If there were Christmas in September, it would be on the 23rd of that month, this year...in Berlin. On that day, Transparency International (TI) will release its annual 2008 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI).

[The index] ranks 180 countries by their perceived levels of domestic corruption. The index, released annually since 1995, looks at public sector corruption based on expert assessments and opinion surveys, helping to highlight the propensity of domestic corruption and its damaging influence (full press release).

Anyway, that's a couple of weeks away. In the meantime, let's play a game.

What will be the 2008 CPI score for [fill in the blank a country of your choice]? Will [country x] see its corruption ranking improve (go up) or worsen (go down) from a year ago (i.e. 2007)?

Post the country and your projection in the comments. When the 2008 CPI rankings are released, we'll see whose predictions worked out. Help spread the word!

Note: more than one country prediction can be posted. For CPI scores in 2007, see here.

CeskeNoviny.cz reports that the Czech State Environment Fund has asked Transparency International (TI) "to carry out an audit to disclose shortcomings in the re-distribution of money from the EU and national sources designed for the Environment Operational Programme" (EOP).

What is an EOP?

The "Environment" Operational Programme is aimed at improving the quality of the environment in the Czech Republic and thus also the population health.

More about the audit:

The anti-corruption audit will have two phases. In the first one the auditors will define the risks with the help of an analysis of the process of receiving and the procession of applications and control of the project after its completion.  They will also analyse the rules of communication between the SFZP and applicants before they submitted their applications and complaints and proposals the fund received since 2004.

In the second stage the auditors will propose measures aimed at correcting shortcomings.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the next time the TI releases its Corruption Perception Index, the Czech Republic is going to improve its ranking.  For 2007, Czechia is ranked 41st with a CPI score of 5.2 out of 10 (cleanest), which is ahead of Latvia (#51) and Poland (#61), but far below Estonia (#28).  For interpretation and additional data, see the TI's CPI for 2007.

A really fascinating Transparency International (TI) report for those in the NGO industry, but also governments and corporations that provide humanitarian assistance, has just been released. The report’s findings, however, can be applied to non-humanitarian assistance scenarios as well, especially those where large sums of money are allocated.

Below is part of the intro, and the rest is available on TI’s site.

Humanitarian assistance is a lifeline that brings food, shelter and other basic services to millions of people caught in the worst of circumstances through war, famine or natural disaster. However, it often takes place in challenging environments which may include endemic corruption. The sudden injection of large amounts of resources and the urgency of a crisis also create risks of corruption in the delivery of humanitarian aid…Detecting and preventing corruption in relief processes is an urgent priority in order to maximise relief efforts and truly help those in dire need.

If you’re interested in specific anticorruption mechanisms, here is a bullet point summary:

• Whistleblower mechanisms
• Codes of conduct that address values, sexual exploitation
• Strengthening surge capacity
• Specific policies for human resources, procurement, audits
• Guidelines for emergency process “overrides”
• Resource tracking and supply chain management
• Improving downward accountability

See the press release; full report in PDF.

"It is better to grant amnesty to those willing to admit they had swindled the public out of cash."

"ER, YOU WHAT?!?!?" I hear you cry.

To give you a brief rundown of Mr Githongo for those of you who do not know who this chap is;
John Githongo founded the Kenyan chapter of 'Transparency International' back in 1999. In 2003 he was elected to the position of Permanent Secretary for Governance and Ethics by the incoming president Kibaki, who had been elected on an anti-corruption platform. He resigned from this position in February 2005 without comment, though it was reported that he felt the government lacked commitment to ending corruption and that he had received death threats. He then moved to the UK to live in self-exile and had been there ever since until .... *duh, deh, dah* ... Tuesday night, after receiving an invitation to return from our very own PM Mr Raila Odinga.

Now, what on earth are we supposed to make of all this handing out amnesty rather than prosectution?

There was a debate on the radio this morning about this thorny issue and although the majority seemed to think that Githongo should get straight back onto the plane and return to wherever he came from with his crazy suggestions, I thought both sides of the discussion had very valid points.

The 'PRO' Githongo stance was that no-one has ever actually been held to account for ripping off public funds. We have commission of enquiry after Commission of Enquiry but no-one ever seems to get held to book and we seem to spend a damn fortune on these commissions dragging out a lot of accusations and counter accusations and yet there is never a conclusion and not one penny gets returned, so Githongo has a point. Let those who ripped off cash put their hands up and then get forgiven and let's move on.

