Corruption is becoming prevalent all over the world. Corruption hurts economies, people, and governments.
Take it or leave it, corruption is what some religious people should call the "original sin".
This is derived from man's innate propensity to be corrupt, based on the fact that man's natural instinct to survive is essentially a selfish instinct, which often disregards fairness, equity, or equality especially when the environment is harsh, hostile, or life-threatening. And man, by his very nature, has the potential to be selfish, which is the foundation for such social evils like corruption. Regardless, corruption can be and should be eliminated as it destroys societies and humanity.
Corruption is unethical, immoral, and illegal in many societies, religions, and countries. It needs to be stopped. Private organizations, United Nations, and some governments have attempted to stop corruption or at least have tried to prevent it. They have failed, however.
This site is an attempt to expose countries and departments where corruption is taking place.
To fill out an instance of corruption you have experienced yourself or have knowledge of, click the link on the left to share information with the rest of the world.
In addition, if you know of any successful approach that has prevented or reduced corruption, please share it with the rest of the world by clicking the link "Make Suggestions" on the left.
Also, if you know of any published article dealing with corruption and want to share with the rest of the world, click "Share Published Article" on the left.
Also, many government agencies or officials do not care about people and their problems. If you have a problem with any government agency or an official, please report it to us by clicking "File Complaint" link on the left.
By Edith Regalado (The Philippine Star) | Updated June 27, 2016 - 12:00am
DAVAO CITY, Philippines – President-elect Rodrigo Duterte is opening a 24-hour, seven days a week hotline for those who want to complain about erring government officers. He’s also making sure the complaints reach him. In a speech at a thanksgiving party in Cebu on Saturday night, Duterte said he would set up 12 phone lines that would allow people to directly report on corruption. He told blogger Mocha Uson that the 24/7 hotline would be manned in a manner similar to the 911 Emergency Response Center of Davao City. Duterte, who also wants to monitor the complaints, wanted these immediately acted upon. In a GMA News report, Duterte said subordinates could also use the hotlines to report a boss who is into corruption, adding that he would not hesitate to humiliate a corrupt government official in public. During his speech that lasted for more than 40 minutes, the incoming president also said he would feel accomplished if he is able to rid the government of corruption, reduce crimes by ridding the country of illegal drugs and sign a peace agreement with the Communist Party of the Philippines, Moro Islamic Liberation Front and Moro National Liberation Front. Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1 He said he abhors corruption and twould not tolerate anyone who would engage in corrupt practices. Duterte also expressed his determination to work for a shift to the federal form of government.
JC.com, Turloch Mooney, Senior Editor, Global Ports | Jun 28, 2016 8:22AM EDT
Nigeria has launched standard operating procedures and an information management platform to tackle widespread corruption and inefficiencies in operations at its major ports. Standard operating procedures have been developed for all agencies operating at the country’s ports and a Port Service Support Portal, or PSSP, was launched as a transparent system to deal with complaints over port operational and integrity issues. The portal also serves as a central source of information and clarification on port operating procedures, standards, rules and regulations. The move follows publication of a study supported by the United Nations Development Project on the operations of agencies at the ports that assessed corruption risks and identified measures to help mitigate those risks. One of the findings of the study was that a minimum of 79 signatures from government officials was required to clear individual shipments for import. A steering committee chaired by the Ministry of Transport set up after the study’s release recommended the development of SOPs for all agencies operating at the ports as well as an information management platform for the dissemination of critical information and handling of complaints in a structured and transparent manner. “Technology remains one of the most important ways by which we can control corruption aside from ensuring that corrupt officials are made to face the consequences,” Yemi Osinbajo, vice president of Nigeria said at the launch of the system. The SOPs and portal are designed to enhance process efficiency through standardization and improve the handling of internal and external complaints from port agents. The system will improve transparency, accountability and create a more user-friendly business environment at the ports, Osinbajo said. The UN study identified weak administration practices and institutions, huge discretionary powers on the part of port officials, widespread poverty and security issues as the main causes of corruption. “It takes 79 signatures to process a shipment in some ports, while in other ports it takes up to 100 signatures. This shows that the process is not harmonized, giving rise to corruption,” said Constantine Palicarsky, one of the consultants who worked on the study. Nigeria is ranked 182 out of 189 countries in the Trading Across Borders category of the World Bank’s 2016 Ease of Doing Business survey. It takes an average of 298 hours and costs $1,077 to undertake border compliance import procedures in Nigeria, according to the World Bank. This compares with an average of 160 hours and $693 for Sub-Saharan Africa countries. The OECD average is 9 hours and $123 for import border compliance procedures. The PSSP is hosted at the Nigerian Shippers’ Council, which said it would do everything in its power to ensure all agencies and personnel complied with the new SOPs. “The initiative is to eliminate issues that cause unnecessary delays in the clearance of cargo. We want to be able to compare with international standards, to cut delays and corruption,” said Council chief executive officer Hassan Bello. Bello said Nigeria’s port system was largely primitive in matters of disseminating critical information and data management, and that the new system would improve efficiency by reducing unnecessary human intervention in processes, helping reduce cargo dwell times. Bello also appealed to local journalists to help drive improvement in the country’s port sector by focusing on the solutions to the problems it faced.
