Fighting corruption pays off

An international comparison of the perceived level of corruption among public officials and politicians in 159 countries has found that Sri Lanka is in the 78th position out of 158 countries with a 3.2 CPI rate. Transparency International compiles the annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) from expert surveys of business people and analysts from around the world, including local country experts.

Scores can range from 10 ('highly clean') to 0 ('highly corrupt'). This year India, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh had rates of 2.9, 2.1, 2.5 and 1.7 respectively.

In 2004, Sri Lanka scored 3.5 and was placed at 67th position out of 145 countries. It means that we are relatively more corrupt in 2005.

Corruption in Sri Lanka has become an issue of major political and economic significance in recent years and the necessity to take measures against it has become evident. However, in the process of our fight against corruption we seem to have forgotten the most important element - which is, the civic bodies support, participation and vigilance.

The media, civic and business associations, trade unions and other non-governmental actors play a crucial role in fostering public discussion of corruption and increasing awareness about the negative impacts of corruption.

We seem to have forgotten that they can screen and scrutinize Governmental action both in their daily life and through formal arrangements institutionalized for this purpose.

This action would eventually contribute to the detection and prevention of corruption and the collection and channelling of input from citizens towards the anti-corruption efforts.

More and more countries now acknowledge the important role that non-political actors can play. They can engage in improving the relevant legal and institutional conditions and initiate some specific projects of cooperation and dialogue with civic organisations on the issue of corruption. For example, in the Philippines, Government and civil society actors have formally engaged in joint steps to combat corruption in the public sector.

This coalition aims to monitor lifestyles of public officials and employees, in order to detect and eradicate possible corruption and graft.

The civil society actors in this coalition assume the task of gathering information on the lifestyle of Government officials.

Such information is then validated by the participating agencies and investigated by the Office of the Ombudsman. When evidence warrants, said office files the appropriate charges before the proper court, including the institution of forfeiture proceedings.

Another key function of non-governmental actors in the fight against corruption is education and awareness raising about corruption issues among the general public.

This role also is being recognized in a growing number of countries. The Governments of many countries have started supporting civil society in this function.

In Korea, support from Government to civil society organisations anti-corruption activities even includes financial support. Cambodia has reported that cooperation is taking the form of anti-corruption education in public schools: after a survey had found a low level of awareness about the impact of corruption among the younger generation, a non-Governmental research institute was tasked to develop an educational program on ethical and governance issues.

This program is taught to children and young adults in the national public schools, enlisting the cooperation of the Ministry of Education. Similar cooperation has taken place in schools in Malaysia.

Other countries, such as the Fiji Islands, Korea, Pakistan and the Philippines have reported about efforts to introduce similar approaches, including encouraging teachers to educate their students about ethics issues at schools and in higher education.

As final beneficiaries of public service, citizens are also an important source of information on wrongdoing and potential gaps and loopholes in laws, regulations and institutions. The legal framework for civil society to operate and a Government's willingness to listen to and cooperate with non-governmental actors must therefore encourage civic actors to function in these roles.

To sum up: we should have a clear-cut policy where public participation in anti-corruption activities is encouraged, in particular through: Cooperative relationships with civil society groups such as chambers of commerce, professional associations, NGOs, labour unions, housing associations, the media, and other organisations; Protection of whistleblowers; and involvement of NGOs in monitoring of public sector programmes and activities.

There is no doubt that the continuous involvement and active support from the civic bodies remain essential for the success of the reform in which Sri Lankan Government is engaged. Overall, in the past decade significant efforts in the fight against corruption has been observed in Sri Lanka. Legal gaps and loopholes continue to exist, however, and the capacity of anti-corruption institutions remains insufficient.

Regional fora such as the ADB/OECD through which experts and policy makers can exchange experience, foster the promotion of good practices and make use of capacity building instruments can play an important role in advancing our anti-corruption agenda.