People's Audit

          The first phase of the project “People’s Audit of Public Service Delivery by Government and Local Government Units” has come to an end after approximately one year of operation. The project is under the leadership and management of King Prajadhipok’s Institute (KPI) and receives various forms of assistance and support from many agencies, notably the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the Office of the Public Sector Development Commission (OPDC).

            The first phase of the project focuses on the knowledge sharing and awareness creation with respect to some relevant methodologies of People’s Audit process, which have been found quite workable previously in Asia and elsewhere. This phase introduces the concept as well as lays the foundation for establishing some semblance of tenable forms of public service measurement programs that will make good for Thailand.

The second phase is expected to carry the project further into the field-based, implementing stage that will hopefully culminate in certain definite decisions on some forms of an acceptable People’s Audit program for use in Thailand, preferably by the broader spectrum of local government agencies under either the blessing or auspices of the Thai Government. On a longer term, Thailand, depending on the success or otherwise of the People’s Audit program implementation in the country, will also serve as a role model for those countries in similar political configuration and geographical proximity to the country, and more practicably as a basis for further trial and experimentation in a more extended or adapted scope of operations in these regional centers in some future time.

The project “People’s Audit of Public Service Delivery by Government and Local Government Units” got its inception in December 2002 when King Prajadhipok’s Institute (KPI) made an approach to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) about the feasibility of supporting good governance and launching a program for knowledge creation, networking coalition, and possible adaptation of practical and workable models or methodologies of a citizen-based system of participation in the shaping and assessment of public service delivery for Thailand.

In January 2003 in particular, under the encouragement and guiding of Dr. Paul Lundberg of UNDP, KPI had embarked on, in the space of a few months, the process of joint consultations and mini-surveys of literature-based sources of people-based audit capacity aimed at public sector deliveries to determine the most promising systems for trial and introduction to the Thai context. A series of meetings among the initial players consisting of representatives from the above agencies and other government and academic institutions led to the decision to name the entire program by the title of “People’s Audit of Public Service Delivery by Government and Local Government Units”, or the “People’s Audit” program, for short.

For the first phase, we have initially arrived at a decision to engage two systems of public service auditing and accountability that have had a long history in developed countries in the West and have been tried with some measure of success in Africa, South America, and Asia. They are the CIET Methodology as used, for example, in Pakistan and the Philippine model of popular participation in local government and public service planning and delivery—the Public Service Excellence Program (PSEP), an assessment program of service delivery, supplemented by the dialogue-based Technology of Participation, although we are still open to other People’s Audit systems should the circumstances permit us to experiment with more of them. Meanwhile, plans have been afoot to make familiarization and study tours to Pakistan and the Philippines, finally to attend a conference in Hong Kong on the Citizen’s Charter theme, and to hold knowledge-sharing workshops as a follow-up to those trips as well as taking a concrete step toward determining the possibility of adapting and adopting certain methods that suit the Thai context. Meanwhile, KPI has been actively pursuing the networking build-up among potential players with a view to establishing a core front group responsible for the future management and popularization of the People’s Audit program and the ultimate realization of its stated objectives as stated below. 

In the second phase, which is expected to be still a continual learning process, more methods will be studied until such time as consensus is reached among the coalition members comprising KPI and its associates that the time has come for the piloting and trial of some selected methods in on-site workshop training stints to be held in the four regions. The overall results of the implementation of the People’s Audit program as envisioned above will be compiled and presented, in due time, to the Government for its review and perhaps selective implementation on a greater scale.

 Three principal agencies--KPI, UNDP, and the Office of the Public Sector Development Commission (OPDC)--have jointly undertaken to oversee this program. OPDC was recently instituted by the Government and tasked with the improvement of the efficiency and administration of government units around the country in line with the modern, fast pace of globalization and competitiveness around the world.

            The People’s Audit initiative receives its overall impetus from the setting off of the wheels of political and governmental reform machinery envisioned under the much-heralded Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 1997, particularly Section 282, which states that “the State shall give autonomy to the locality in accordance with the principle of self-government according to the will of the people in the locality.”

Those are the ideals, of course, and the publics have yet to be weaned from the panhandler, receiving-end attitude in their interface with the Government and its local government machinery. No doubt, the operative words here are ‘autonomy’ and ‘locality’, implying that extensive and intelligent participation by local citizens in the governing of their local affairs jointly with local government officials in the formulation and delivering of public goods and services will ensure the improved efficiency and effectiveness of those deliveries that will result in the equitable dispensation and full satisfaction of the citizens’ collective well-being under the umbrella of myriad services provided by the Government.

By extension and looked at from a wider perspective, considerable confidence has been placed in the belief that only a people who take charge of their own affairs and destiny can vote intelligently in the selection of a liberal, energetic and wise government and their representatives in the legislature at both local and national levels. So, we are optimistic that our aims and ideals are correct for they definitely approximate the ideals of true democracy. In other words, the fate of the citizens’ living conditions and future developments should not be left entirely to the politicians at election times and to the bureaucrats during the in-between extremes of democratic exercise, but must rest squarely and equally on the direct involvement and active participation of the citizens at all the steps of service provision themselves at all times to ensure the full equity of access and efficient utilization of those public resources.

            But our biggest concern is to identify the right and optimum methodologies for successful application to the Thai political and cultural milieu, which, admittedly, is no small task to accomplish. The gulf between representative and participatory democracies remains as wide as ever, even if not impossible to narrow down and bridge eventually.