Battle against corruption must be relentless

Tunku Abdul Aziz, New Strait Times, Kuala Lumpur

Malaysia ranked 37th in the Transparency International's annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) listing 133 countries in 2003.

This ranking, to some, is a source of pride. But when we look closely at the listing, we see that most of the countries ahead of us are the developed ones. Of the countries that rank below us only South Korea at 50 seems an anomaly. The standings of the rest of the countries on the CPI correspond roughly to their per capita GDP. Quite simply, there is very strong empirical evidence to link corruption to economic achievement.

But to suggest that corruption alone is responsible for a country's economic performance is to over-simplify matters. Economic growth requires more than just an honest government ruling over a moral people.

But it would help immensely if lesser-developed countries that lack economic resources for growth were not further handicapped by an inefficient bureaucracy and an unethical business community. Do rich countries have low corruption because their people have no need to take bribes, or is it that low corruption engenders faster and better quality growth?

It is perhaps unnecessary to try to answer this "chicken and egg" question because in reality the reduction in corruption and economic growth are mutually reinforcing. Less corruption aids growth, and more growth lessens the chances and need for bribery.

This means that an all-out efforts to eliminate corruption should lead to higher economic growth, benefiting everyone. Richer citizens are less prone to corrupt practices. They would be better educated and much more aware of their civic duties. A better-informed public would vote better politicians into office, who, under the constant vigilance of a free Press and the watchful eyes of dedicated citizen groups, would deliver better governance and economic results. This completes the virtuous circle.

For those who are now caught in the vicious circle of corruption and slow growth, getting out is not easy. Strong political will is needed, backed by a supportive public. However, it would be wrong to assume that everyone is enthusiastic about eliminating corruption.

There are many with vested interests to preserve the status quo. These people would argue that it is a waste of political energy and financial resources to fight corruption when there are other more pressing issues that deserve our attention.

It has been said that certain communities, because of their history, are prone to engage in corrupt practices, whether as giver or receiver of bribes. People with a long history of bad government and uncaring emperors; illiterate peasants with no knowledge of the law, or recourse to higher authorities who have to pay bribes to officials for all manner of favors to stay alive; people who over many centuries have honed their bribery skills to a fine art; people who have been oppressed, to whom bribery is a legitimate survival tool.

All cultures and civilizations, it is safe to say, must have encountered corruption in one form or other in their long history. All civilized societies consider corruption immoral. Yet from time to time they have used it to escape from oppressive officials, that is, as a means for self-preservation. It is this duality of the nature of corruption that gives it a complexity that complicates our understanding of it and our attempt to label it as a pure crime.

In short, corruption is a crime, but in extenuating circumstances people do take a more lenient view of it. The holding of such a perception makes for a skeptical public, and it makes it hard for the government to convince everyone to join the fight against corruption, the more so when this call comes from a government that has tolerated corruption in the past.

After years of living with corruption, Malaysians cannot be blamed for harboring a degree of skepticism and apathy in greeting the Government's call to eradicate corruption. They remember well the previous elegant slogan: Bersih, Cekap Dan Amanah. What happened, they ask? If there is to be any real hope of winning the war against corruption, real action must follow the slogans. The corrupt should be promptly charged and prosecuted without regard to status or political affiliation.

Where necessary, legal changes should follow to make the Anti- Corruption Agency more effective, and to emphasize enforcement.

When the people see tangible changes being made and a real change in the behavior of government servants, apathy will give way to enthusiasm and hope. And hope will not be entirely misplaced. Political analysts attribute much of Barisan Nasional's success in the recent general election to the promise by the Prime Minister to wipe out corruption. BN's election manifesto said its stand on corruption is "zero tolerance".

The public is, however, not naive enough to believe corruption can be eradicated; no one has yet succeeded in doing so. But a zero policy implies an all-out effort at every level and in every corner of society and the Government, the private sector, civil society and even political parties. If zero is impossible, minimal is absolutely fine.

The writer is president of Transparency International, Malaysia.