Voters lining up outside a Baghdad polling station during the 2005 Iraqi election. Voter turnout was considered high despite widespread concerns of violence.
Voter suppression is a strategy used to influence the outcome of an election by discouraging or preventing specific groups of people from voting. It is distinguished from political campaigning
in that campaigning attempts to change likely voting behavior by
changing the opinions of potential voters through persuasion and
organization, activating otherwise inactive voters, or registering new
supporters. Voter suppression, instead, attempts to reduce the number of
voters who might vote against a candidate or proposition.
The tactics of voter suppression range from minor changes that
make voting less convenient, to physically intimidating and even
physically attacking prospective voters, which is illegal. Voter
suppression can be effective if a significant number of voters are
intimidated or disenfranchised. In 2013, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Shelby v. Holder that voting laws had resulted in voter suppression and discrimination.
Examples
Australia
In
Australia citizens are expected to enroll to vote and it is their
responsibility to update their enrollment when they change their
address. Even so, it is estimated that about 6% of eligible Australian
voters are not enrolled, or are enrolled incorrectly. These are
disproportionately younger voters, many of whom might neglect to enroll
when they attain voting age.
In 2006, the Howard Government
legislated to close the electoral roll much earlier once an election
was called. While previously, voters had been allowed seven days of
grace after an election had been called to arrange or update their
enrollment, new voters were now allowed only until 8:00 pm on the day
that the electoral writ
was issued to lodge their enrollment form, while those who needed to
update their addresses were allowed three days. In Australia, the Prime Minister
effectively has the right to determine the date of the election, so
long as constitutional rules regarding the maximum term of the
parliament are adhered to. This measure was therefore likely to result
in many newer voters being precluded from voting in the first election
for which they were eligible because the time to arrange their
enrollment once an election is called had been greatly reduced.
The measure was widely seen as an attempt at voter suppression aimed at younger voters, surveys had shown that younger voters are more likely than the general population to vote for the Australian Labor Party or the Greens than the Liberal Party.
The Government denied that they were trying to suppress some voters,
insisting that the purpose of the reform was to smooth the
administration of elections and to reduce the possibility of electoral
fraud. This was in spite of the fact that the Australian Electoral Commission
had requested no such reform, there was no evidence of significant
electoral fraud and that the Australian Electoral Commission had been
dealing with hundreds of thousands of late enrollments without
significant problems for decades.
In July 2010, the left-leaning lobby group GetUp! launched a challenge to this law. The High Court of Australia expedited the hearing so that a ruling could be made in time for the 2010 federal election.
The majority ruling struck down early closing of the roll, reinstating
the old rule allowing voters seven days grace to arrange or update their
enrollment.
Australian citizens of the ages 16 or 17 can enroll online so that when they turn 18 they are able to vote.
In litigation brought by The Council of Canadians, a federal court found that such fraud had occurred and had probably been perpetrated by someone with access to the Conservative Party's voter database, including its information about voter preferences.
The court stated that the evidence did not prove that the Conservative
Party or its successful candidates were directly involved. It did, however, criticize the Conservative Party for making “little effort to assist with the investigation”. The court did not annul the result in any of six ridings where the fraud had occurred, because it concluded that the number of votes affected had been too small to affect the outcome.
France
In France
being registered on voting lists is not systematical, neither arriving
majority age, neither if changing of adress, neither if having already
been registering on lists.
The registration might still be done at times even without any demand to
register voters without them asking, but it is not mandatory for
authorities.
Israel
In April 2019, during Israel's general elections for the 21st Knesset, Likud activists installed hidden cameras in polling stations in Arab communities. Election observers were seen wearing such cameras. Hanan Melcer, the Head of the General Elections Committee, said the cameras were illegal.
The following day, PR agency Kaizler Inbar took credit for the
operation and said it had been planned in collaboration with Likud. They
additionally claimed that voter turnout in Arab communities had fallen
under 50% thanks to the presence of the agency's observers in the
polling stations,
though there is little evidence that the cameras had any effect on the
voter turnout, as the Arab population had been promising to boycott the
election well in advance.
Taiwan
Political
participation is crucial in a democratic country like Taiwan. The
analysis of the voting turnout in Taiwan has been extremely high
compared to other democratic countries. However, the voting suppression
in this country focuses on two main factors of age and ethnicity. Thus,
the voting suppression in Taiwan is individuals that are higher in age
because of poor health. There are three voting groups that are in
Taiwan- Pan-Blue supporters, Pan-Green, and independents. Voters that
classified them to be independents are less likely to vote because of
receiving less political information. Thus, the inadequate advertisement
of political information for the people contributes to voting
suppression as many people are not equally well-informed.
Another factor is understanding the difference in ethnic backgrounds
between Minnan and mainlanders affect their participation in political
life.
In the United States,
elections are administered locally, and forms of voter suppression vary
among jurisdictions. At the founding of the country, the right to vote
in most states was limited to property-owning white males. Over time, the right to vote was formally granted to racial minorities, women, and youth. During the later 19th and early 20th centuries, Southern states passed Jim Crow laws to suppress poor and racial minority voters – such laws included poll taxes, literacy tests, and grandfather clauses. Most of these voter suppression tactics were made illegal after the enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Even after the repeal of the Jim Crow laws that were implemented by
these statutes, there have been repetitive incidents of racial
discrimination against voters in Southern States. Specifically, in
2018, 87,000 people in Georgia were unable to vote because of late
registration. Many of the states with the strictest voting regulations
are swing states, which have been enacted primarily by politicians who
represent the Republican party.
According to AMP Reports, many people who were predicted to be in favor
of voting for the Democratic party had their ballot dismissed, as the
study showed in an analysis that "A disproportionate number of those
potential voters were people of color or young voters, groups that
typically favor Democrats."
The history of the previous Jim Crow regulations in the southern states
affects the voter suppression today because people that fall into the
minority category often have their vote dismissed, due to manipulation
of voting regulations.
In 2013, voter ID laws
arose following the Supreme Court's decision to strike down Section 4
of the Voting Rights Act, which some argue amounts to voter suppression
against African-Americans.
