Expertise, not high profile political names, the way to avoid another GT200 fiasco
Besides the fact that such technology is not in her field of expertise, Pornthip is likely to influence the process with her bias, as her position on the GT200 has shown.
Suthep, like many in Thai society who found their backs against the wall, tends to go after high profile names to rescue them. For a brief moment about a decade ago, ordinary people with grievances would turn to the then tough cop Pol General Seri Themeyavj.
And if the issue involved a young child, especially girls who had been sexually abused, one could be sure the cameras would be there to capture the moment she bowed to Paweena Hongsakul. Like Pornthip, their moment of truth will come. For the autopsy expert, her moment of truth has just arrived.
The press is not blameless either. We allowed ourselves to be used without really questioning their intention or sincerity.
Suthep, on the other hand, needs to get out of this headspace and think beyond political necessity with regard to procurement policy, as well as just about everything surrounding his political life.
First of all, the government and its agencies planning to purchase security related equipment such as bomb detectors should surround themselves with independent experts, not questionable and politically charged and well known public figures.
Besides being independent, these experts should be free from political influence and brokers and distributors of these products.
We need to look at the track record of this equipment's use, as well as thorough studies conducted by foreign governments. Perhaps we might want to carry out our own as well, just to be certain.
Historically, when it comes to procurement projects, there are always questions surrounding the judgement of our military personnel.
The latest airship to be used in the South is a good example. Yes, other armed forces use it - but they use it for surveillance purposes, to see from high and above if enemies are advancing towards their headquarters or stronghold. For Thailand's purposes in the deep South, shouldn't a UMV do the job? What about trying to fix those closed-circuit cameras? Isn't it strange how bombs always go off in areas where the camera is not working?
The handling of the controversy British-made bomb scanner GT200 is a case in point. One can go back and forth all day about the effectiveness of the GT200 detector. But the manner as to how Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva went about it was unsound.
His effort to distance himself from the controversial bomb detector left no room for an exit strategy for the military and the Army chief, General Anupong Paochinda. In his attempt to save face, Anupong came out and gave GT200 a clean bill of health, putting him on a crash course with the premier at a time when the two sides, given the climate of political uncertainty, need each other more than ever.
Understandably so, there is a historical mistrust between the public and the military. And so when a controversy over the effectiveness as the GT200 or other bomb detectors surfaced, there is a tendency for the public not to give the top brass the benefit of the doubt.
One way to move future procurement projects forward would be to include experts on the list of evaluators, not high profile political figures with virtually no knowledge about such technology.