The 'YOU MUST BE NUTS' stance that totally disagrees with Githongo, is of the opinion that if you forgive these people - whether they put their hands up or not (as chances are they never will anyhow!), it is just giving an excuse to these people to loot even more cash, and surely we have to put a stop to this corruption by holding people to account for their actions - whether that be yesterday or ten years ago, surely theft (because that is basically what it is lets be honest) is totally wrong and should NOT be forgiven just like that because some chap put his hands up and said 'Sorry'. Surely there should be some form of repercussion.

Someone said that apparently in China, people get beheaded if caught stealing government funds, and although that may be slightly extreme I must admit, everyday people here in Kenya get lynched daily for stealing mobile phones, and yet we are willing to let our leaders get away with blatant fraud?

Mmmm, I think both sides have legitimate points in this argument, but I'm definitely leaning to the side of NOT getting away with this continuous looting of our hard earned cash.

Surely the buck has to stop somewhere ???

maria koreck, reprezentant ONG mures, supleantul lui zoltan hajdu, ia cuvantul şi pune sub semnul întrebării această clauză de confidenţialitate pt. că e un fel de botniţă aplicată membrilor CRESC, cu sancţiunea excluderii din comitet! dna. lokodi îi răspunde în acel mod tipic politicianist care nu explică nimic, repetând doar când şi cum trebuie completată declaraţia, fără să ne lămurească DECE. reţin ca explicaţie doar că "aşa se face, aşa e scris în regulament, gata, trecem la următorul punct"... vedeţi şi înregistrarea video de mai jos!

[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2333631972958752336&hl=en]
[alocutiuni: 1. dna. koreck maria, supleant ONG mures despre clauza de confidentialitate, 2. raspunde dna. lokodi, 3. personal ADR centru prezinta diverse rapoarte]

dna. lokodi mai spune apoi că asta înseamnă "să ţinem secret ceea ce discutăm aici"... cum adică? se pare că n-a auzit de legea transparenţei, a accesului la informaţii de interes public, la întregul set de norme UE transpuse în acte normative româneşti privind accesul la informaţii privind mediul? şi nu în ultimul rând, chiar comisia europeană a elaborat în aprilie 2008 un set de norme privind transparenţa şi accesul la informaţii UE (inclusiv norme legale europene în elaborare)! în ardeal se pare că trăim în altă uniune europeană decât cea la care a aderat românia în 2007!? deci, "să ţinem secret" cum avem de gând să cheltuim câteva sute de milioane de euro pe an din banii contribuabililor europeni!

dna. preşedintă ori nu stăpâneşte bine nuanţele limbii române, ori le ignoră, ori chiar crede sincer ce spune... apropo de "secret" şi secretomanie: dna. lokodi a fost procuror în timpul dictaturii comuniste, din câte am aflat. şi din câte ştiu, nu a existat procuror pe vremea aceea care să nu fi colaborat cu serviciile secrete. de aici oare secreto-filia dânsei? well, nu mă interesează CVul personal al nimănui, dar din moment ce este vorba de un funcţionar public, iar activităţile din trecut pun sub semnul întrebării integritatea şi buna credinţă vizavi de activităţile prezente, background-ul profesional al unui funcţionar ne priveşte pe toţi şi poate fi/trebuie discutat.

2. prezentare raport trimestrial
3. situaţie implementare POR la nivel de regiune centru
4. aprobare pv şedinţă precedentă
5. evaluare strategică proiecte (reabilitare arteră principală agnita, reabilitare termică cămin de bătrâni sibiu, reabilitare DJ în mărginimea sibiului, modernizare străzi tg. mureş, reabilitare cetate vauban alba iulia, achiziţionare echipament situaţii de urgenţă)

la evaluarea proiectelor eu am fost dat afară din sală, nu ştiu exact dece. oare pt. că nu sînt membru CRESC sau observator, ci "doar" invitat? în regulamentul CRESC nu scrie nimic de excluderea invitaţilor de la o parte a şedinţei! sau am fost dat afară pentru că sînt cel care i-a stricat jocurile dnei ex-procuror lokodi, eliminându-i până acuma din CRESC 2 candidaţi clientelari sau favoriţi pe care s-a străduit mult să-i impună în mod abuziv? pe dna. L. eu am cunoscut-o până acuma aproape exclusiv ca pe un funcţionar abuziv şi cu mentalitate vădit opresivă. :-(

şi încă un ultim apropo: am aflat de la un prieten că dna. lokodi ar fi fost menţionată şi într-unul din rapoartele pre-aderare ale comisiei europene, la rubrica corupţie. trebuie să mă mai documentez. mă întreb, oare câţi colaboratori ai fostei poliţii politice şi-au găsit un post călduţ în sfera UE, ADR?

6. corelare cu POR proiecte finanţate/finanţabile din diverse fonduri.