In Texas, a voter ID law requiring a driver's license, passport,
military identification, or gun permit, was repeatedly found to be
intentionally discriminatory. The state's election laws could be put
back under the control of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Under
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, however, the DOJ has expressed support for Texas's ID law. Sessions was accused by Coretta Scott King in 1986 of trying to suppress the black vote. A similar ID law in North Dakota, which would have disenfranchised large numbers of Native Americans, was also overturned.
In Wisconsin, a federal judge found that the state's restrictive
voter ID law led to "real incidents of disenfranchisement, which
undermine rather than enhance confidence in elections, particularly in
minority communities";
and, given that there was no evidence of widespread voter impersonation
in Wisconsin, found that the law was "a cure worse than the disease."
In addition to imposing strict voter ID requirements, the law cut back
on early voting, required people to live in a ward for at least 28 days
before voting, and prohibited emailing absentee ballots to voters.
Other controversial measures include shutting down Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) offices in minority neighborhoods, making it more difficult for residents to obtain voter IDs; shutting down polling places in minority neighborhoods;
systematically depriving precincts in minority neighborhoods of the
resources they need to operate efficiently, such as poll workers and
voting machines; and purging voters from the rolls shortly before an election.
Often, voter fraud is cited as a justification for such laws even
when the incidence of voter fraud is low. In Iowa, lawmakers passed a
strict voter ID law with the potential to disenfranchise 260,000 voters.
Out of 1.6 million votes cast in Iowa in 2016, there were only 10
allegations of voter fraud; none were cases of impersonation that a
voter ID law could have prevented. Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate,
the architect of the bill, admitted, "We've not experienced widespread
voter fraud in Iowa."
In May 2017, President Donald Trump established the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity,
for the purpose of preventing voter fraud. Critics have suggested its
true purpose is voter suppression. The commission is led by Kansas
secretary of state Kris Kobach,
a staunch advocate of strict voter ID laws and a proponent of the
Crosscheck system. Crosscheck is a national database designed to check
for voters who are registered in more than one state by comparing names
and dates of birth. Researchers at Stanford University, the University
of Pennsylvania, Harvard University, and Microsoft found that for every
legitimate instance of double registration it finds, Crosscheck's
algorithm returns approximately 200 false positives. Kobach has been repeatedly sued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for trying to restrict voting rights in Kansas.
Social media impact on voting suppression
Social media platforms, specifically Facebook contains 2.4billion active users.
The content in regards to election voting on social media includes
misinformation and disinformation which contribute to voter suppression.
A 1902 cartoon depicts a police officer whose eyes are covered with a cloth labelled "bribes",
Corruption, as it is defined by the World Bank, is a form of dishonesty or a criminal offense
which is undertaken by a person or an organization which is entrusted
with a position of authority, in order to acquire illicit benefits or
abuse power for one's private gain. Corruption may involve many
activities which include bribery and embezzlement, and it may also involve practices which are legal in many countries. Political corruption
occurs when an office-holder or other governmental employee acts in an
official capacity for personal gain. Corruption is most common in kleptocracies, oligarchies, narco-states, and mafia states.
Corruption and crime are endemic sociological occurrences which
appear with regular frequency in virtually all countries on a global
scale in varying degrees and proportions. Each individual nation
allocates domestic resources for the control and regulation of
corruption and the deterrence of crime. Strategies which are undertaken
in order to counter corruption are often summarized under the umbrella
term anti-corruption. Additionally, global initiatives like the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 16 also have a targeted goal which is supposed to substantially reduce corruption in all of its forms.
Definitions and scales
A billboard in Zambia exhorting the public to "Just say no to corruption".
Stephen D. Morris, a professor of politics, wrote that political
corruption is the illegitimate use of public power to benefit a private
interest. Economist Ian Senior defined corruption as an action to
secretly provide a good or a service to a third party so that he or she
can influence certain actions which benefit the corrupt, a third
party, or both in which the corrupt agent has authority.
World Bank economist Daniel Kaufmann
extended the concept to include "legal corruption" in which power is
abused within the confines of the law—as those with power often have the
ability to make laws for their protection. The effect of corruption in
infrastructure is to increase costs and construction time, lower the
quality and decrease the benefit.
Corruption can occur on different scales. Corruption ranges from
small favors between a small number of people (petty corruption),
to corruption that affects the government on a large scale (grand
corruption), and corruption that is so prevalent that it is part of the
everyday structure of society, including corruption as one of the
symptoms of organized crime (Systemic corruption).
A number of indicators and tools have been developed which can measure different forms of corruption with increasing accuracy;
but when those are impractical, one study suggests looking at bodyfat
as a rough guide after finding that obesity of cabinet ministers in post-Soviet states was highly correlated with more accurate measures of corruption.
Petty corruption
Petty corruption
occurs at a smaller scale and takes place at the implementation end of
public services when public officials meet the public. For example, in
many small places such as registration offices, police stations, state
licensing boards, and many other private and government sectors.
Grand corruption
Grand corruption
is defined as corruption occurring at the highest levels of government
in a way that requires significant subversion of the political, legal
and economic systems. Such corruption is commonly found in countries
with authoritarian or dictatorial governments but also in those without
adequate policing of corruption.
The government system in many countries is divided into the legislative, executive
and judicial branches in an attempt to provide independent services
that are less subject to grand corruption due to their independence from
one another.
Systemic corruption
Systemic corruption (or endemic corruption)
is corruption which is primarily due to the weaknesses of an
organization or process. It can be contrasted with individual officials
or agents who act corruptly within the system.
Factors which encourage systemic corruption include conflicting incentives, discretionary powers; monopolistic powers; lack of transparency; low pay; and a culture of impunity.
Specific acts of corruption include "bribery, extortion, and
embezzlement" in a system where "corruption becomes the rule rather than
the exception."
Scholars distinguish between centralized and decentralized systemic
corruption, depending on which level of state or government corruption
takes place; in countries such as the Post-Soviet states both types occur.
