|
|
|
|
| Opinion |
| My Turn |
|
by
Dr Martin Kansichi, 06 February 2006
-
06:29:20
|
Corruption, corporate citizenship
Corruption has existed ever since antiquity as one of the worst and, at the same time, most widespread forms of behaviour, which is inimical to the administration of public affairs when indulged in by public officials and elected representatives. In the last hundred years, it has come to encompass behaviour within the purely private domain.
No precise definition of corruption can be found which applies to all forms, types and degrees of corruption, or which would be accepted universally as covering all acts, which are considered in every jurisdiction as constituting corruption.
Indeed some practices have at times and in certain circumstances been considered as manifestations of corruption while those very same practices have at other times and in different circumstances been considered as licit if not also laudable.
Naturally, with the passage of time, customs as well as historical and geographical circumstances have greatly altered public sensitivity to such behaviour, in terms of the significance and attention attached to it. As a result, its treatment in laws and regulations has likewise changed substantially.
In some periods of history, certain corrupt practices were actually regarded as permissible (for example, the acceptance by public officials of favours for the accomplishment of acts which did not conflict with their duty as officials), or else the penalties for them were either fairly light, or generally not applied.
In the past, one considered corruption only with regard to public officials, be they members of the Legislature, the Executive or the Judiciary. This is no longer the case today. A typical example is the offence of insider trading, which could, at least in some countries, be considered as a form of corruption.
While it is still perfectly legal for a person to act upon price-sensitive information given to him by a farmer in relation to a price of onions on the local market the following week, it would today constitute a criminal act if a person were to take advantage of confidential information given to him by a company director and which allows to foresee the evolution of the price of the company’s shares on the stock exchange.
While the advantage obtained in the first case does not cause any noticeable distortion on the market, the second kind of information is considered to have an iniquitous and grave distorting effect on the system. As companies on the stock exchange are not a mere private matter but entities of public concern, any distortion of the rules of proper behaviour with regard to their operation may today be classified, also, as a form of corruption, at least if taken in the widest sense of the word.
Indeed the law in relation to corruption is one of the laws, which tries to enforce and enhance those rules that a society at a particular point considers proper for its orderly functioning.
The law does not deal with the concept at the empirical level, it rather deals with the suppression of certain activities that go against—hence corrupt—the proper functioning of public and private sector activities and governments.
Corruption is like a prism with many surfaces. It can be viewed from different angles, for example as a social issue or from the perspective of political science, economic and organisational theory or from the perspective of criminal, civil or administrative law.
If corruption is viewed too narrowly only one side of the prism may be revealed, for example, corruption as criminal behaviour. Awareness of this problem sometimes also results in an unduly broad definition of the concept, as where a number of general offences committed by people in the course of their employment come to be treated as corruption, for example theft, embezzlement, fraud and other acts which prejudice the employer. This is incorrect.
In essence, corruption is not about putting one’s fingers in the till but more about the abuse of power or improbability in the decision-making process. This definition can be refined still further, but it is in effect the lowest common denominator. Corruption should not necessarily be equated with criminal corruption. Of course, corruption has always been a close companion of crime.
This explains to a large extent the multiple forms it takes and the varied terminology used to describe it: bribery, graft, gift-taking, kick-backs, sharp business practices and so on. Likewise, both corruption and criminal corruption are expressions of the same attitude to morals, ethical principles and public function.
Corruption may also be seen as a phenomenon of the society and in that sense one may speak of systematic corruption of legal systems, economic management, the delivery of public services and policy making. Such corruption can skew incentives disastrously, undermine voluntary compliance, deter investment and render democracy ineffectual.
It generates economic costs by distorting incentives, political costs by undermining institutions and social costs by redistributing wealth and power toward the rich and privileged. When corruption undermines property rights, the rule of law and incentives to invest, economic and political development are crippled.
-Corruption of any kind and at any level of society seriously undermines the basic values on which society is founded. In particular it destroys the good faith that is required if government, politics and commerce are to function properly. In addition, corruption results in arbitrariness and amounts to a basic denial and contempt of the rule of law.
Some of the main contributing factors of corruption are the concentration of power, wealth and status, non-democratic or autocratic regimes, a cumbersome bureaucracy, excessive administrative controls and trade restrictions, a poorly organised and underpaid civil service, a weak judicial set-up and, as an over-riding general ingredient, a materialistic concept of success where power, money, status and ostentation play a leading, if not primary, role.
Simple human greed is very often a main contributing factor to corruption. Unless effective remedies to fight and eradicate corruption are such as to encompass it in all its forms—and not just the criminal aspect—the undertaking may well be inadequate. The parameters of what constitutes, or at least should constitute, criminal corruption are certainly more evident and palpable than those that are, or should be, the constitutive elements of corruption in the abstract.
The methods to combat criminal corruption usually follow the familiar pattern: detection, investigation, prosecution and punishment of the offender. The fight against corruption in its wider connotation involves a whole frame of mind, a change in outlook on values and ethical standards.
Vigilance, transparency, publicity, proper institutional bodies are all valuable and necessary tools, but something deeper should also be looked for. A way has to be found which would expose the ugly and pernicious side of corruption and its harmful effects upon society in general and life in particular.
Sound ethical standards should be reflected in public administration and in business in all its aspects. It must be shown that a clean society, upholding upright moral values and ethical standards works. Emphasis must be placed on transparency, incentives, personal responsibility and accountability. Corruption can be fought by negative measures as well as by positive measures.
The creation of a culture opposed to corruption through a good moral and civic education is no doubt the best approach in the fight against crime in general and corruption in particular. It is important for any State to instill in its citizens high moral values and ethical standards.
The chief problem with all forms of corruption is that it thrives on secrecy and silence. It represents one of the most significant segments of unknown crime or unreported crime. Official statistics, whether criminal or otherwise, seldom reflect this type of activity. One can sense it but not necessarily prove it.
Transparency therefore becomes a key-concept in the fight against corruption, in particular in the public domain. As regards the volume of money, public procurement is by far the most important domain of corruption. Avoiding and sanctioning corruption in public procurement is thus one of the essential ingredients in the fight against corruption.
Education in the civic and ethical fields should face up to the challenge. Corruption is a manifestation of a degeneration of morality, a return to the instinct of egoism and greed. Instinct can only be tamed and controlled by an incessant educational programme in good moral behaviour, ethical standards and in civic norms.
A society built on the positive values of strong morality and good ethical standards is a caring society, which thrives on harmony and solidarity. Such a society is one with an aim, with a long-term vision; such a society is one, which believes that corruption upsets these values and frustrates its aims. History has taught us that it is belief in a purpose, rather than a strong hand that can really fuse and hold society together.
The ability to judge soundly is essential in planning our future and improving on our past performance. Sound judgment is a prerequisite to achieve optimum utilization of people and natural assets. The imperative is greater than ever to put our cards on the table and critically assess our situation. Corruption cries for solutions.
To find answers, not only on survival for the present but also on interpreting the future, preparing ourselves for opportunities which are bound to come our way. It will demand study and preparation. It requires a lot of thinking. Make time to think. It is essential that we create adequate opportunity to sit back and think. To develop insight, but also dream colourful dreams of our future generations.
To close this argument, the biblical story of David and Goliath provides a good individual contribution each one of us can make in the fight against corruption. David did not become great when he killed Goliath, but at the moment he decided to try. Corruption should be viewed in the same context the Israelites viewed Goliath. Like David, within each one of us there is that seed of greatness!— The author is Minister of Trade and Private Sector Development. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
