself under assault for leaning towards political expediency, he calls himself a "pragmatist" whose ends justify the means. But he can never hope to be recognized as the genuine reformer that he so desperately aspires to be unless he can truly appreciate the hard fact that political control doesn't automatically translate into public trust.

One may be able to buy the former but the price of losing the latter is irrecoverable.