Some scholars argue that there is a negative duty of western governments to protect against systematic corruption of underdeveloped governments.
Corruption has been a major issue in China, where society depends
heavily on personal relationships. By the late 20th century that
combined with the new lust for wealth, produced escalating corruption.
Historian Keith Schoppa says that bribery was only one of the tools of
Chinese corruption, which also included, "embezzlement, nepotism,
smuggling, extortion, cronyism, kickbacks, deception, fraud, squandering
public monies, illegal business transactions, stock manipulation and
real estate fraud." Given the repeated anti-corruption campaigns it was a
prudent precaution to move as much of the fraudulent money as possible
overseas.
As a Post-Soviet Union country - Armenia is also facing
corruption-related issues. This has been transferred to Armenia as well
as other Soviet Union Member Republics as a heritage. Armenia was a
pleasant exception. After the Armenian Velvet Revolution in 2018 new government made the fight against corruption an official top priority. 'Anti-corruption Strategy' seemed to give results as it upgraded from 105th place in CPI score to 60th in just two years.
In Latin American countries, corruption is permitted as a result
of the cultural norms of the institution. In countries like the United
States, there is a relatively strong sense of trust among strangers, one
that is not found in Latin American countries. In Latin American
countries, this trust does not exist, whereas the social norms imply
that no stranger is responsible for the wellbeing or happiness of
another stranger. Instead, the trust is found in acquaintances.
Acquaintances are treated with trust and respect—a level of trust that
is not found among acquaintances in countries like the United States.
This is what permits for corruption in Latin American countries. If
there is a strong enough trust within an administration that no one will
betray the rest, corruptive policies will take place with ease. In the
United States, this could not occur, as there is not a strong enough
trust among the members of an administration to allow for corruption. In
Latin American countries, there is a stronger value in individuality,
which includes that of acquaintances, unlike in countries like the
United States, which fails to include acquaintances.
Causes
Per R. Klitgaard
corruption will occur if the corrupt gain is greater than the penalty
multiplied by the likelihood of being caught and prosecuted:
Corrupt gain > Penalty × Likelihood of being caught and prosecuted
Klitgaard has also coined a metaphorical formula to illustrate how the amount of corruption depends on three variables:
monopoly (M) on the supply of a good or service, the discretion
(D) enjoyed by suppliers, and the supplier's accountability and
transparency (A) to others. The amount of corruption (C) could be
expressed as:
C = M + D – A.
Since a high degree of monopoly and discretion accompanied by a
low degree of transparency does not automatically lead to corruption, a
fourth variable of "morality" or "integrity" has been introduced by
others. The moral dimension has an intrinsic component and refers to a
"mentality problem", and an extrinsic component referring to
circumstances like poverty, inadequate remuneration, inappropriate work
conditions and inoperable or over-complicated procedures which
demoralize people and let them search for "alternative" solutions. Hence the amended Klitgaard equation is
It has been noted that in a comparison of the most corrupt with the
least corrupt countries, the former group contains nations with huge
socio-economic inequalities, and the latter contains nations with a high
degree of social and economic justice.
In different sectors
Corruption can occur in many sectors, whether they be public or private industry or even NGOs
(especially in public sector). However, only in democratically
controlled institutions is there an interest of the public (owner) to
develop internal mechanisms to fight active or passive corruption,
whereas in private industry as well as in NGOs there is no public
control. Therefore, the owners' investors' or sponsors' profits are
largely decisive.
Government/public sector
Public corruption includes corruption of the political process
and of government agencies such as tax collectors and the police, as
well as corruption in processes of allocating public funds for
contracts, grants, and hiring. Recent research by the World Bank
suggests that who makes policy decisions (elected officials or
bureaucrats) can be critical in determining the level of corruption
because of the incentives different policy-makers face.
Within the political system
A political cartoon from Harper's Weekly, 26 January 1878, depicting U.S. Secretary of the Interior Carl Schurz investigating the Indian Bureau
at the U.S. Department of the Interior. The original caption for the
cartoon is: "THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR INVESTIGATING THE INDIAN
BUREAU. GIVE HIM HIS DUE, AND GIVE THEM THEIR DUES."
Political corruption is the abuse of public power, office, or
resources by elected government officials for personal gain, by
extortion, soliciting or offering bribes. It can also take the form of
office holders maintaining themselves in office by purchasing votes by
enacting laws which use taxpayers' money.
Evidence suggests that corruption can have political consequences- with
citizens being asked for bribes becoming less likely to identify with
their country or region.
The political act of graft (American English), is a well
known and now global form of political corruption, being the
unscrupulous and illegal use of a politician's authority for personal
gain, when funds intended for public projects are intentionally
misdirected in order to maximize the benefits to illegally private
interests of the corrupted individual(s) and their cronies. In some
cases government institutions are "repurposed" or shifted away from
their official mandate to serve other, often corrupt purposes.
The Kaunas "Golden Toilet".
The Kaunas golden toilet case
was a major Lithuanian scandal. In 2009, the municipality of Kaunas
(led by mayor Andrius Kupčinskas) ordered that a shipping container was
to be converted into an outdoor toilet at a cost of 500,000 litai (around 150,000 euros). It was to also require 5,000 litai (1,500 euros) in monthly maintenance costs. At the same time when Kaunas's "Golden Toilet" was built, Kėdainiai tennis club acquired a very similar, but more advanced solution for 4,500 euros.
Because of the inflated cost of the outdoor toilet, it was nicknamed
the "Golden Toilet". Despite the investment, the "Golden Toilet"
remained closed for years due to the dysfunctionality and was a subject
of a lengthy anti-corruption investigation into those who had created it
and the local municipality even considered demolishing the building at one point.
The group of public servants involved in the toilet's procurement
received various prison sentences for recklessness, malfeasance, misuse
of power and document falsifications in a 2012 court case, but were
cleared of their corruption charges and received compensation, which
pushed the total construction cost and subsequent related financial
losses to 352,000 euros.
