For the corrupt, by the corrupt….

Rank 5	Country/Territory	CPI 2009 Score	Surveys Used	Confidence Range
180	Somalia	1.1	3	0.9 – 1.4
179	Afghanistan	1.3	4	1.0 – 1.5
178	Myanmar	1.4	3	0.9 – 1.8
176	Sudan	1.5	5	1.4 – 1.7
176	Iraq	1.5	3	1.2 – 1.8
175	Chad	1.6	6	1.5 – 1.7
174	Uzbekistan	1.7	6	1.5 – 1.8
168	Turkmenistan	1.8	4	1.7 – 1.9
168	Iran	1.8	3	1.7 – 1.9
168	Haiti	1.8	3	1.4 – 2.3
168	Guinea	1.8	5	1.7 – 1.8
168	Equatorial Guinea	1.8	3	1.6 – 1.9
168	Burundi	1.8	6	1.6 – 2.0
162	Venezuela	1.9	7	1.8 – 2.0
162	Kyrgyzstan	1.9	7	1.8 – 2.1
162	Guinea-Bissau	1.9	3	1.8 – 2.0
162	Democratic Republic of Congo	1.9	5	1.7 – 2.1
162	Congo Brazzaville	1.9	5	1.6 – 2.1
162	Angola	1.9	5	1.8 – 1.9
158	Tajikistan	2.0	8	1.6 – 2.5
158	Laos	2.0	4	1.6 – 2.6
158	Central African Republic	2.0	4	1.9 – 2.2
158	Cambodia	2.0	8	1.8 – 2.2
154	Yemen	2.1	4	1.6 – 2.5
154	Paraguay	2.1	5	1.7 – 2.5
154	Papua New Guinea	2.1	5	1.7 – 2.5
154	Côte d´Ivoire	2.1	7	1.8 – 2.4
146	Zimbabwe	2.2	7	1.7 – 2.8
146	Ukraine	2.2	8	2.0 – 2.6
146	Timor-Leste	2.2	5	1.8 – 2.6
146	Sierra Leone	2.2	5	1.9 – 2.4
146	Russia	2.2	8	1.9 – 2.4
146	Kenya	2.2	7	1.9 – 2.5
146	Ecuador	2.2	5	2.0 – 2.5
146	Cameroon	2.2	7	1.9 – 2.6
143	Nepal	2.3	6	2.0 – 2.6
143	Comoros	2.3	3	1.6 – 3.3
143	Azerbaijan	2.3	7	2.0 – 2.6
139	Philippines	2.4	9	2.1 – 2.7
139	Pakistan	2.4	7	2.1 – 2.7
139	Belarus	2.4	4	2.0 – 2.8
139	Bangladesh	2.4	7	2.0 – 2.8
130	Uganda	2.5	7	2.1 – 2.8
130	Nigeria	2.5	7	2.2 – 2.7
130	Nicaragua	2.5	6	2.3 – 2.7
130	Mozambique	2.5	7	2.3 – 2.8
130	Mauritania	2.5	7	2.0 – 3.3
130	Maldives	2.5	4	1.8 – 3.2
130	Libya	2.5	6	2.2 – 2.8
130	Lebanon	2.5	3	1.9 – 3.1
130	Honduras	2.5	6	2.2 – 2.8
126	Tanzania	2.6	7	2.4 – 2.9
126	Syria	2.6	5	2.2 – 2.9
126	Guyana	2.6	4	2.5 – 2.7
126	Eritrea	2.6	4	1.6 – 3.8
120	Vietnam	2.7	9	2.4 – 3.1
120	Mongolia	2.7	7	2.4 – 3.0
120	Kazakhstan	2.7	7	2.1 – 3.3
120	Ethiopia	2.7	7	2.4 – 2.9
120	Bolivia	2.7	6	2.4 – 3.1
120	Armenia	2.7	7	2.6 – 2.8
111	Togo	2.8	5	1.9 – 3.9
111	Solomon Islands	2.8	3	2.3 – 3.3
111	Sao Tome and Principe	2.8	3	2.4 – 3.3
111	Mali	2.8	6	2.4 – 3.2
111	Kiribati	2.8	3	2.3 – 3.3
111	Indonesia	2.8	9	2.4 – 3.2
111	Egypt	2.8	6	2.6 – 3.1
111	Djibouti	2.8	4	2.3 – 3.2
111	Algeria	2.8	6	2.5 – 3.1
106	Niger	2.9	5	2.7 – 3.0
106	Gambia	2.9	5	1.6 – 4.0
106	Gabon	2.9	3	2.6 – 3.1
106	Benin	2.9	6	2.3 – 3.4
106	Argentina	2.9	7	2.6 – 3.1
99	Zambia	3.0	7	2.8 – 3.2
99	Tonga	3.0	3	2.6 – 3.3
99	Senegal	3.0	7	2.5 – 3.6
99	Madagascar	3.0	7	2.8 – 3.2
99	Jamaica	3.0	5	2.8 – 3.3
99	Dominican Republic	3.0	5	2.9 – 3.2
99	Bosnia and Herzegovina	3.0	7	2.6 – 3.4
97	Sri Lanka	3.1	7	2.8 – 3.4
97	Liberia	3.1	3	1.9 – 3.8
95	Vanuatu	3.2	3	2.3 – 4.7
95	Albania	3.2	6	3.0 – 3.3