Opinion » Comment May 6, 2016
The Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), the key legislation which defines what constitutes corruption and prescribes penalties for corruption-related offences, is set to be amended by Parliament. The proposed Bill, now before a select committee of the Rajya Sabha, includes several contentious amendments that are likely to have far-reaching ramifications. They require considerable deliberation. First, the proposed amendments make all actual and potential bribe-givers offenders under the PCA. How fair is it to criminalise all bribe giving in a country like ours, where people are forced to pay bribes even to get their basic entitlements like rations, pensions, education and health facilities? The PCA already criminalises those who abet corruption. While it is desirable to treat giving bribes aimed at receiving illegitimate gains as an offence, people, especially the poor and the marginalised, are often forced to pay bribes to get what is legitimately theirs. If they are also prosecuted, it would be a double wrong. Disincentivising reporting Imagine a poor man who rushes his young daughter to hospital after she has got badly burnt, and finds the doctor demanding a bribe to treat her. What options does he have? If he doesn’t pay the bribe, he risks losing his daughter’s life. On the other hand, if he pays it (clearly under duress), the proposed amendments to the PCA make him as guilty as the receiver — he could be in prison for up to seven years! Forcing people into this dilemma would only further the culture of impunity by disincentivising reporting of corruption by bribe-givers. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the PCA are, practically and morally, a retrograde step. The government would be well advised to reconsider this and offer immunity to at least three types of bribe-givers. First, those who are coerced to pay a bribe to obtain their legal entitlements; second, those who voluntarily come forward to complain and bear witness against corrupt public officials; and third, those who are willing to turn approvers. For the second and third categories though, immunity should be provided only from criminal liability — bribe-givers must be made to return any benefit they secured as a result of the bribe. Providing immunity to these categories of bribe-givers would encourage them to complain about corruption and ensure that corruption is not a low-risk, high-return activity. Rather than criminalising bribe-givers who are forced to pay bribes to get their legal entitlements, the objective of combating coercive corruption would be more effectively achieved if the government puts in place a comprehensive grievance redress mechanism. Currently, if anyone files a complaint regarding denial of their entitlements, the complainant almost never gets redress nor is any penal action initiated against the guilty. This can be remedied by the enactment of the grievance redress bill, which was introduced in the Parliament in 2011 and had support across party lines, but unfortunately lapsed with the dissolution of the last Lok Sabha. Approval for investigation The second prickly issue is the need to seek prior approval for investigation into certain cases of corruption. The amendments state that complaints regarding corruption that relate to decisions taken or recommendations made by public servants in the discharge of their official duty, shall not be investigated without the prior approval of the Lokpal or Lokayuktas, as the case maybe. Such complaints shall be forwarded to, and deemed to be complaints made to the Lokpal or Lokayuktas. The Minister concerned clarified in the Rajya Sabha that the objective of these amendments is to safeguard public servants who are in decision-making positions, so that they may take decisions without fear of harassment. He said that the amendments were meant to replace Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, which was struck down by the Supreme Court. Section 6A mandated prior sanctions for investigation for officials of the rank of joint secretary and above, as they are in decision-making positions. However, these amendments will potentially lead to great confusion and unending litigation. How will the police, without investigation, unambiguously determine whether the alleged act of corruption is relatable to a decision taken or recommendation made by a public servant? To avoid confusion, the proposed amendments must either be dropped or state that complaints about all offences under the PCA shall be dealt with by the Lokpal at the Central level and Lokayuktas at the State level, for all categories of public servants covered in the respective laws. Existing instruments Finally, despite widespread public opinion against the necessity to seek the government’s permission before prosecuting a public servant for corruption, the amendments seek to strengthen this provision by increasing the cover to even retired public officials. Unfortunately, experience in India has shown that the requirement for seeking prior sanction from the government for prosecution is a critical bottleneck and results not only in huge delays but also in the accused often never being prosecuted. The PCA must insulate prosecuting agencies from government influence. The Lokpal law has vested the power of granting sanction for prosecution in the Lokpal. The proposed amendments must appropriately reflect this. Wherever the procedure for granting prosecution is defined in the Lokpal or Lokayukta laws, it should be applicable. For all other cases, including where no Lokpal or Lokayukta has been set up, an independent committee should be tasked with the responsibility of giving prior approval for prosecution. If the Modi government is serious about tackling corruption, it should, in addition to re-introducing the grievance redress bill, immediately operationalise the Lokpal Act and the Whistle Blowers Protection Act which were passed by Parliament more than two years ago. These laws, together with the PCA, form the necessary anti-corruption statutory framework.
|St. Vincent & the Grenadines||100|