On 7 July 2020, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a global think tank, released a report claiming the Emirati city, Dubai, of being an enabler of global corruption, crime and illicit financial flows.
It stated that the global corrupt and criminal actors either operated
through or from Dubai. The city was also called a haven for trade-based money laundering, as it gives space to free trade zones, with minimal regulatory laws and customs enforcement.
Within the police
Police corruption is a specific form of police misconduct
designed to obtain financial benefits, personal gain, career
advancement for a police officer or officers in exchange for not
pursuing or selectively pursuing an investigation or arrest or aspects
of the "thin blue line" itself where force members collude in lies to protect their precincts, unions and/or other law enforcement members from accountability. One common form of police corruption is soliciting or accepting bribes in exchange for not reporting organized drug or prostitution rings or other illegal activities. When civilians become witnesses to police brutality, officers are often known to respond by harassing and intimidating the witnesses as retribution for reporting the misconduct.
Whistleblowing is not common in law enforcement, one of the main
reasons being because officers who do so, normally face reprisal by
being fired, being forced to transfer to another department, being
demoted, being shunned, losing friends, not being given back-up during
emergencies, receiving professional or even physical threats as well as
having threats be made against friends or relatives of theirs or having
their own misconduct exposed, in response to reporting the misconduct of
other officers. In America another common form of police corruption, is when white supremacist groups, such as Neo-Nazi Skinheads or Neo-Confederates (such as the Ku Klux Klan),
recruit members of law enforcement into their ranks or encourage their
members to join local police departments to repress minorities and
covertly promote white supremacy.
Another example is police officers flouting the police code of conduct in order to secure convictions of suspects—for example, through the use of surveillance abuse, false confessions, police perjury and/or falsified evidence. Police officers have also been known to sell forms of contraband that were taken during seizers (such as confiscated drugs, stolen property or weapons). Corruption and misconduct can also be done by prison officers, such as the smuggling of contraband (such as drugs or electronics) into jails and prisons for inmates or the abuse of prisoners. Another form of misconduct is probation officers taking bribes in exchange for allowing paroles to violate the terms of their probation or abusing their paroles. More rarely, police officers may deliberately and systematically participate in organized crime themselves, either while on the job or during off hours. In most major cities, there are internal affairs sections to investigate suspected police corruption or misconduct. Similar entities include the British Independent Police Complaints Commission.
Judicial corruption refers to the corruption-related misconduct of judges,
through the receiving or giving of bribes, the improper sentencing of
convicted criminals, bias in the hearing and judgement of arguments and
other forms of misconduct. Judicial corruption can also be conducted by
prosecutors and defense attorneys. An example of prosecutorial misconduct, occurs when a politician or a crime boss
bribes a prosecutor to open investigations and file charges against an
opposing politician or a rival crime boss, in order to hurt the
competition. An example of attorney misconduct, would be a defense attorney refusing to represent a client for political or professional motives.
Governmental corruption of the judiciary is broadly known in many transitional and developing countries because the budget
is almost completely controlled by the executive. The latter critically
undermines the separation of powers, because it fosters financial
dependence on the judiciary. The proper distribution of a nation's
wealth, including its government's spending on the judiciary, is subject
to constitutional economics.
It is important to draw distinctions between the two methods
which are used to corrupt the judiciary: the government (through budget
planning and various privileges), and the private. Judicial corruption can be difficult to completely eradicate, even in developed countries.
Corruption in judiciary also involves the government in power using the
judicial arm of government to oppress the opposition parties in the
detriments of the state.
Within the military
Military
corruption refers to the abuse of power by members in the armed forces,
in order for career advancement or for personal gain by a soldier or
soldiers. One form of military corruption in the United States Armed Forces, is a military soldier being promoted in rank or being given better treatment than their colleagues by their officers, due to their race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, religious beliefs, social class or personal relationships with higher-ranking officers in spite of their merit. In addition to that, the US military has also had many instances of officers sexually assaulting fellow officers
and in many cases, there were allegations that many of the attacks were
covered up and victims were coerced to remain silent by officers of the
same rank or of higher rank.
Another example of military corruption, is a military officer or
officers using the power of their positions to commit activities that
are illegal, such as skimming logistical supplies such as food,
medicine, fuel, body armor or weapons to sell on the local black market. There have also been instances of military officials, providing equipment and combat support to criminal syndicates, private military companies and terrorist groups, without approval from their superiors. As a result, many countries have a military police force
to ensure that the military officers follow the laws and conduct of
their respective countries but sometimes the military police have levels
of corruption themselves.
In healthcare
Corruption, the abuse of entrusted power for private gain, as defined by Transparency International
is systemic in the health sector.
The characteristics of health systems with their concentrated supply of a
service, high discretionary power of its members controlling the
supply, and low accountability to others are the exact constellation of
the variables described by Klitgaard, on which corruption depends.
Corruption in health care is more dangerous than in any other
sector, because it affects health outcomes and is literally deadly.
It is widespread and yet, little has been published in medical journals
about this topic and as of 2019 there is no evidence on what might
reduce corruption in the health sector.
Corruption occurs within the private and public health sectors and may
appear as theft, embezzlement, nepotism, bribery up til extortion, or as
undue influence,
and occurs anywhere within the sector, be it in service provision,
purchasing, construction and hiring. In 2019, Transparency International
has described the 6 most common ways of service corruption as follows: absenteeism,
informal payments from patients, embezzlement, inflating services and
the costs of services, favouritism and manipulation of data (billing for
goods and services that were never sent or done).
Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. — Petrobras, more commonly known as simply Petrobras (Portuguese pronunciation: [ˌpɛtɾoˈbɾas]), is a semi-public Brazilian multinational corporation in the petroleum industry headquartered in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The company's name translates to Brazilian Petroleum Corporation – Petrobras. The company was ranked No. 58 in the 2016 Fortune Global 500 list. It is being investigated over corporate and political collusion and corruption.
