The Problems of Mediation in Administrative Cases Concerning Actions of Local Administrative Organizations

Abstract

Mediation in administrative cases involving the actions of local government organizations (LGOs) in Thailand was established following the amendment of the Administrative Court Establishment and Administrative Case Procedure Act B.E. 2542 (1999). This amendment empowers both the Administrative Court of First Instance and the Supreme Administrative Court to mediate disputes on a case-by-case basis. Research findings reveal that mediation in these cases has been largely unsuccessful due to several critical issues: a lack of legal flexibility within LGOs, resulting in an inability to reach monetary settlements or modify contractual conditions; the absence of local council resolutions, which renders agreements void; and the high financial value of disputes, which often necessitates formal judicial adjudication. Furthermore, a limited understanding of mediation laws among local officials deters them from utilizing these channels. Crucially, intensive scrutiny by oversight agencies, such as the State Audit Office (SAO) and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), creates a fear that compromise settlements may be construed as causing damage to the state. To enhance mediation efficiency and promote local development, this research recommends: implementing training programs for local officials to clarify mediation procedures and legal authority; establishing internal guidelines that allow local executives to reach preliminary agreements without awaiting council resolutions; and requiring oversight agencies (the Office of the Auditor General and the Department of Local Administration) to issue joint guidelines supporting administrative compromise settlements. Finally, the Department of Local Administration should mandate practical guidelines for pre-litigation mediation to reduce the administrative burden relative to post-litigation negotiations significantly.