http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\05\15\story_15-5-2012_pg3_5
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 ROVER’S DIARY: Corruption in socio-economic perspective — I — Babar Ayaz In times of military dictatorship, curbs on the media and a compliant judiciary do not play up corruption cases as they do when there is democracy in the country Many years ago, I saw a movie in which Peter Sellers played the lead. I do not remember the name but it was not one of the Pink Panther series. It was about how hospitals and doctors fleece patients in the US. It had a unique indemnifying statement that instead of saying all characters were fictitious, it said all characters were real and that if anybody had any resemblance to any of them he should stand up. There was a time not many years ago when Pakistan competed with Nigeria for the most corrupt country of the world. At that point, it was at the bottom of the Transparency International pit. Now the 2010 report places Pakistan at the134th rung out of 182 countries. Should we rejoice that from being the most corrupt country we are today 48th from the bottom? Are we any better than what we were a few years back or 42 countries have slipped down to being worse than us? Perhaps the latter is true. The10 least corrupt countries in order of their ranking are New Zealand, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Singapore, Norway, Netherlands, Australia, Switzerland and Canada. And the 10 most corrupt countries from the bottom are Somalia, North Korea, Myanmar, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Sudan, Iraq, Haiti and Venezuela. According to The Economist, there is an interesting correlation between the levels of corruption and the status of the Human Development Index (HDI). The least corrupt have the best HDI and the most corrupt the worst. Even a cursory look at the least and most corrupt countries shows that there is also a correlation between corruption and the level of poverty, absence of democracy and internal instability. In a democratic dispensation, there are better checks and balances in the form of a free media and independent courts. In our case, these institutions play their watchdog role but at times they are rather overzealous and present something as the one and only important challenge to Pakistani society. That is where balance is lost but as this is the popular theme, everybody wants to ride it in the race for breaking news and headlines, the judiciary included. In times of military dictatorship, curbs on the media and a compliant judiciary do not play up corruption cases as they do when there is democracy in the country. Undoubtedly, the media has to continue exposing corruption, but without perspective and responsibility, disproportionate coverage creates the perception that democracy breeds corruption and the elected representatives are the most corrupt people in comparison to those who ruled us under military dictators. It also gives an impression as if corruption is something new and unique in Pakistani society. Here I am reminded of a short impressionistic piece from my late father Shahzada Ayaz’s book, Chota mun bari baat published in 1952. After lamenting on how corruption was rampant, he concluded: “Mujeh dar hey khahin merey qaum ka kirdar looteroun ka na bun jayae” (I fear my nation’s character may turn into looters). Why is corruption a part of our society? The dominant culture and value system of Pakistan when it was established was feudal and tribal. The basis of the economy was agrarian. The Mughal and British Raj allotted land and power based on loyalty and not in accordance with any transparent PPRA rules. What is called corruption in the modern middle class and capitalist society was not perceived from the same angle in the rural areas and that is the reason the same corrupt people are elected repeatedly. As long as they can get their work done at the grassroots level by buying services, the level of resentment against corruption is not as high as it is in the urban areas, particularly in the middle classes. At the same time, there was a big influx of refugees in the country who were either economic migrants or were pushed out because of communal riots. Without meaning any offence to refugees, let us understand that globally such a large migration of uprooted people has the tendency to grab economic opportunities as quickly as possible. This tendency was also seen in the filing of highly inflated claims by refugees. In a lighter vein, it can be said that if all claims are added, the total area could be more than that of the subcontinent! This scramble for land also infused corruption in society in which the state had the power to bestow agricultural lands and urban properties. It is interesting that the Pakistani business classes, who crib about corruption in their posh offices, grew after partition. According to Mr S M Jamil, the first General Secretary of the Muslim Chamber of Commerce in India, a few months before partition Mr Jinnah had asked him to convene a meeting quickly to appeal to the Muslim businessmen to invest in Pakistan. The meeting was held in Bombay and most of them expressed their readiness but had only one concern, “Will the source of investment be asked by the authorities and taxed?” When Mr Jinnah was informed about their concern, he instructed Jamil to discuss this with Ghulam Mohammed, who assured that no questions would be asked. Interestingly, this issue comes up cyclically in Pakistan. Even now, an ‘amnesty’ for black money is being considered in the coming budget while the moralists are opposing it. The Pakistani business class in the 1950s was mainly composed of traders that accumulated capital by all fair and foul means with the patronage of government officials who ruled through the ‘licence Raj’. Thus its growth was dependent on getting favours from the civil bureaucracy, which issued licences in an over-regulated economy. Even for the expansion of a factory, the investment promotion bureau and ministry of industries had to be bribed. With liberalisation, there are now many businesses that do not seek favours from government and manage to avoid corrupt practices as much as they can. This economic culture should be kept in perspective while analysing corruption today. Any society’s moral and cultural values are related to the level of its economic development. Global experience shows that developing countries had and still have a higher level of corruption as compared to manageable developed economies. The 10 least corrupt countries have also another commonality — they are welfare states. First, let us briefly define ‘corruption’ as it is perceived today by economists and political analysts. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Politics, “Corruption obtains when an official transfers a benefit to an individual who may or may not be entitled to the benefit, in exchange for an illegal payment (the bribe). By taking the bribe, the official breaks a legal binding he gave to his ‘principal’.” It further says, “A positive relation appears to exist between the extent of bribery and the ‘level of red tape’...” Two social scientists, Donatella Della Porta and Yves Meny in their excellent book, Democracy and Corruption in Europe say, “Corruption can be initially defined as the clandestine exchange between two markets; the political and/or administrative market and the economic and social market.” Corruption perhaps has been the oldest evil that has existed in human society. In most religions, offerings and charity are given to get some return from the gods one worships. However, the issue has come under the spotlight, particularly after the end of the Cold War. Before that, the capitalist democracies were only critical of corruption in the socialist countries and they would cover up their own follies. However, once the fear that people might get attracted to an alternate socialist politico-economic system fell with the Berlin wall, the western democracies became introspective about the ills within. Corruption in developing and developed countries is not only the exclusive domain of politicians and government officials, as it appears from the present uproar in the media in Pakistan, but multi-billion corruption scandals in the west have brought down famous banks and companies and the worst recessions. In Pakistan, the media industry is also well aware of the corrupt practices of their owners, advertising agencies and even multinational brand managers. The irony is that the same people sermonise ad nauseam about politicians’ and government officials’ corruption — forgetting that only the pious who have not sinned can cast the first stone. (To be continued) The writer can be reached at [email protected] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