89	Rwanda	3.3	4	2.9 – 3.7
89	Morocco	3.3	6	2.8 – 3.9
89	Moldova	3.3	6	2.7 – 4.0
89	Mexico	3.3	7	3.2 – 3.5
89	Malawi	3.3	7	2.7 – 3.9
89	Lesotho	3.3	6	2.8 – 3.8
84	Thailand	3.4	9	3.0 – 3.8
84	Panama	3.4	5	3.1 – 3.7
84	India	3.4	10	3.2 – 3.6
84	Guatemala	3.4	5	3.0 – 3.9
84	El Salvador	3.4	5	3.0 – 3.8
83	Serbia	3.5	6	3.3 – 3.9
79	Trinidad and Tobago	3.6	4	3.0 – 4.3
79	Swaziland	3.6	3	3.0 – 4.7
79	China	3.6	9	3.0 – 4.2
79	Burkina Faso	3.6	7	2.8 – 4.4
75	Suriname	3.7	3	3.0 – 4.7
75	Peru	3.7	7	3.4 – 4.1
75	Colombia	3.7	7	3.1 – 4.3
75	Brazil	3.7	7	3.3 – 4.3
71	Romania	3.8	8	3.2 – 4.3
71	Greece	3.8	6	3.2 – 4.3
71	FYR Macedonia	3.8	6	3.4 – 4.2
71	Bulgaria	3.8	8	3.2 – 4.5
69	Montenegro	3.9	5	3.5 – 4.4
69	Ghana	3.9	7	3.2 – 4.6
66	Kuwait	4.1	5	3.2 – 5.1
66	Georgia	4.1	7	3.4 – 4.7
66	Croatia	4.1	8	3.7 – 4.5
65	Tunisia	4.2	6	3.0 – 5.5
63	Saudi Arabia	4.3	5	3.1 – 5.3
63	Italy	4.3	6	3.8 – 4.9
61	Turkey	4.4	7	3.9 – 4.9
61	Cuba	4.4	3	3.5 – 5.1
56	Slovakia	4.5	8	4.1 – 4.9
56	Samoa	4.5	3	3.3 – 5.3
56	Namibia	4.5	6	3.9 – 5.1
56	Malaysia	4.5	9	4.0 – 5.1
56	Latvia	4.5	6	4.1 – 4.9
55	South Africa	4.7	8	4.3 – 4.9
54	Seychelles	4.8	3	3.0 – 6.7
52	Lithuania	4.9	8	4.4 – 5.4
52	Czech Republic	4.9	8	4.3 – 5.6
49	Poland	5.0	8	4.5 – 5.5
49	Jordan	5.0	7	3.9 – 6.1
49	Bhutan	5.0	4	4.3 – 5.6
46	Hungary	5.1	8	4.6 – 5.7
46	Cape Verde	5.1	3	3.3 – 7.0
46	Bahrain	5.1	5	4.2 – 5.8
45	Malta	5.2	4	4.0 – 6.2
43	Macau	5.3	3	3.3 – 6.9
43	Costa Rica	5.3	5	4.7 – 5.9
42	Mauritius	5.4	6	5.0 – 5.9
39	Korea (South)	5.5	9	5.3 – 5.7
39	Oman	5.5	5	4.4 – 6.5
39	Brunei Darussalam	5.5	4	4.7 – 6.4
37	Taiwan	5.6	9	5.4 – 5.9
37	Botswana	5.6	6	5.1 – 6.3
35	Puerto Rico	5.8	4	5.2 – 6.3
35	Portugal	5.8	6	5.5 – 6.2
34	Dominica	5.9	3	4.9 – 6.7
32	Spain	6.1	6	5.5 – 6.6
32	Israel	6.1	6	5.4 – 6.7
31	Saint Vincent and the Grenadines	6.4	3	4.9 – 7.5
30	United Arab Emirates	6.5	5	5.5 – 7.5
27	Slovenia	6.6	8	6.3 – 6.9
27	Estonia	6.6	8	6.1 – 6.9
27	Cyprus	6.6	4	6.1 – 7.1
25	Uruguay	6.7	5	6.4 – 7.1
25	Chile	6.7	7	6.5 – 6.9
24	France	6.9	6	6.5 – 7.3
22	Saint Lucia	7.0	3	6.7 – 7.5
22	Qatar	7.0	6	5.8 – 8.1
21	Belgium	7.1	6	6.9 – 7.3
20	Barbados	7.4	4	6.6 – 8.2
19	United States	7.5	8	6.9 – 8.0
17	United Kingdom	7.7	6	7.3 – 8.2
17	Japan	7.7	8	7.4 – 8.0
16	Austria	7.9	6	7.4 – 8.3
14	Ireland	8.0	6	7.8 – 8.4
14	Germany	8.0	6	7.7 – 8.3
12	Luxembourg	8.2	6	7.6 – 8.8
12	Hong Kong	8.2	8	7.9 – 8.5
11	Norway	8.6	6	8.2 – 9.1
8	Iceland	8.7	4	7.5 – 9.4
8	Canada	8.7	6	8.5 – 9.0
8	Australia	8.7	8	8.3 – 9.0
6	Netherlands	8.9	6	8.7 – 9.0
6	Finland	8.9	6	8.4 – 9.4
5	Switzerland	9.0	6	8.9 – 9.1
3	Sweden	9.2	6	9.0 – 9.3
3	Singapore	9.2	9	9.0 – 9.4
2	Denmark	9.3	6	9.1 – 9.5
1	New Zealand	9.4	6	9.1 – 9.5

