My suggestion is that they should focus on the two elements crucial to solving all kinds of problems – good governance and transparency.

If all universities were well governed and with transparency, problems could never worsen to a point where Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha has to invoke his special Article 44 powers.

Article 44 was invoked to issue measures at various problem-hit institutes last year, including Assumption, Surindra Rajabhat and Chaiyaphum Rajabhat universities.

The issue at Surindra stemmed from a university council president amending rules to allegedly allow “his people” to join administrative panels, while at Chaiyaphum University half of the committee members resigned, posing administration difficulties. Under Article 44, oversight panels intervened to amend rules with all sides’ agreement, and also tackled financial and resource management issues.

Supat Jampathong should be commended for his move to form a team to promote good governance among universities.

“Many universities’ governance issues affect Thai education management quality and hurt public confidence,” the Office of the Higher Education Commission (Ohec) chief said.

He added that most problems stemmed from executive-level disputes over human resources, work arrangements, or benefits. They arose because executives neglected their duties, prioritised their own private benefits or were simply greedy.

Sumit Suwan, Kasetsart University vice president for research and academic services, said the major governance problem was a lack of virtue in university councils and administration.

“As long as universities select on ability rather than morality, conflicts over power and benefits will lead to governance problems. Nepotism is also often at play in selecting council members or rectors. The selection procedures should be open to all so that good and able candidates are chosen for councils. Meanwhile the age and qualifications of council presidents, members and rectors should also be clearly stated. Lecturer candidates should be judged on their academic background, work experience, lifestyle (including social media use) and even psychological tests,” he added.

The Education Ministry and Ohec have tried to solve the problem by enforcing and amending laws, but the law acts merely as guidance and is not a magic cure. Invoking Article 44 or the Higher Education Act is useful to a certain degree, but, since governance depends on virtue and capability, problems can’t be solved if people still lack those elements, he said.

Late last year, the Office of the Auditor General asked Prayut to stall plans for government agencies and state enterprises to hire universities as advisers, on grounds that such action might affect lecturers’ duties – including teaching. Between 2012 and 2016, about 90 universities served as state advisers in 4,219 projects worth a total Bt14 billion in fees. Eighteen of the universities weren’t registered on the adviser list at the Finance Ministry.

Good governance and transparency must now be promoted seriously at universities.

Higher-education executives must understand that they cannot place their personal interest above that of the country.

By ignoring their core duty of producing quality human resources and inspiring the young to achieve noble goals, they have endangered the country’s future.

The threat is real, particularly in light of the open secret that much of the mis-governance has evaded scrutiny by the public or authorities.

We need to tackle this scourge with efficiency to prevent our most precious national resource from being wasted.

Special powers or specific laws are not the answer. Neither is the move to upgrade the Ohec to the status of Ministry of Higher Education.

Instead, it is crucial that efforts focus on instilling the right attitude and requiring all faculty staff/executives to uphold good governance as well as transparency.

Begin that push now and it won’t be long before we see tangible results.