Page 97 - kpi17073

96 การประชุมวิชาการ
สถาบันพระปกเกล้า ครั้งที่ 16

the rule of law, legally enforceable standards, scrutiny and audit. Transparency is
achieved through open debate, freedom of information, and independence of the
media. Responsiveness is based on systematic acceptance of the norm of
consultation, of effective redress under the rule of law, and supported by devolution
and decentralisation of decision making. Solidarity is reflected by acceptance of
diversity, and may also have an international dimension.

The expression of these values in practice is highly dependent on political
dialogue and political cultures. In addition, strength in reflecting one mediating value
may be accompanied by relative weakness in reflecting another. The design of an
electoral system, for example, can emphasise popular representation, accountability of
the government, accountability of individual elected members, stable government,
political competition, effective opposition and oversight, effectiveness of political
parties, sustainability, and other possibly desirable things… It cannot however
emphasise all of these at once, and the process of electoral system design involves
political choices as to which are priorities in each individual context. Political party
systems, bicameralism, and vertical division of power easily provide further examples
of such choices.

There are many lessons of power dynamics that can be observed in the political
transitions of recent years. Popular participation in designing change can give great
legitimacy and credibility, but is not enough in itself and is not always successful.
Elite buy-in to change is essential – otherwise new frameworks may fail to be
implemented, may not be followed through to make them work properly, or may be
subverted in practice. It may be easy to overreact in seeking remedies to identified
weaknesses in institutional frameworks. Political realities may dictate that an element
of impunity (a term which covers past financial abuses as well as past physical
abuses) is a necessary part of any ‘deal’. In relatively large countries, devolution and
decentralisation may be helpful in balancing power. State building and good
governance are not a substitute for democratic institutions, but they are an important
companion to them. Symbols can be just as important as substance. When
institutional breakdown leads to deep divisions in society and indeed in communities
and families, building new bridges takes both dialogue and time. And since democracy
เอกสารประกอบการอภิปรายร่วมระหว่างผู้แทนจากต่างประเทศ
is a political concept in which the power to make decisions is intrinsic, its corollary is
that some level of ability to make bad or ineffective decisions is also intrinsic.

There may be limits as to what is achievable in any given political window of
opportunity. Is a smaller step which is universally accepted more valuable than a
larger step which is not accepted by a significant part of the community? Is one step
back sometimes necessary towards two steps forward? Do radical demands for
change move the centre of debate further, even though they are not achievable and
lead to disappointment?

Monarchy and democracy lead ineluctably to parliamentarism. Fusion of powers
can provide a workable framework for stable democracy. The question is rather
‘how best to make parliamentarism work’.