The landslide victory of Chadchart Sittipunt as city governor was a watershed moment for local politics and decentralisation.
Last week, members of the Bangkok Metropolitan Council (BMC) called on City Hall to push to reinstate district council elections to promote political decentralisation -- a concept that puts power over policy and budget in the hands of elected politicians and reduces central government power.
While democracy is perhaps the best political system because voters can elect those who work for them, healthy debate is needed to discuss the pluses and minuses of district councilors.
Before any debate, voters who often know little about district councillors and city councillors need to understand their roles and their past performance in local politics.
The positions of city councillors and district councillors originated over 30 years ago under the 1985 Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Act. Since then, the capital's voters have elected 50 city councillors to work as lawmakers in City Hall, local parliament for the capital city. On the same day, they also voted to elect 350 district councillors. Each district had one city councillor and seven district councillors (eight in some larger districts).
Those 50 city councillors were responsible for passing laws and keeping the governor and BMA officials in check. The 350 district councillors served as advisers to each district director and also as a liaison for channelling voters' concerns to district officials. Elections for both roles were paused following the latest coup.
The suspension of elections for district councillors came after the now-defunct National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) suggested the roles be scrapped, because the BMA would be monitored by the 50 city councillors. Also, the NRSA thought many councillors served as mere canvassers for politicians.
It has also been argued that the roles have been made obsolete by the rise of digital media as a means to make people's voices heard and even have national politicians read their posts on occasion and address their concerns directly.
Another question is whether their performance adds enough value to the capital's administration to justify their existence.
City Hall's political landscape is unique. While city and district councillors are tightly affiliated with political parties, on duty they play quiet roles when it comes to oversight. It is an open secret that City Council meetings are mostly yawn-worthy affairs where attendees "go along to get along" with the governor and senior officials. Approvals are granted and green lights are given despite public resistance or accusations of corruption in some cases.
Many district councillors reportedly come from the same political groups as the city councillors themselves.
Voters have elected district councillors for three decades, without a great deal of evidence of the value they add. So before jumping onto the "decentralisation" bandwagon, voters should ask whether the position is really even that important at all.
New Bangkok governor Chadchart should not bring back district level elections simply for the appearance of democracy, he must ensure the role is still relevant. If not, he must find alternative ways to engender direct public participation.
But if he sticks to his plan, we must hope he will reinvent the role significantly enough to ensure it is beneficial to the people and not political parties.