Odebrecht is a privately held Brazilian conglomerate consisting of businesses in the fields of engineering, real estate, construction, chemicals and petrochemicals. The company was founded in 1944 in Salvador da Bahia by Norberto Odebrecht,
and the firm is now present in South America, Central America, North
America, the Caribbean, Africa, Europe and the Middle East. Its leading
company is Norberto Odebrecht Construtora [pt]. Odebrecht is one of the 25 largest international construction companies and led by Odebrecht family.
In 2016, the firm's executives were examined during Operation Car Wash
part of an investigation over Odebrecht Organization bribes to
executives of Petrobras, in exchange for contracts and influence. Operation Car Wash is an ongoing criminal money laundering and bribes related corporate crime investigation being carried out by the Federal Police of Brazil, Curitiba Branch, and judicially commanded by Judge Sérgio Moro since 17 March 2014.
In the education system
Corruption in education is a worldwide phenomenon. Corruption in
admissions to universities is traditionally considered as one of the
most corrupt areas of the education sector.
Recent attempts in some countries, such as Russia and Ukraine, to curb
corruption in admissions through the abolition of university entrance
examinations and introduction of standardized computer-graded tests have
met backlash from part of society, while other appreciate changes. Vouchers for university entrants have never materialized. The cost of corruption is in that it impedes sustainable economic growth.
Endemic corruption in educational institutions leads to the formation of sustainable corrupt hierarchies.
While higher education in Russia is distinct with widespread bribery,
corruption in the US and the UK features a significant amount of fraud. The US is distinct with grey areas and institutional corruption in the higher education sector.
Authoritarian regimes, including those in the former Soviet republics,
encourage educational corruption and control universities, especially
during the election campaigns. This is typical for Russia, Ukraine, and Central Asian regimes,
among others. The general public is well aware of the high level of
corruption in colleges and universities, including thanks to the media. Doctoral education is no exception, with dissertations and doctoral degrees available for sale, including for politicians. Russian Parliament is notorious for "highly educated" MPs
High levels of corruption are a result of universities not being able
to break away from their Stalinist past, over bureaucratization, and a clear lack of university autonomy. Both quantitative and qualitative methodologies are employed to study education corruption,
but the topic remains largely unattended by the scholars. In many
societies and international organizations, education corruption remains a
taboo.
In some countries, such as certain eastern European countries, some
Balkan countries and certain Asian countries, corruption occurs
frequently in universities. This can include bribes to bypass bureaucratic procedures and bribing faculty for a grade.
The willingness to engage in corruption such as accepting bribe money
in exchange for grades decreases if individuals perceive such behavior
as very objectionable, i.e. a violation of social norms and if they fear
sanctions regarding the severity and probability of sanctions.
Within labor unions
The Teamsters (International Brotherhood of Teamsters) is an example of how the civil RICO process can be used. For decades, the Teamsters had been substantially controlled by La Cosa Nostra.
Since 1957, four of eight Teamster presidents were indicted, yet the
union continued to be controlled by organized crime elements. The
federal government has been successful at removing the criminal
influence from this 1.4 million-member union by using the civil process.
In religion
The history of religion
includes numerous examples of religious leaders calling attention to
the corruption which existed in the religious practices and institutions
of their time. The Jewish prophets Isaiah and Amos berate the rabbinical establishment of Ancient Judea for failing to live up to the ideals of the Torah. In the New Testament, Jesus
accuses the rabbinical establishment of his time of hypocritically
following only the ceremonial parts of the Torah and neglecting the more
important elements of justice, mercy and faithfulness. Corruption was one of the important issues which led to the Investiture Controversy. In 1517, Martin Luther accused the Catholic Church of widespread corruption, including the selling of indulgences.
The 19th-century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer
acknowledged that academics, including philosophers, are subject to the
same sources of corruption as the societies which they inhabit. He
distinguished the corrupt "university" philosophers, whose "real concern
is to earn with credit an honest livelihood for themselves and ... to
enjoy a certain prestige in the eyes of the public" from the genuine philosopher, whose sole motive is to discover and bear witness to the truth.
To be a philosopher, that is to say, a lover of wisdom
(for wisdom is nothing but truth), it is not enough for a man to love
truth, in so far as it is compatible with his own interest, with the
will of his superiors, with the dogmas of the church, or with the
prejudices and tastes of his contemporaries; so long as he rests content
with this position, he is only a φίλαυτος [lover of self], not a
φιλόσοφος [lover of wisdom]. For this title of honor is well and wisely
conceived precisely by its stating that one should love the truth
earnestly and with one’s whole heart, and thus unconditionally and
unreservedly, above all else, and, if need be, in defiance of all else.
Now the reason for this is the one previously stated that the intellect
has become free, and in this state, it does not even know or understand
any other interest than that of truth.
Arms for cash
"Arms for cash" can be done by either a state-sanctioned arms dealer,
firm or state itself to another party it just regards as only a good
business partner and not political kindred or allies, thus making them
no better than regular gun runners. Arms smugglers, who are already into arms trafficking may work for them on the ground or with shipment. The money is often laundered and records are often destroyed.
It often breaks UN, national or international law.
Payment can also be in strange or indirect ways like arms paid for in post-war oil contracts, post-war hotel ownership, conflict diamonds, corporate shares or the long term post-war promises of superfus future contracts between the parties involved in it, etc...
In 2006 Transparency International ranked Angola a lowly 142 out of 163 countries in the Corruption Perception Index just after Venezuela and before the Republic of the Congo with a 2.2 rating. Angola was at 168th place (out of 178 countries) on Transparency
International's Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), receiving a 1.9 on a
scale from 0 to 10.
On the World Bank's 2009 Worldwide Governance Index, Angola had done
very poorly on all six aspects of governance assessed. While its score
for political stability improved to 35.8 in 2009 (on a 100-point scale)
from 19.2 in 2004, Angola earned especially low scores for
accountability, regulatory standards, and rule of law. The score for
corruption declined from an extremely low 6.3 in 2004 to 5.2 in 2009.
The country is regarded poorly and that corruption is wounding the economy badly despite the emerging oil industries wealth.