(în poză: dna. maria koreck, supleant ONG mures: a treia pers. din dreapta; dna. lokodi: în centru la masa din faţă; dl. martin bottesch, CJ sibiu: persoana de langă preşedinta CRESC)

impresia generală a fost una bună, lăsând la o parte situaţia declaraţiilor de confidenţialitate... totuşi, din câte am putut vedea şi auzi, înainte să fi fost dat afară, NU se prea DISCUTĂ încă în CRESC, dna preşedintă fiind cu atât mai dominantă prin aceasta. a mai luat cuvântul o doamnă (birgit schliewenz) din landul brandenburg/germania, un fel de observator şi fost twin. a fost plină de laude la dresa "responsabilităţii" cu care s-a votat în CRESC. (au fost aprobate spre finanţare toate cele 6 proiecte.)

următoarea şedinţă va avea loc în luna septembrie.

actualizare 24.08:: dna. koreck, intr-o postare pe o lista de email a apreciat sedinta CRESC in felul urmator: "Atat pot sa va spun ca nu au fost foarte interesante din punct de vedere al dezvoltarii regionale, nu am reusit sa vad nimic negativ la ele, insa cu o exceptie nici o incercare a judetelor de a gandi strategic si de a uni fortele pentru a eficientiza dezvoltarea regiunii noastre."

si ca o propunere de viitor:
"Oricum, nu procedura de evaluare a proiectelor este cea unde noi putem sa facem ceva, ci va trebui sa venim cu propuneri strategice in domeniul fiecaruia si sa incercam ca propunerile noastre sa fie preluate si de alte judete si sa putem propune proiecte pilot regionale in diferite domenii. Este un proces mai lung, dar trebuie sa il facem. Exista capitole de finantari unde am putea sa intram, insa nu cu proiecte mici doar depuse de o organizatie ci de proiecte mai ample impreuna mai multe organizatii in asociere cu administratii publice locale."

abordarea dnei. koreck mi se pare cu adevarat una "strategica" si "corelata" privind viitoarele proiecte UE in regiunea noastra. chiar daca am considerat-o pe dna. koreck, pe drept cred, un reprezentant ONG pe placul dnei presedinta CJ mures, lokodi, cu care se afla in relatii de amicitie si per tu, viziunea dansei asupra rolului ONG in CRESC si in ceea ce priveste gandirea strategica, mi se pare laudabila. sa vedem cum evolueaza situatia privind confidentialitatea activitatii membrilor CRESC iar apoi, daca ONGurile si APL se vor putea ridica la inaltimea la care ne-a ridicat deja dna. koreck!

......................................................................................................

joi / THU 21.08::
2015H > caut pe site-ul ADR centru lista actualizată a membrilor CRESC dar n-o găsesc decât pe cea veche, cu membri "expiraţi".

aflu toate astea de la zoli hajdu, reprezentant ONG mures în CRESC, respectiv aflu că şi publicarea materialelor pe site-ul ADR s-a făcut tot la insistenţele lui. îl întreb apoi dacă mi-a făcut invitaţie ca să pot participa şi eu la şedinţa CRESC şi-mi spune că nu, pt. că el nu va merge, fiind înlocuit de supleantul koreck maria. -dar de asta mă poţi invita încă!, îi răspund. păi s-o sun eu pe maria că el nu ştie dacă mă poate invita dacă nu participă! -am vorbit eu cu secretariatul ADR şi mi-au zis că e de ajuns să fiu invitat de unul din membri CRESC şi gata!

(văd pe zoli schema asta psihologică de marginalizare şi punere a membrilor unui for delibverativ într-o postură defensivă de către birocraţii instituţiei respective. atâta ar putea face şi zoli pentru mine: să mă treacă pe lista participanţilor, că doar aşa stabilisem încă săptămâna trecută! şi nu c-ar conta la nivel de ego, dar e vorba de principiul ajutorului reciproc, anume: pentru locul său în comitetul de evaluare strategică o persoană a depus nişte eforturi serioase, şi acea persoană nu a fost el, cum ar fi fost firesc... ci eu, care i-am făcut lobby şi i-am strâns voturi timp de 2 zile, ca să nu-i mai iasă schema dnei. presedintă CJ mures, lokodi emoke, de a desemna indirect candidatul ei favorit...)

mai insist puţin şi zoli se pare că se prinde... şi îmi anunţă la ADR participarea. zoli şi maria k. vor să abordeze în CRESC în mod discret o problemă serioasă (obligativitatea membrilor CRESC de a semna o declaraţie de confidenţialitate) şi nu vrea să forţeze nota de la bun început, zice zoli. îi spun că vreau să particip la şedinţă nu ca să mă pun acolo în evidenţă ca potenţial troublemaker ci ca om interesat + că ţine şi de proiectul meu cu transparency românia!

