Corruption ranking: It could be better
Thursday, 25 September 2008
THERE is not too much to read in the better position attained by Bangladesh in the corruption ranking of Transparency International (TI) that measures the rise and fall of corruption round the world. Its report on corruption released on Wednesday showed Bangladesh to be improving by moving up in the rating to the position of the 10th most corruption-ridden country in the world. It shares this ranking jointly with Kenya, Russia and Syria. Bangladesh's position was 7th in corruption ranking last year and for some years in succession before that, it had the undesirable distinction as the most corrupt country. Therefore, there is some satisfaction to be noted that this country is, at least, not remaining stagnant in its image as the worst case in the corruption ranking. It has made small but important progress in taking up the gauntlet against corruption. It has been moving positively upwards in the corruption ranking and not sliding down.
However, this optimism is but only a marginal consolation for the ranking at ten among some 180 countries sampled for corruption; it does not mark a substantial uptrend for Bangladesh in this respect. Even its subcontinental neighbours such as India and Pakistan which at one time had a corruption history not very dissimilar or inspirational than Bangladesh, are seen to be having a notably improved corruption ranking in contrast to the latter. Here, the question may be raised -- and not all without some valid reason -- about the 'objectivity' of the TI's corruption perception index (CPI). In India and Pakistan, the TI, however, does not get the same coverage or weightage, as it gets in the Bangladesh media. Yet then, there is no denying here of the imperative for consolidating whatever progress Bangladesh has been made in the struggle against corruption. It should go on doing a lot better to do justice to its potentials in this regard. Even its smaller South Asian neighbours -- Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives -- have a better corruption ranking, according to the TI's CPI, and that points to the importance of Bangladesh's maintaining a vigorous anti-corruption drive well into the future.
The caretaker government of Bangladesh is expected to end its tenure -- following elections -- to hand over power to an elected government. It has otherwise done a good job of starting cases against corruption suspects in the country. Here, a more focused attention, particularly on the "nabobs" of corruption rather than chasing Tom, Dick or Harry in a difused manner, would have done a better job. Combating corruption is not an event. It is a process and, for that matter, deep-seated institutional reforms are necessary for tackling the menace of corruption at the ground-level. The caretaker government did a commendable job in reorganizing and empowering the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). The ACC has already made a mark though its drive to combat corruption. Here, this body should not try only to steal the limelight by serving notices upon only or the 'big names' of all sorts to submit their wealth statements and to get the media coverage. It should also help accelerate process of reforms in substantive areas to address the systemic issues of corruption.
None would expect the anti-graft drive to stop with the exit of the caretaker government from power after the holding of general election. The next elected government, having the mandate of the people, is, thus, most likely to give it a new dynamism, in view of the long-felt need of the common citizens to rid the country of corruption as far as possible and practicable. It would, thus, fairly be expected to maintain the anti-corruption drive in amore pragmatic manner, keeping the stark realities of the country's socio-economic and political life.
However, this optimism is but only a marginal consolation for the ranking at ten among some 180 countries sampled for corruption; it does not mark a substantial uptrend for Bangladesh in this respect. Even its subcontinental neighbours such as India and Pakistan which at one time had a corruption history not very dissimilar or inspirational than Bangladesh, are seen to be having a notably improved corruption ranking in contrast to the latter. Here, the question may be raised -- and not all without some valid reason -- about the 'objectivity' of the TI's corruption perception index (CPI). In India and Pakistan, the TI, however, does not get the same coverage or weightage, as it gets in the Bangladesh media. Yet then, there is no denying here of the imperative for consolidating whatever progress Bangladesh has been made in the struggle against corruption. It should go on doing a lot better to do justice to its potentials in this regard. Even its smaller South Asian neighbours -- Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives -- have a better corruption ranking, according to the TI's CPI, and that points to the importance of Bangladesh's maintaining a vigorous anti-corruption drive well into the future.
The caretaker government of Bangladesh is expected to end its tenure -- following elections -- to hand over power to an elected government. It has otherwise done a good job of starting cases against corruption suspects in the country. Here, a more focused attention, particularly on the "nabobs" of corruption rather than chasing Tom, Dick or Harry in a difused manner, would have done a better job. Combating corruption is not an event. It is a process and, for that matter, deep-seated institutional reforms are necessary for tackling the menace of corruption at the ground-level. The caretaker government did a commendable job in reorganizing and empowering the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). The ACC has already made a mark though its drive to combat corruption. Here, this body should not try only to steal the limelight by serving notices upon only or the 'big names' of all sorts to submit their wealth statements and to get the media coverage. It should also help accelerate process of reforms in substantive areas to address the systemic issues of corruption.
None would expect the anti-graft drive to stop with the exit of the caretaker government from power after the holding of general election. The next elected government, having the mandate of the people, is, thus, most likely to give it a new dynamism, in view of the long-felt need of the common citizens to rid the country of corruption as far as possible and practicable. It would, thus, fairly be expected to maintain the anti-corruption drive in amore pragmatic manner, keeping the stark realities of the country's socio-economic and political life.