The Mitterrand–Pasqua affair, also known informally as Angolagate, was an international political scandal over the secret and illegal sale and shipment of arms from the nations of Central Europe to the government of Angola by the Government of France in the 1990s. It led to arrests and judiciary actions in the 2000s, involved an illegal arms sale to Angola despite a UN embargo, with business interests in France
and elsewhere improperly obtaining a share of Angolan oil revenues. The
scandal has subsequently been tied to several prominent figures in
French politics.
Within
less democratic countries, the presence of resources such as diamonds,
gold, oil, and forestry increases the prevalence of corruption.
Corruption includes industrial corruption, consisting of large bribes,
as well as petty corruption such as a poacher paying off a park ranger to ignore poaching.
The presence of fuel extraction and export is unambiguously associated
with corruption, whereas mineral exports only increased corruption in
poorer countries. In wealthier countries, mineral exports such as gold
and diamonds are actually associated with reduced corruption. The
international Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
seeks to create best practices for good governance of gas, oil, and
minerals, particularly focusing on the state management of revenue from
these resources. Any valued natural resource can be affected by
corruption, including water for irrigation, land for livestock grazing, forests for hunting and logging, and fisheries.
The presence or perception of corruption also undermines
environmental initiatives. In Kenya, farmers blame poor agricultural
productivity on corruption, and thus are less likely to undertake soil conservation
measures to prevent soil erosion and loss of nutrients. In Benin,
mistrust of government due to perceived corruption led small farmers to
reject the adaptation of measures to combat climate change.
Bribery involves the improper use of gifts and favours in exchange for personal gain. This is also known as kickbacks or, in the Middle East, as baksheesh. It is a common form of corruption. The types of favors given are diverse and may include money, gifts, real estate, promotions, sexual favors, employee benefits, company shares, privileges, entertainment, employment
and political benefits. The personal gain that is given can be anything
from actively giving preferential treatment to having an indiscretion
or crime overlooked.
Bribery can sometimes form a part of the systemic use of
corruption for other ends, for example to perpetrate further corruption.
Bribery can make officials more susceptible to blackmail or to
extortion.
Embezzlement, theft and fraud
Embezzlement and theft involve someone with access to funds or assets illegally taking control of them. Fraud involves using deception to convince the owner of funds or assets to give them up to an unauthorized party.
Examples include the misdirection of company funds into "shadow
companies" (and then into the pockets of corrupt employees), the
skimming of foreign aid money, scams, electoral fraud and other corrupt activity.
Graft
The political act of graft is when funds intended for public
projects are intentionally misdirected to maximize the benefits to
private interests of the corrupt individuals.
Extortion and blackmail
While bribery is the use of positive inducements for corrupt aims, extortion and blackmail centre around the use of threats. This can be the threat of physical violence or false imprisonment as well as exposure of an individual's secrets or prior crimes.
This includes such behavior as an influential person threatening
to go to the media if they do not receive speedy medical treatment (at
the expense of other patients), threatening a public official with
exposure of their secrets if they do not vote in a particular manner, or
demanding money in exchange for continued secrecy. Another example can
be a police officer being threatened with the loss of their job by their superiors, if they continued with investigating a high-ranking official.
Influence peddling
Influence peddling
is the illegal practice of using one's influence in government or
connections with persons in authority to obtain favors or preferential
treatment, usually in return for payment.
Networking
Networking (both Business and Personal)
can be an effective way for job-seekers to gain a competitive edge over
others in the job-market. The idea is to cultivate personal
relationships with prospective employers, selection panelists, and
others, in the hope that these personal affections will influence future
hiring decisions. This form of networking has been described as an
attempt to corrupt formal hiring processes, where all candidates are
given an equal opportunity to demonstrate their merits to selectors. The
networker is accused of seeking non-meritocratic advantage over other
candidates; advantage that is based on personal fondness rather than on
any objective appraisal of which candidate is most qualified for the
position.
Euro bank notes hidden in sleeve.
Abuse of discretion
Abuse of discretion refers to the misuse of one's powers and decision-making
facilities. Examples include a judge improperly dismissing a criminal
case or a customs official using their discretion to allow a banned
substance through a port.
Favoritism, nepotism and clientelism
Favouritism, nepotism and clientelism
involve the favouring of not the perpetrator of corruption but someone
related to them, such as a friend, family member or member of an
association. Examples would include hiring or promoting a family member
or staff member to a role they are not qualified for, who belongs to the
same political party as you, regardless of merit.
Relationship to economic growth
Corruption
is strongly negatively associated with the share of private investment
and, hence, it lowers the rate of economic growth.
Corruption reduces the returns of productive activities. If the
returns to production fall faster than the returns to corruption and
rent-seeking activities, resources will flow from productive activities
to corruption activities over time. This will result in a lower stock of
producible inputs like human capital in corrupted countries.
Corruption creates the opportunity for increased inequality,
reduces the return of productive activities, and, hence, makes
rentseeking and corruption activities more attractive. This opportunity
for increased inequality not only generates psychological frustration to
the underprivileged but also reduces productivity growth, investment,
and job opportunities.
Prevention
According to the amended Klitgaard equation,
limitation of monopoly and regulator discretion of individuals and a
high degree of transparency through independent oversight by
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the media plus public access
to reliable information could reduce the problem. Djankov and other
researchers
have independently addressed the role information plays in fighting
corruption with evidence from both developing and developed countries.
Disclosing financial information of government officials to the public
is associated with improving institutional accountability and
eliminating misbehavior such as vote buying. The effect is specifically
remarkable when the disclosures concern politicians' income sources,
liabilities and asset level instead of just income level. Any extrinsic
aspects that might reduce morality should be eliminated. Additionally, a
country should establish a culture of ethical conduct in society with
the government setting the good example in order to enhance the
intrinsic morality.
In 1969, Christian anarchist Dorothy Day argued that God will resolve economic abuses such as corruption. She wrote,
Fortunately, the Papal States
were wrested from the Church in the last century, but there is still
the problem of investment of papal funds. It is always a cheering
thought to me that if we have good will and are still unable to find
remedies for the economic abuses of our time, in our family, our parish,
and the mighty church as a whole, God will take matters in hand and do
the job for us.