It really is not the reporting of Police corruption to the world community that vilifies the workings of our criminal “Justice” machinery, particularly concerning treatment of our foreign 'economically advantaged' but culturally naive visitors. It is the inherent disgrace of such relatively transparent extortive shakedowns themselves where ‘under the table' consent has been seized thru’ usurpation and the proceeds proportionately fractionalized upward, ‘behind the khaki curtain’, rank wise, conforming to the ‘Inverted Triangle’ principle of Multi-Level Marketing.

In the bigger picture, CORRUPTION MATTERS! Corruption is treasonous: it subverts ethical governance, saps productivity, prostitutes our nation to the highest bidder, directly affects National Security. And it costs us all very dearly!

No doubt we’ve come some ways toward progress but in these 60 post-Independence years we took to coming ‘this close’ to striking a nuclear deal with the US, we could have accomplished A LOT MORE in other areas critical to our national development and earning a respectable standing as a World Leader entrusted with veto powers in the UN.

Instead, we find ourselves still limping to the same sad tune and the same weather beaten theme we’ve inherited from our predecessors: Purporting to address poverty while widening the economic gap, proposing literacy reforms while overlooking adequate benefits for teachers, stamping out child labor absent an aggressive motivational school program free from depriving them of their meager government subsidized food rations and health services, setting out to modernize agriculture and animal husbandry without considering just dues to struggling farmers, assuring rural development in an administrative climate that skims the ‘cream’ off the budget ‘crud’, contemplating infrastructure absent decent benefits for Labor, ‘tightening up’ internal security with a purchasable intelligence and enforcement machinery …

Not that we’ve been short of money for development programs.; far from that! You see, the budgeted funds traverse a rather obscure, circuitous path to reach their final destination. Herein lies the (deliberate?) quandary! A lot of greedy pockets line the route impeding its passage like panhandlers at the railway station following close at heel toward your transportation! And when the funds eventually arrive and are put to their intended use, they are usually found to be “inadequate” to complete the projects to an acceptable standard for utilization hence justifying necessitating cost-influenced ‘trimmings’ and, as expected, sub-standard results that defeat the purpose.

Consider just this one common example: the annual flood situation during the Monsoons. Stagnant water and the lack of proper drainage facilities that invite disease, traffic jams, property damage, power cuts, mud slides, many casualties … We deal with this occurrence every year in just about the same locations as previous years, yet, with the exception of random filling of pot holes (and only in response to overwhelming complaints), we see little if any signs of its abatement – despite the availability and release of funds for the very purpose.

It doesn’t take a genius in Economics to figure out where the shortages in allocated funds went. One needs only to direct a cursory glance at the “Lifestyles to Means Ratio” of our trusted public servants to discover their nests are pretty damn well feathered. Yet there’s little if any inquest. And why should there be when “all concerned” (excluding the general public) have been generously compensated?

One manager at the local Municipality, on assurance of anonymity, confessed that the biggest money-making racket has been the land registration and grabbing schemes – the Darling of some of the highest placed icons in politics and Administration! This is how it usually works: Intelligence from their ‘Field Surveyors’ brings to light a listing of prime real estate especially vulnerable for seizure (usually owned by some aged individual, or someone living abroad, or someone with little or no political clout to hold out in an expensive - and often fixed - court proceedings).

Appropriate documents are then forged (e.g., a fictitious Sale Deed, Mortgage Deed with Right of Possession, Affidavit of Defaulting Terms Guaranteeing Surety, etc.). The property is registered to the new ‘owner’ who summarily directs his goons to occupy the property and establish presence. The ‘genuine’ Owner would call the Police but to no avail; their ‘cooperation’ would have been acquired previously. So now he is compelled into a long, drawn out battle in court which could last as long as 20 years. Meanwhile, some enterprising political muscle-flexing scum enjoys the fruits of someone else’s labor!

And you were thinking “THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH?” Not hardly, my Man! Looks like the predators shall!

There are scores of such success stories giving credence to the “Rags to (purloined) Riches” parable. Like f’rinstance a City manager who had been milking the budget for years "allocating" resources toward road development in some godforsaken corner of Slumsville and for maintenance and operational costs of their Community Center. Now, TWENTY PROFITABLE YEARS LATER, it is discovered that absolutely no roads were ever laid out there since Independence, and there was no Community Center in that Hole-in-the-Wall ghetto in the first place!

Extortion rackets, particularly gender biased IPC §498a scams, have evolved in sophistication and become so widespread that they are generally recognized as a lucrative underground Cottage Industry managed by a capable Board of Directors who just happen to be the local Police.

