Does the public trust the institutions of defence and security to tackle the issue of bribery and corruption in their establishments?
Thailand score: NS/100
The public view the defence establishment as entirely indifferent to corruption within it, or as clearly corrupt, without the political will to tackle the problem.
The public view is that bribery and corruption are not, according to official rhetoric, acceptable to the defence establishment, but there is a widely-held belief that this is just that: rhetoric, and not seriously intended.
The public view is that bribery and corruption, though not acceptable to the defence establishment, is insufficiently addressed by the measures in place to tackle the problem.
This indicator is not scored. Please discuss conditions in the country context related to good practice (Score 4).
The public view is that there is a clear commitment from the defence establishment that bribery and corruption are not acceptable and must be prosecuted, and that their efforts to tackle the problem are sincere and effective.
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. In recent years, the military has failed to gain public trust for several reasons. Firstly, the decision of the military regime to approve the procurement of a 13.5-billion-baht submarine from China and the purchases of weapons and military supplies from defence contractors around the world caused a great deal of public scepticism about transparency and vulnerability to corruption in the military . According to international and domestic polls, corruption is as endemic as ever after the coup d’ état in 2014, while the military government was the subject of a protest in the northern city of Chiang Mai against the building of a government luxury housing project on forested land. Transparency International’s 2017 Corruption Perceptions Index also scored Thailand 37 out of 100, marginally lower than in 2014 when the NCPO took over the country . Recently, the spread of Covid-19 from a boxing competition organised by a high-ranking army officer also tainted the image of the military and even revealed the involvement of some generals in the military’s shady business . Additionally, the public debate that represented the fiercest criticism against PM Prayuth, who first came to power in a 2014 military coup, raised the fact that the military rose to power through non-democratic means, alongside ineffective administration, abuse of power, corruption and trading favours for big businesses .
 Soonruth Bunyamanee, Bangkok Post. April 26, 2017. ”Secret’ submarine buy erodes public trust’. Accessed March 28, 2020. https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/1238710/secret-submarine-buy-erodes-public-trust
 Patpicha Tanakasempipat and Panarat Thepgumpanat, Reuters. May 17, 2018. ‘Four years after coup, Thais tired of corruption and democratic delays’. Accessed March 28, 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics/four-years-after-coup-thais-tire-of-corruption-and-democratic-delays-idUSKCN1IH37B
 Nation Thailand. April 5, 2020. ‘Thai military battling to regain public trust after grave missteps’. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30385457
 Panarat Thepgumpanat and Panu Wongcha-um, Reuters. February 24, 2020. ”RIP Democracy’: Thai Students Protest Party Ban as Opposition Grills PM in Parliament’. Accessed May 07, 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics/rip-democracy-thai-students-protest-party-ban-as-opposition-grills-pm-in-parliament-idUSKCN20I0VJ
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||NS|
|United Arab Emirates||NS|