Enhancing civil society participation
Creating
bottom-up mechanisms, promoting citizens participation and encouraging
the values of integrity, accountability, and transparency are crucial
components of fighting corruption. As of 2012, the implementation of the
"Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres (ALACs)” in Europe had led to a
significant increase in the number of citizen complaints against acts of
corruption received and documented and also to the development of strategies for good governance by involving citizens willing to fight against corruption.
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA, USA 1977) was an early paradigmatic law for many western countries i.e. industrial countries of the OECD.
There, for the first time the old principal-agent approach was moved
back where mainly the victim (a society, private or public) and a
passive corrupt member (an individual) were considered, whereas the
active corrupt part was not in the focus of legal prosecution.
Unprecedented, the law of an industrial country directly condemned
active corruption, particularly in international business transactions,
which was at that time in contradiction to anti-bribery activities of
the World Bank and its spin-off organization Transparency International.
As early as 1989 the OECD had established an ad hoc Working Group
in order to explore "...the concepts fundamental to the offense of
corruption, and the exercise of national jurisdiction over offenses
committed wholly or partially abroad."
Based on the FCPA concept, the Working Group presented in 1994 the then "OECD Anti-Bribery Recommendation" as precursor for the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions
which was signed in 1997 by all member countries and came finally into
force in 1999. However, because of ongoing concealed corruption in
international transactions several instruments of Country Monitoring
have been developed since then by the OECD in order to foster and
evaluate related national activities in combating foreign corrupt
practices. One survey shows that after the implementation of heightened
review of multinational firms under the convention in 2010 firms from
countries that had signed the convention were less likely to use
bribery.
In 2013, a document
produced by the economic and private sector professional evidence and
applied knowledge services help-desk discusses some of the existing
practices on anti-corruption. They found:
The role of multilateral institutions has been crucial in the fight against corruption. UNCAC provides a common guideline for countries around the world. Both Transparency International and the World Bank provide assistance to national governments in term of diagnostic and design of anti-corruption policies.
The use of anti-corruption agencies have proliferated in recent years after the signing of UNCAC. They found no convincing evidence on the extent of their contribution, or the best way to structure them.
Traditionally anti-corruption policies have been based on success
experiences and common sense. In recent years there has been an effort
to provide a more systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of
anti-corruption policies. They found that this literature is still in
its infancy.
Anti-corruption policies that may be in general recommended to
developing countries may not be suitable for post-conflict countries.
Anti-corruption policies in fragile states have to be carefully
tailored.
Anti-corruption policies can improve the business environment. There
is evidence that lower corruption may facilitate doing business and
improve firm's productivity. Rwanda
in the last decade has made tremendous progress in improving governance
and the business environment providing a model to follow for
post-conflict countries.
The Republic of Armenia aims to achieve zero corruption through
raising awareness on the societal hazards. After the lavish spending
accusations on the Armenian anti-corruption council, through action
strategies with implementation and observing instruments progress is
noticeable.
In popular culture
In some countries people travel to corruption hot spots or a
specialist tour company takes them on corruption city tours, as it is
the case in Prague. Corruption tours have also occurred in Chicago, and Mexico City
Though corruption is often viewed as illegal, a concept of legal corruption has been described by Daniel Kaufmann and Pedro Vicente.
It might be termed as processes which are corrupt, but are protected by
a legal (that is, specifically permitted, or at least not proscribed by
law) framework.
Examples
In
1994, the German Parliamentary Financial Commission in Bonn presented a
comparative study on "legal corruption" in industrialized OECD countries
They reported that in most industrial countries foreign corruption was
legal, and that their foreign corrupt practices ranged from simple,
through governmental subsidization (tax deduction), up to extreme cases
as in Germany, where foreign corruption was fostered, whereas domestic
was legally prosecuted.
The German Parliamentary Financial Commission rejected a Parliamentary
Proposal by the opposition, which had been aiming to limit German
foreign corruption on the basis of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA from 1977), thus fostering national export corporations. In 1997 a corresponding OECD Anti-Bribery Convention was signed by its members.
It took until 1999, after the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention came into
force, that Germany withdrew the legalization of foreign corruption.
Foreign corrupt practices of industrialized OECD countries 1994 study
The Foreign corrupt practices of industrialized OECD countries 1994 (Parliamentary Financial Commission study, Bonn).
Belgium: bribe payments are generally tax deductible as business
expenses if the name and address of the beneficiary is disclosed. Under
the following conditions kickbacks in connection with exports abroad are
permitted for deduction even without proof of the receiver:
Payments must be necessary in order to be able to survive against foreign competition
They must be common in the industry
A corresponding application must be made to the Treasury each year
Payments must be appropriate
The payer has to pay a lump-sum to the tax office to be fixed by the Finance Minister (at least 20% of the amount paid).
In the absence of the required conditions, for corporate taxable
companies paying bribes without proof of the receiver, a special tax of
200% is charged. This special tax may, however, be abated along with the
bribe amount as an operating expense.
Denmark: bribe payments are deductible when a clear operational context exists and its adequacy is maintained.
France: basically all operating expenses can be deducted.
However, staff costs must correspond to an actual work done and must not
be excessive compared to the operational significance. This also
applies to payments to foreign parties. Here, the receiver shall specify
the name and address, unless the total amount in payments per
beneficiary does not exceed 500 FF. If the receiver is not disclosed the
payments are considered "rémunérations occult" and are associated with
the following disadvantages:
The business expense deduction (of the bribe money) is eliminated.
For corporations and other legal entities, a tax penalty of 100% of
the "rémunérations occult" and 75% for voluntary post declaration is to
be paid.
There may be a general fine of up 200 FF fixed per case.
Japan: in Japan, bribes are deductible as business expenses that are
justified by the operation (of the company) if the name and address of
the recipient is specified. This also applies to payments to foreigners.
If the indication of the name is refused, the expenses claimed are not
recognized as operating expenses.