There’s available a very informative article by a Sanjay Dani of San Francisco on the Indian Corruption Entrepreneurship that goes so far as to suggest diligence and due caution from US businesses contemplating interaction within the unique ethical mores of Indian business practices. I found it most definitely a “ Must Read ” piece of objective research. Here’s the Link: http://thepiratebay.org/search/India%20Police%20Corruption*/0/99/600.

Pursuant to numerous such criminal incidents reported by the media, particularly situations where, minimally, by preponderance of evidence, one could reasonably ascertain that vested Police involvement exists, the Consulate General of the United States of America has issued a World-wide cautionary advisory to travelers intending to visit India:

“Persons violating Indian laws, even unknowingly, may be expelled, arrested or imprisoned.  For example, certain comments or gestures towards women, Indian national symbols, or religion that are legal in the United States may be considered a criminal violation in India, subjecting the accused to possible fines or imprisonment. Furthermore, since the police may arrest anyone who is accused of committing a crime (even if the allegation is frivolous in nature), the Indian criminal justice system is often used to escalate personal disagreements into criminal charges.  This practice has been increasingly exploited by dissatisfied business partners, contractors, estranged spouses, or other persons with whom the U.S. citizen has a disagreement, occasionally resulting in the jailing of U.S. citizens pending resolution of their disputes.  At the very least, such circumstances can delay the U.S. citizen's timely departure from India, and may result in an unintended long-term stay in the country.  Corruption in India, especially at local levels, is a concern, as evidenced by Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index of 3.5, ranking India in 72nd place of the world’s countries…”

Now wait just a doggone moment here, Pilgrim! I represent (I mean) resent those remarks! How dare they pass factual comments about us like that! Why, the nerve … ! Just for that, we should serve them a dose of our Super Duper NRI-‘Farengee’ Special FIR! Our Inspector Sahibs have years of practical experience dressing up fraudulent FIRs with “Mirchi Masala”! They’ll dream up a suitable Penal Code section later! Yes, Yes! Just imagine the charges … Ooohh! Baby, I’m really getting turned on, now … A non-bailable “Libelous Representation of Truth” or “Contempt of Crooked Courts” or “Conspiracy to Impede Tourist Shakedowns” r/w “Propaganda Intended to Expose our Insidious Tourist Traps” …. We gotta arrest them for something, Yar! It is now Izzat-ka-Sawaal! Let's get them for, like f’rinstance, “Urinating on the Sidewalk in Public View”! No, we can’t do that! After all, it happens to be a protected Indian tradition! Instead, let’s ‘appropriate’ their Multi National Investments here and send them packing back to "Phoren"! Oops! Can’t do that either. We’d be broke in no time and on our knees again! Besides, we could all use some Visiting Visas to Amreeka so we could conveniently disappear and start our very own Desi convenience store or get a job in the armory dept. at the local mosque!

On second thoughts, why cause trouble, Yar? Let’s just turn the other cheek and pretend it’s just a “crazy American joke”! Subsequent slaps in public don’t hurt as much as the first one did; besides, remember that time-honored advise from the enlightened Swamiji (now prudently in hiding)? “Better to be slapped in public by a gang of career diplomats than have your ass kicked in private by a solitary Marine”.

Our Founding Fathers may likely be “rolling in their graves” while their prospering progeny are “rolling in the gravy”. Tsk! Tsk! Depressing state of affairs …

"Over the last 40 years, Africa has received over $600 billion in foreign aid and debt relief. For most of this period, the continent sustained zero to negative growth; positive growth was only occasional and sporadic, depending on international commodity price fluctuations." reports the Guardian newspaper.

The article continues, "Why has aid been antithetical to growth? There are many reasons, including mismanagement and miss-allocation of aid resources, slow disbursement of aid monies and corruption. But the fundamental reason is that aid creates the wrong incentives for growth."

Despite the evidence The recent G8 Summit in Japan upheld earlier calls for doubling foreign financial aid to Africa as a solution to poverty on the continent.

Mwanda suggests that If the source of this revenue is the national economy, government would be driven by self-interest to listen to its citizens about policies and it would be necessary to increase the productivity of private enterprises. But, foreign id distorts the situation. Rather than forge a productive relationship with their own citizens, governments find it more profitable to negotiate for revenues from abroad.

Foreign aid that has saved incompetent governments from collapse. By providing them an external subsidy, governments in Africa have been able to retain power even when pursuing policies that impoverish their citizens. Cut the aid, and many of them will be forced to pursue economic growth or pay the political price of their economic folly.