The CPI list was published by Forbes recently.The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) table shows a country’s ranking and score, the number of surveys used to determine the score, and the confidence range of the scoring. The rank shows how one country compares to others included in the index. The CPI score indicates the perceived level of public-sector corruption in a country/territory. The CPI is based on 13 independent surveys. However, not all surveys include all countries. The surveys used column indicates how many surveys were relied upon to determine the score for that country. The confidence range indicates the reliability of the CPI scores and tells us that allowing for a margin of error, we can be 90% confident that the true score for this country lies within this range. –  

India ranks 84 in the list. It sits almost somewhere in the mid way point between the most corrupt and the least corrupt nations. Yes, we can celebrate that we are doing a lot better than Somalia ( ranked 180 ) which is bound to stray into the below zero mark shortly but at the same time we have every reason to lament that countries like Ghana are many rungs above us. Having lived / living in countries ranked at 8 and 12, corruption is a serious reason that deters many NRI’s returning back to India. I recall an incident when I applied for a driver’s license back home. The paan chewing RTO inspector demanded a bribe of five hundred rupees to pass me. It was only after the inspector received a multilingual ( Kannada, hindi, tamil, english) volley of expletives that he reluctantly passed me. In his own words he stated he passed me not because I drove flawlessly but he did so in order to save his face. The RTO incident is one small drop in the Indian ocean of corruption. Bribes are regularly paid in plastic packets at the Sub Registrar’s office to register a property at least 40% less than market value, so has to to save paying a higher amount of stamp duty. The bribe ensures the lower valuation, timely registration and above all accurate registration. There is a good chance that the property may never get registered and even if it does, the Sub Registrar’s wife may have her name on the records instead of yours.

We strive hard to ape the west, we want to build bigger cities, drive faster cars, splurge on hi tech gadgets, eat burgers , drink fizzy colas but not once did we try to imbibe, assimilate,  soak in,  wassail a sense of fair play judging by how many countries from the EU and the Americas are on top of the rankings.Corruption in India has reached such alarming levels that all parties indulging in it have no sense of shame, remorse or angst whatsoever. Like a parasite it has seeped itself into every cell of the rotting establishments. Corruption has steadfastly become a way of life. A walk to the telephone exchange or the electricity board in case of a fault is akin to taking a stroll into Stephen King’s theme parks. Even schools take bribes, they call it ” building fund” and grant admissions to the higher contributors.

Most times we only talk about corruption and seldom think of ways to fight it. Because it has infested this country so much and has seeped into the nerve cells of all establishments. Eradicating it is by no means an ordinary feat, for within political, bureaucratical, corporate and societal establishments, corruption raises it’s ugly head. India’s advancement in technology and it’s implementation in Public sector undertakings has marginaly fought corruption. The RTI Act 2005 has allowed for more transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities. These are all steps in the right direction.