Canada: there is no general rule on the deductibility or
non-deductibility of kickbacks and bribes. Hence the rule is that
necessary expenses for obtaining the income (contract) are deductible.
Payments to members of the public service and domestic administration of
justice, to officers and employees and those charged with the
collection of fees, entrance fees etc. for the purpose to entice the
recipient to the violation of his official duties, can not be abated as
business expenses as well as illegal payments according to the Criminal
Code.
Luxembourg: bribes, justified by the operation (of a company) are
deductible as business expenses. However, the tax authorities may
require that the payer is to designate the receiver by name. If not, the
expenses are not recognized as operating expenses.
Netherlands: all expenses that are directly or closely related to
the business are deductible. This also applies to expenditure outside
the actual business operations if they are considered beneficial as to
the operation for good reasons by the management. What counts is the
good merchant custom. Neither the law nor the administration is
authorized to determine which expenses are not operationally justified
and therefore not deductible. For the business expense deduction it is
not a requirement that the recipient is specified. It is sufficient to
elucidate to the satisfaction of the tax authorities that the payments
are in the interest of the operation.
Austria: bribes justified by the operation (of a company) are
deductible as business expenses. However, the tax authority may require
that the payer names the recipient of the deducted payments exactly. If
the indication of the name is denied e.g. because of business comity,
the expenses claimed are not recognized as operating expenses. This
principle also applies to payments to foreigners.
Switzerland: bribe payments are tax deductible if it is clearly operation initiated and the consignee is indicated.
US: (rough résumé: "generally operational expenses are deductible if they are not illegal according to the FCPA")
UK: kickbacks and bribes are deductible if they have been paid
for operating purposes. The tax authority may request the name and
address of the recipient."
"Specific" legal corruption: exclusively against foreign countries
Referring to the recommendation of the above-mentioned Parliamentary Financial Commission's study,
the then Kohl administration (1991–1994) decided to maintain the
legality of corruption against officials exclusively in foreign
transactions
and confirmed the full deductibility of bribe money, co-financing thus a
specific nationalistic corruption practice (§4 Abs. 5 Nr. 10 EStG,
valid until 19 March 1999) in contradiction to the 1994 OECD
recommendation. The respective law was not changed before the OECD Convention also in Germany came into force (1999).
According to the Parliamentary Financial Commission's study, however, in
1994 most countries' corruption practices were not nationalistic and
much more limited by the respective laws compared to Germany.
Particularly, the non-disclosure of the bribe money recipients' name
in tax declarations had been a powerful instrument for Legal Corruption
during the 1990s for German corporations, enabling them to block foreign
legal jurisdictions which intended to fight corruption in their
countries. Hence, they uncontrolled established a strong network of
clientelism around Europe (e.g. SIEMENS) along with the formation of the European Single Market in the upcoming European Union and the Eurozone.
Moreover, in order to further strengthen active corruption the
prosecution of tax evasion during that decade had been severely limited.
German tax authorities were instructed to refuse any disclosure of
bribe recipients' names from tax declarations to the German criminal
prosecution.
As a result, German corporations have been systematically increasing
their informal economy from 1980 until today up to 350 bn € per annum
(see diagram on the right), thus continuously feeding their black money
reserves.
Siemens corruption case
In 2007, Siemens was convicted in the District Court of Darmstadt of criminal corruption against the Italian corporation Enel Power SpA.
Siemens had paid almost €3.5 million in bribes to be selected for a
€200 million project from the Italian corporation, partially owned by
the government. The deal was handled through black money accounts in Switzerland and Liechtenstein that were established specifically for such purposes.
Because the crime was committed in 1999, after the OECD convention had
come into force, this foreign corrupt practice could be prosecuted. It
was the first time a German court of law convicted foreign corrupt
practices like a national practice, although the corresponding law did
not yet protect foreign competitors in business.
During the judicial proceedings it was disclosed that numerous such black accounts had been established in the past decades.
Historical responses in philosophical and religious thought
Philosophers and religious thinkers have responded to the inescapable reality of corruption in different ways. Plato, in The Republic,
acknowledges the corrupt nature of political institutions, and
recommends that philosophers "shelter behind a wall" to avoid
senselessly martyring themselves.
Disciples of philosophy ... have tasted how sweet and blessed a
possession philosophy is, and have also seen and been satisfied of the
madness of the multitude, and known that there is no one who ever acts
honestly in the administration of States, nor any helper who will save
any one who maintains the cause of the just. Such a savior would be like
a man who has fallen among wild beasts—unable to join in the wickedness
of his fellows, neither would he be able alone to resist all their
fierce natures, and therefore he would be of no use to the State or to
his friends, and would have to throw away his life before he had done
any good to himself or others. And he reflects upon all this, and holds
his peace, and does his own business. He is like one who retires under
the shelter of a wall in the storm of dust and sleet which the driving
wind hurries along; and when he sees the rest of mankind full of
wickedness, he is content if only he can live his own life and be pure
from evil or unrighteousness, and depart in peace and good will, with
bright hopes.
The New Testament, in keeping with the tradition of Ancient Greek thought, also frankly acknowledges the corruption of the world (ὁ κόσμος) and claims to offer a way of keeping the spirit "unspotted from the world." Paul of Tarsus acknowledges his readers must inevitably "deal with the world,"
and recommends they adopt an attitude of "as if not" in all their
dealings. When they buy a thing, for example, they should relate to it
"as if it were not theirs to keep." New Testament readers are advised to refuse to "conform to the present age" and not to be ashamed to be peculiar or singular. They are advised not be friends of the corrupt world, because "friendship with the world is enmity with God." They are advised not to love the corrupt world or the things of the world. The rulers of this world, Paul explains, "are coming to nothing" While readers must obey corrupt rulers in order to live in the world, the spirit is subject to no law but to love God and love our neighbors as ourselves. New Testament readers are advised to adopt a disposition in which they are "in the world, but not of the world."
This disposition, Paul claims, shows us a way to escape "slavery to
corruption" and experience the freedom and glory of being innocent
"children of God".