Our View: Almost certainly Mwanda´argument is correct, but this should not lead to an ending of aid. Instead it is the responsibility of o private and public, to adopt policies that recognise and address these issues. That means supporting initiatives, such as those by Transparency International, to encourage the expansion of open and accountable governments, and continuing to expose those that under-perform on the Corruption Perceptions Index which ranks 180 countries by their perceived levels of corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys. This index allows decision makers to adopt policies and make investment decisions accordingly.

In support they said, "“As leader of a global coalition in the fight against corruption, Transparency International supports the initiative of Artists Against Corruption. In expressing the link between corruption and poverty through music, theatre, dance, art, photograph, and other art forms, the campaign will make people aware that corruption is one of the biggest obstacles to reducing poverty. This initiative helps advance our mission to create change towards a world free of corruption."

We are now also discussing collaborate to rapidly internationalise Artists Against Corruption. News of any developments will be posted here. You can also join the newsletter mailing list for regular updates.

Transparency International's (TI) methodology was recently applied at the local level in Estonia in order to analyze levels of corruption in that country's regions. The results are that:

Estonian residents perceive corruption the most urgently in Northern Estonia...Ranking next in terms of corruption perception was Southern Estonia, Eastern Estonia and Western Estonia.

Think (version 2) - education

Larry Elliot, edconomics Editor of the Guardian newspaper (UK) as recently as 24th June reported that, " MPs fear corruption risk from poorly monitored aid." The story said, "Parliament's spending watchdog will warn the government today that lax monitoring of aid spending meant hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money was at risk of corruption or being wasted."

The committee chairman said, "Despite spending around one fifth of its bilateral aid in the form of direct payments to the governments of developing countries, DFID does not know how good an instrument this is in reducing poverty. Nor does the department know whether such support provides better value for money in reducing poverty than other forms of aid."

And, it does not take long to find evidence of the additional problems that can be cause by badly managed aid programs. "Poorly directed aid increases Afghanistan's woes" was the title of an editorial piece in the Observer newspaper (UK) yesterday. The article says, "Corruption and criminality, linked often to the very heart of government, is endemic. Despite $15bn in aid that has been disbursed, Afghanistan remains mired in pervasive poverty with unemployment standing at more than 40 per cent. The country's position as one of the world's poorest has barely shifted since 2001."

With all the money invested it says, " There have been some positive steps since the fall of the Taliban regime. Millions of children are in education in a country with a long history of high levels of illiteracy, particularly among women. A vibrant media, although under threat from many sides, also exist. Improvements have been made in the provision of healthcare. But this is not enough to persuade Afghans that much is getting better when they are confronted daily by criminality, violence, a predatory police force and an ill-educated and corrupted civil service."

And the article goes on to say, "The hazard of throwing more money at the problem is that without a tighter focus to that spending, Afghans see the increased aid budget as an opportunity for a small elite of Afghans and a small army of international contractors and aid workers to enrich themselves still further. A further consequence is that, because it lacks a professional civil service to support the people, the aid community has shouldered the burden, inadvertently undermining still further the development of effective local services."

I am not arguing that aid should stop, on the contracry it should increase. But, it is just as important to make sure that what is spent is used effectively, and certainly does not make existing problems worse. Corruption is a very complicated issue, but that is not an excuse for ignoring it. Ignoring it costs lives.

Institutions like Transparency International provide a great deal of help to aid giving and aid receiving countries. They have developed best practice guidelines for reform based on the latest research into the causes and effects of corruption. All governments would be well advised to take their adviseand adopt comprehensive anti-corruption policies. Advice is also available to private enterprise and to individuals who want to fight corruption.

The links are not immediately obvious, and they are in fact many and varied. They depend on the type of corruption, also many and varied.

On a macro level it is safe to say that "Corruption not only reduces the net income of the poor but also wrecks programmes related to their basic needs, from sanitation to education to health care. It results in the misallocation of resources to the detriment of poverty reduction programmes." (Transparency International) But the, effects are most dramatically obvious at a micro or personal level when a bribe randomly extorted by a police officer may mean a families cannot afford medicines or even basic food.

Corruption has an impact on the effectiveness of spending by a national government, and on the effectiveness of international development assistance. The money does not always reach the intended beneficiaries because of corruption. in 2006 Donor countries donated US$104bn in official development assistance. This is set to increase to US$130bn by 2010. If this money gets into the wrong hands the Millennium Development Goals will be put at risk, or as Transparency International put it, "With increasing levels of aid there is concern that corrupt politicians and business people may use this money to enrich themselves rather than improving living conditions for the poor." This will happen unless corruption is tackled as an integral part of poverty reduction strategies.

