Dismal graft (Do as we say, not as we do)

The Economist ^ | August 28, 2002 | Global Agenda

[dgallo51]

International efforts to stamp out graft among public officials have made little progress, laments a new study. Corrupt politicians and greedy businessmen are not just enriching themselves, but hampering economic development

THE United Nation's summit on sustainable development, now under way in Johannesburg, is a rallying point for a plethora of causes, some more deserving than others. The latest to join the throng—with some justification—is Transparency International (TI), a non-governmental organisation that fights corruption worldwide. But those striving to break the cycle of poverty and graft in the developing world will find little to encourage them. TI’s latest Corruption Perceptions Index, a listing of 102 countries ranked according to the perceived levels of corruption among their politicians and public officials, makes dismal reading.

No less than 70 countries score less than five out of a possible total of ten, according to TI’s poll. There are few shocks, except perhaps that so little has been achieved in stamping out the problem. Corruption is still perceived to be rampant in Indonesia, Kenya, Angola, Madagascar, Nigeria and Bangladesh—all countries at the bottom of the pile with a score of less than two out of ten. The politicians’ gain is their peoples’ sacrifice. “From illegal logging to blood diamonds, we are seeing the plundering of the earth and its people in an unsustainable way,” laments Peter Eigen, chairman of TI.

Far from improving, he says, standards have slipped in many parts of the world, particularly in places where democracy is under threat or economies are in decline. In this category TI includes a large swathe of South and Central America—including Panama, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Paraguay, all of which score three or less out of a possible ten. Even Argentina, whose economy has crumbled since the government reneged on its debts to international lenders and was forced to devalue its currency, is now included among this bunch.

Although Russia has recently made strides to combat corruption—President Vladimir Putin has introduced a welter of tax reforms and new measures to fight money laundering—most of the former Soviet Union remains seriously corrupt. Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Ukraine and Uzbekistan all manage scores of three or less. There are some bright spots, even in eastern Europe. Slovenia, a former communist state, is perceived to have a cleaner record than either Italy or Greece.

TI’s list is by no means exhaustive. As a rolling survey of polls carried out by other organisations between 2000 and 2002, and involving interviews with local residents as well as jaundiced expatriates, it includes only those countries which have featured in at least three such studies. So the list covers barely half the 200 or so sovereign nations in the world. It is a fair bet that some of those excluded because there are too little reliable data on them are as corrupt, if not worse, than those caught by TI’s Corruption Perceptions Index.

Predictably, the countries that come out of the survey best are, by and large, those with the most developed economies and the most established democracies. But there are a few surprises. The United States—recently beset by its share of corporate sleaze if not by wrongdoing among politicians—appears 16th in the table, just above Chile but below Austria and Hong Kong. Ireland, at number 23, narrowly pips Botswana, which ranks higher than France or Portugal. The top spot is reserved for squeaky-clean Finland, which is followed by Denmark and New Zealand in joint second.

Copyright © 2002 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.

[dgallo51]

We're sure not in Kansas anymore Toto! You know there isn't a lower life form on the face of this planet than one who steals from the poorest of the poor. There must be accountability and the sociopaths purged and punished!