Evaluation of Current Situation of
Fraud and Corruption in Thailand
Prepared by
Dr. Sutthi Suntharanurak
Auditor , Professional Level
Office of the Auditor General of Thailand
Outline
• Research Methodology
• Contents of current situation fraud and
corruption in Thailand
- International Anti-Corruption index
- Summary interesting results
Research Methodology
• Qualitative Method
- Review literature about corruption in
Thailand since 1997
- Review literature about corruption
assessment
• Questionnaire survey of our research team
- Descriptive analysis
Corruption in Thailand since 1997
• Why we start at 1997?
- Financial Crisis in Thailand  Demand for Good
Governance
- 1997 Constitution of Thailand The Reform
of Check and Balance system
• Since 1997 many Anti Corruption Agencies (ACAs)
have been established to prevent and suppress
corruption and money laundering in Thailand
• The Organic Act on Counter Corruption B.E. 2542
(1999)
• Act on Offences Relating to the Submission of Bids to
State Agencies B.E. 2542 (1999)
• The Anti-Money Laundering Act B.E. 2542 (1999)
• The Special Investigative Cases Act B.E. 2547 (2004)
• Act on Administrative measure for prevention and
suppression corruption B.E. 2551 (2008)
• The Organic Act of State Audit B.E. 2542 (1999)
• Since 1997 ACAs have been anti corruption both grand and
petty corruption.
• Case studies of Grand Corruption in Thailand
- Corruption in public procurement of medicine and medical
equipment in 1999
- Corruption of Klong Dann Sewage Treatment in 2000
- Corruption of Bangkok International Film Festival in 2007
- Corruption in public procurement of Bangkok fire fighting
trucks in 2008
- Unusually rich of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of
Transport in 2012
- Unusually rich of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of
Defense in 2013
Statistical Corruption of ACAs
OAG Thailand
Number of
Corruption and
Money Cases
349
NACC
1,056
Database of NACC
(2000-Present)
DSI
85
DSI Annual Year Report 2011
(2004-2011)
AMLO
426
AMLO Annual Performance
Report 2011
(1999-2011)
ACAs
Sources
Database of OAG
(1999-2012)
Corruption Perception Index of Thailand
during 5 years (2008-2012)
Year
CPI Thailand
Ranking
2008
3.5/10
80/180
2009
2010
3.4/10
3.5/10
84/180
78/178
2011
3.4/10
80/183
2012
37/100
88/176
Global Integrity Index of Thailand
Category of Integrity
Measure
Integrity Indicators
Scorecard
Interpretation
Indicators
Civil society, Public
Information and Media
71/100
Moderate
Elections
47/100
Very Weak
Government
Accountability
61/100
Weak
Administration and
Civil Service
64/100
Weak
Oversight and
Regulation
78/100
Moderate
Anti-Corruption and
Rule of Law
68/100
Weak
Overall Score
68/100
Weak
Integrity Indicators Scorecard about
SAIs and Anti-Corruption
Category of Integrity
Measure
Integrity Indicators
Scorecard
Interpretation
Indicators
Whistle-Blowing
Measures
69/100
Weak
SAI
83/100
Strong
Anti-Corruption Law
89/100
Strong
ACAs
63/100
Weak
Rule of Law
71/100
Moderate
Law Enforcement
50/100
Very Weak
Process of Collecting Data
1. To translate ASOSAI questionnaires in Thai version
2. To determine the number of sample which I focused on ACAs
,that is, OAG, NACC, PACC, DSI, and AMLO.
3. 155 questionnaires were distributed to 4 ACAs in order to
evaluate corruption situation in Thailand. Meanwhile, I send 10
questionnaires to AMLO in order to assess money laundering
situation.
4. However, this research focuses on the role of SAI. Therefore I
selected 125 respondents from OAG Thailand. These
respondents are auditors and investigators who have more
experiences to explain corruption situation.
Number of Sample
10
10
10
OAG
10
NACC
PACC
DSI
125
AMLO
Response rate and Challenge problem
• There were 115 respondents (or response rate was
70% of all respondents) who returned their
questionnaires back to me. However, these answers
reflected only the evaluation of corruption situation.
• In process of collecting data, the challenge problem
was the collaboration problem especially other ACAs
which I got only 10 questionnaires from DSI.
• Further, some respondents commented about the
complexity of some questions which seems to be hard
to answer.
The Statistics of respondents
10
40
OAG (HQ)
OAG (RGO)
DSI
65
Summary interesting results
1. Approximately 77.4% viewed that the current
situation of corruption in Thailand seems to be
serious and pervasive in most or all sectors.
2. Interestingly, almost 70% believed that the current
situation is much higher than previously.
3. Half of respondents described that the tolerance
level is moderately intolerant towards corruption.
4. Meanwhile, 54.78% of respondents explained that
the strength of steps taken by Thai government
against corruption is at moderate level.
5. The first type of corruption based on perception of
respondents is Grand corruption which 52.17 %
perceived it is prevalence in Thailand.
6. However, 57.39% still believed that the prevalence
of petty corruption is at high level. Likewise, 75.65%
recognized that the pervasiveness of grand
corruption is at high level, too.
7. This dataset showed that common types of
corruption seems to be the abuse of position/power
(28.69%) and criminal breach of trust (29.56%)
8. Interestingly, half of respondents viewed that local
government or municipalities was the most
vulnerable to corruption.
9. Approximately ¾ or 75% of respondents ranked
that the greatest probability of corruption occurred
in procurement contracts sector.
10. For the root cause of corruption in Thailand, about
44.35% believed that it had been derived from
culture, customs and habits of giving bribes to get
things done. In contrast, 40% seems to agree and
disagree that main cause of corruption is derived
from the patronage-client system.
11. About monitoring the situation of corruption,
53.04% viewed that it was essential. Likewise, half
of them thought that it was essential to prioritize
complaints of corruption or fraud from the public.
12. For reporting corruption, most respondents
emphasized the important role of whistle blower.
Interestingly, 64.34% believed that the whistle
bowling was effective to ensure complaints of
corruption.
13. For the effect of corruption, most respondents
concerned seriously about damage of corruption to
the government budget, private sector, and citizen.
14. Almost 65% strongly agreed that corruption during
budget formulation is primarily grand or political
corruption. Likewise, more than half strongly agreed
that unchecked and excessive discretion in the
budget process tends to create opportunities for
political corruption.
15. Our respondents gave their opinions about conflict
of interest which is usual style of corruption in
Thailand.
16. Conflict of interest (COI) is a set of circumstances
that creates a risk that professional judgment or
actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly
influenced by a secondary interest. (Thompson,
1993)
17. Example of COI : Self Dealing, Post-Employment,
Outside Employment, Using inside information,
Using public property for private advantage, Pork
barreling, etc.
Different countries but same behavior!!
18. Further, many respondents mentioned to the policy
corruption which involved to the public policy
process. They explained that the policy corruption
is related to both national and local politicians. It
still involved to the budget cycle especially the
budget formulation and approval budget.
Thank you for your attention
You Will Never Walk Alone !!