Corruption also has a serious impact on development driven by private businesses. In a society where a culture of corruption is dominant trust does not exist and business risks are higher resulting in less risk taking by enterprises. Foreign buisnesses are also less likely to invest. In a recent survey the Economist Intelligence Unit found that, "45% of respondents say they have not entered a specific market or pursued a particular opportunity because of corruption risks."

It is safe to conclude that societies pay a massive price if they tollerate corruption, but the price paid by the poor is far greater. It is no exageration to say that for many poor people the cost of corruption is their lives. One example is when corrupt officials starve hospitals of resources leaving them unable to save lives, whilst spending public funds on projects that offer financial kickbacks.

Artists Against Corruption supports the general fight against corruption, but our focus is to raise awareness on behalf of those most affected by it.

Given the growing consensus that the problem must be addressed we are hoping for widesread support from institutions, governments, private companies and NGO´s in our effort to raise awareness and a desire to put an end to corruption.

It will probably get additional coverage from subject specific blogs such as Development Industry.

Below is part of the intro, and the rest is available on TI's site.

Humanitarian assistance is a lifeline that brings food, shelter and other basic services to millions of people caught in the worst of circumstances through war, famine or natural disaster. However, it often takes place in challenging environments which may include endemic corruption. The sudden injection of large amounts of resources and the urgency of a crisis also create risks of corruption in the delivery of humanitarian aid...Detecting and preventing corruption in relief processes is an urgent priority in order to maximise relief efforts and truly help those in dire need.

If you're interested in specific anticorruption mechanisms, here is a bullet point summary:

• Whistleblower mechanisms
• Codes of conduct that address values, sexual exploitation
• Strengthening surge capacity
• Specific policies for human resources, procurement, audits
• Guidelines for emergency process “overrides”
• Resource tracking and supply chain management
• Improving downward accountability

See the press release; full report in PDF.

Think (version 1) - bribery

Six EU Member States have still not ratified the October 2003 UN Convention against Corruption, including two G8 members, Germany and Italy. Japan, another G8 member has also not ratified.

He makes an astute observation:

• It is timely to reflect, a month ahead of the G8 Toyako summit on the big gap between rhetoric and reality (seen also in aid to Africa and climate change) and ‘western’ hypocrisy.

On a more focused plane, but staying on the subject is Julien Frisch recent post about transparency of electronic voting. This is certainly an issue that has not been extensively explored by the public, but one that will continue to play an ever increasing role in elections worldwide - including the 2008 U.S. presidential election.

ایران در سال 2005 رتبه 86 با به همراه چین داشت. در سال 2006 ایران با امتیاز 2،7 از 10 به رتبه 105 سقوط کرد و در کنار مالاوی، بولیوی، لیبی و مقدونیه قرار گرفت. در سال 2007 ایران باز نیز سقوط کرد و درمیان 180 کشور در جایگاه 133 با امتیاز 2،5 از 10 در کنار بوروندی، هندوراس، لیبی، نپال، فیلیپین و یمن قرار گرفت.

این گزارش بسیار خواندنی است. دوستانی که به دیدگاه سخت گیرانه و تا اندازه ای منفی من نسبت به ایران ایراد می گیرند، از جمله باید به این گزارش که به نگاهی بیاندازند. احساس و تجربه شخصی من این رتبه بندی را تایید می کند. ایرانیان در بسیاری موارد به پاکستان و بنگلادش نزدیک تر هستند تا به کشورهای عربی و ترکیه.

چند نتیجه جالب در این گزارش دیدم:

- کشورهایی که درآمد اصلی آنها از منابع طبیعی و زیرزمینی است، فاسدتر هستند.

- CPI نشان می دهد که فساد اقتصادی به گسترش فقر در کشورها سرعت می بخشد.

- سنگاپور که در گذشته از فاسدترین کشورها بود، پس از مبارزه موفق علیه فساد و رشوه خواری ،رشد سریع اقتصادی را تجربه کرد و اکنون در رتبه 4 قرار دارد.

برخی از دیگر رتبه ها:

1. دانمارک

2. فنلاند

3. نیوزیلند

4. سنگاپور

5. سوئد

6. ایسلند

7. هلند

8. سویس

9. کانادا

10. نروژ

16. آلمان

30. اسراییل

32. قطر

36. امارات متحده عربی

43. مالزی

46. بحرین

53. اردن

54. موریس

55. عمان

60. کویت

63. تونس

66. ترکیه

69. غنا

73. چین

74. هند

75. مکزیک

76. مراکش

81. عربستان سعودی

103. لبنان

107. بورکینا فاسو

110. مصر

131. بوروندی

132.هندوراس

133. ایران

134. لیبی

135. نپال

139. پاکستان

...