 I recall an interesting article by an ex central vigilant officer Mr N Vittal ( given below )

Unfortunately, our politics has become criminalised. Law-breakers are lawmakers today. The only people the youth probably look upon as role models are politicians and media stars who collectively represent what is called the Page Three culture. So far as professions are concerned, every professional association can uphold ethics and codes of conduct, and thereby build role models and benchmarks for guiding society.

The third important factor is the system. In any society, from the ethics point of view, 10 per cent may, by nature, be ethical and 10 per cent will, by nature, be corrupt, and 80 per cent will modify their behaviour depending on the system. One simple example of this is how, while an Indian may throw rubbish on the streets without batting an eyelid, the same Indian, when he reaches Singapore, is on guard and may not commit nuisance or throw rubbish on the streets.

We must redesign our system of governance to check corruption. Corruption today is a game in which five major players are involved. They are the corrupt neta, the babu, lala, jhola and dada—the corrupt politicians, the corrupt bureaucrats, the corrupt businessmen, the corrupt NGOs and criminals. For tackling each of them, I would suggest the following:

Political corruption is at the root of all corruption in our country. Our politics is corrupt because it is based on black money. Every political party collects cash, which is black money. Black money is oxygen for corruption and corruption is oxygen for black money. Therefore, we must focus on electoral reform and reducing black money.

Simultaneously, we must also bring greater transparency in the raising of funds by the political parties. Some steps have been taken for removing restrictions on political contributions. We should try to create a situation similar to that of the United States or Britain in so far as fund-raising is concerned. This would provide an opportunity to reduce corruption.

Dr Jayaprakash Narayan, a very committed IAS officer who resigned and set up an NGO, Lok Satta, in Andhra Pradesh, has highlighted the need for changing our electoral system itself. Instead of the British system of first past the post, which only nine out of 47 countries have adopted, we should opt for a system of proportional representation. He also suggests direct elections for the post of chief minister, who can then appoint a cabinet of talent. It is an interesting idea and worth trying. To begin with, it is necessary to build a consensus in the country on this idea.

A simple reform that can be implemented immediately to check corruption and criminalisation of politics is to disqualify any candidate against whom charges have been framed in court. The police may be pliable but the courts apply their mind and frame charges, and hence, they are likely to be more objective.

Today, the criminal politicians take advantage of the principle that they are innocent till proved guilty and also the delays in our judicial system. Corruption has become a low- risk, high-profit business in India because our judiciary is so slow and the conviction rate is only six per cent.

There is need to change the judicial system in so far as corruption cases are concerned, so that like election cases, corruption cases, too, are required to be decided within one year. For this, the system of summary trial procedure can be introduced and the appeal limited to one court. Today, at any given point of time, around 4,000 CBI cases are pending. CBI cases, by their very nature, are supposed to be very serious and yet some of them are pending for more than 25 years. The speeding up of the cases and effective punishment will go a long way in improving the situation.

Winning formula

So far as bureaucratic corruption is concerned, the following three-point formula must be adopted.

—Simplification of rules and procedures to reduce the scope of corruption;

—Transparency and empowering of public, and

—Effective punishment.

There is an urgent need to bring a sense of accountability in bureaucracy. Article 311 provides so much protection to the public servant that it is very difficult to take action effectively and in time against corrupt officials.

Fighting corruption is a hard task. There cannot be a single-point approach to the task. We have to adopt a multi-point approach, some of which I have indicated above.

We then come to the basic question. The powers that be, whether in politics or bureaucracy or business, are benefiting from the corrupt system. Can there be a situation where these beneficiaries of corruption will initiate action to check corruption? That may amount to causing hara-kiri. My perception is that as far as our politicians are concerned, they act only under two circumstances: One, where the TINA (There is no alternative) factor prevails; and two, where there is a vote bank advantage. The TINA factor can be created in our country by broadly two methods. One is by using the route of the public interest litigation and activating the Supreme Court so that the persons concerned have no alternative but to implement it. The enactment of the CVC Act and the practice of the candidates declaring their criminal record while filing nominations are examples of this type.

However, there are also limits to judicial intervention. The second instrument that can create the TINA factor is technology, particularly information technology. We have seen how in the railway reservation system, the use of IT has brought down corruption. I understand that even in the issue of passport, computerisation has helped in bringing down corruption. So greater use of IT and reforming and simplifying the procedures can be the second broad strategy to help create the TINA factor.

 

While at the middle of this post, I recall writing a bit more on the same topic from a cinematic sense –https://sharmilasays.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/rajnee-thi/