[Update 6 July '08]:  Corruption in Romania video report (7:25m) by Journeyman Pictures.

The Economist has ran another piece on corruption, second in a little bit more than a month (good for them). This time, rather than looking at Eastern European corruption at large, it chose to focus on Romania as a single case in an article plainly titled Corruption in Romania.

For parts of its content, the article relies on a report by Willem de Pauw, a Belgian prosecutor to flash out corupţie in Romania; the report is available in pdf format here. The never-published-until-the-economist-picked-it-up report contrasts with conclusions of a similar document by the European Union.

Unlike the EU report, de Pauw concludes that "instead of progress in the fight against high-level corruption, Romania is regressing on all fronts."

Less encouraging - because it supports the conclusions of Hammarberg's report - is the observation about the state of Romanian justice system:

The Romanian judiciary and/or legal system appears…unable to function properly when it comes to applying the rule of law against high-level corruption.

Intriguing is the next statement:

Indeed, more than five years after the start of Romania’s anti-corruption drive, the public is still waiting for one single case of high-level corruption to reach a verdict.

This is a similar problem experienced by Estonia, which was recently criticized for not having prosecuted a single case of international bribery in the past two years (2006, 2007). While not the same, the comparison must sting for Estonians whose country is relatively highly rated on the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). Estonia's CPI score is over 6, in comparison to Romania's CPI of over 3 (note: 10=lowest perceived corruption).

Two observations are made by The Economist, that...

1. The EU relied too much on individual politicians to back Romania’s anti-corruption drive
2. [There is] intense resistance of practically the whole political class of Romania against the anti-corruption effort

Given this, what can the European Union and reformers in Bucharest do better to decrease corruption levels in Romania?

For one, Brussels should avoid placing all its eggs in one basket as it did with the former justice minister Monica Macovei - who was conveniently dismissed from the government after Romania acceded in 2007. And second, if the whole political class (or a vast majority) is resisting anticorruption efforts, then the EU ought to create encourage vested domestic constituencies that could aid in its push for a more accountable and transparent society.

One such constituency that could clearly benefit from less corruption are small businesses owners, who are typically less "connected" than major corporations, and who are very interested in protecting their property and profits from corrupt public officials.

Most importantly the EU should not forget that it wields a powerful tool in the EU funds, a carrot-turn-stick

It should be generous in disbursing grants funded by the EU taxpayers, but just as much it ought not hesitate to withdraw funding if the recepient party fails on its commitments.

Gertrud Levit, writing for the Baltic Business News, discusses the failure of government in Tallinn to deal with international corruption. This is somewhat surprising given that Estonia regularly scores at the top of the Transparency International's (TI) Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) among communist states.

Levit, quoting a report on Estonia by the TI, says:

In 2006 and 2007 not a single case of international bribery was looked into in Estonia...[and the country] doesn’t even have laws to fight international bribery.

Some of the measures to counter corruption recommended by the TI are that Estonia should...

...define the terms foreign official, giving a bribe, and enterprise liability better, once the appropriate changes to the Penal Code have reached the parliament.

Note that the Magician ad is available in multiple languages at the TI's YouTube Channel, such as Arabic, French, Mandarin Chinese, Russian, Spanish,

The Magician

BERLIN: In Pakistan a quarter of the rural population is engaged in a hidden but well-known system of side payments to obtain irrigation water, a report by Transparency International (TI) released on Wednesday said.

The corruption tax on farmers for obtaining more water than their entitlements was estimated at 2.5 percent of their income per hectare, it added.

Functioning for decades now, this interlocking incentive system of bribery is considered by many a well-established ‘working rule’. The report said that corruption gains from irrigation have been found to dwarf officials’ above-board incomes. In Pakistan, they were estimated at five to eight times regular salaries, and in India up to ten times.

When irrigation water becomes scarce, corrupted allocation means that the last in line lose out, the report says, adding a system meant to distribute water equitably morphs into a water funnel for the rich, who can bribe their way to the front of the queue.

In response to growing scarcity, more farmers are engaging in informal negotiations and extra-legal transactions with irrigation agency officials to obtain water beyond their legal quotas.

Farmers who take extra water generally use it for water gulping crops such as rice, sugarcane and high-yield cotton. Meanwhile, down streamers can hardly produce the minimum amount of staple food and cash crops needed to survive.

Reform will not come easily, the report said. Implementing top-down anti-corruption measures would probably be ineffective at restoring equity in canal irrigation systems. Pakistan set up a system of ‘oversight’ in the 1960s and 1970s, but this only created a new layer of officials to be bribed. afp

Courtesy: Daily Times Pakistan