http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/Socio-
economic_issues_in_India
Socio-economic issues in India
Since India's Independence in 1947, country has faced several social and economic
issues.

Contents
[hide]

• 1 Violence
o 1.1 Religious violence
o 1.2 Terrorism
o 1.3 Naxalism
o 1.4 Caste related violence
• 2 Overpopulation
• 3 Economic issues
o 3.1 Poverty
o 3.2 Corruption
• 4 See also

• 5 References

Violence
Religious violence
Main article: Religious violence in India
Further information: Hindutva, Hindu nationalism, Islamic Extremism, Khalistan
movement, Islamic terrorism, and Christian terrorism
See also: Anti-Christian violence in India, Anti-Christian violence in Karnataka, and
Religious violence in Orissa

[[Image:Babri rearview.jpg|right|thumb|The 16th Century [[Babri Mosque], (built by

destroying Ram Mandir -birth place of God Ram) was destroyed by the members of
Hindu nationalist VHP and Bajrang Dal in 1992,[1] resulting in nationwide religious
riots]] Constitutionally India is a secular state, [2] but large-scale violence have
periodically occurred in India since independence. In recent decades, communal tensions
and religion-based politics have become more prominent. .[3] Although India is generally
known for religious pluralism, [4] the Hindutva ideology propagates that India belongs to
the Hindus, and the Christians and the Muslims are "aliens", [5] and many proponents of
this ideology portray violence against Muslims and Christians as a form of "self-defence"
against "invaders". [6] The Hindutva ideology is at the core of Sangh Parivar politics and
its expression in violence against religious minority. [5] Throughout the history of post-
Independence India, both Muslim and Christian communities have faced repeated attacks
from Hindu activists. [7] As the Hindutva ideology has grown more powerful over the
years, many Hindutva activists have partaken in riots against minority communities. [8]
Over the last decade, religious violence in India has increasingly become what academics
believe to be organized pogroms to eliminate minority communities. [9] [10] [11] Some state
governments in India have been accused of not effectively prosecuting those who attack
religious minorities. [12] Major religious violent incidents include Ayodhya debate,
Bombay Riots, 1993 Bombay bombings, 2002 Gujarat violence.

Many Ahmedabad's buildings were set on fire during 2002 Gujarat violence

Although related, Hinduism and Hindutva are different. Hinduism is a religion while
Hindutva is a political ideology. The Hindutva movement is not supported by majority of
Hindus. Some tolerant or "secular" Hindus use the term "Hindu Taliban" to describe the
supporters of the Hindutva movement.[13] Fukuoka Asian Culture Prize-winning Indian
sociologist and cultural and political critic Ashis Nandy argued "Hindutva will be the end
of Hinduism."[14]

In Jammu and Kashmir, Since March 1990, estimates of between 250,000 to 300,000
pandits have migrated outside Kashmir due to persecution by Islamic fundamentalists in
the largest case of ethnic cleansing since the partition of India.[15] The proportion of
Kashmiri Pandits in the Kashmir valley has declined from about 15% in 1947 to, by some
estimates, less than 0.1% since the insurgency in Kashmir took on a religious and
sectarian flavor.[16] Many Kashmiri Pandits have been killed by Islamist terrorists in
incidents such as the Wandhama massacre and the 2000 Amarnath pilgrimage massacre.
[17][18][19][20][21]

In recent years, there has been a sharp increase in violent attacks on Christians in India,
often perpetrated by Hindu Nationalists.[22] The acts of violence include arson of
churches, re-conversion of Christians to Hinduism, distribution of threatening literature,
burning of Bibles, raping of nuns, murder of Christian priests and destruction of Christian
schools, colleges, and cemeteries.[23][24] The Sangh Parivar and related organisations have
stated that the violence is an expression of "spontaneous anger" of "vanvasis" against
"forcible conversion" activities undertaken by missionaries,[23][25][26] a claim described as
"absurd" and rejected by scholars.[23] Between 1964 and 1996, thirty-eight incidents of
violence against Christians were reported.[23] In 1997, twenty-four such incidents were
reported.[27] In 2007 and 2008 there was a further flare up of tensions in Orissa, the first
following the Christians' putting up a Pandhal in land traditionally used by Hindus and
the second after the unprovoked murder of a Hindu Guru and four of his disciples while
observing Janmashtami puja. This was followed by an attack on a 150-year-old church in
Madhya Pradesh,[28] and more attacks in Karnataka,[29]

Terrorism
Main article: Terrorism in India
[show]
v•d•e

Terrorist attacks in India

(since 2001)

The regions with long term terrorist activities today are Jammu and Kashmir, Central
India (Naxalism) and Seven Sister States (independence and autonomy movements). In
the past, the Punjab insurgency led to militant activities in the Indian state of Punjab as
well as the national capital Delhi (Delhi serial blasts, anti-Sikh riots). As of 2006, at least
232 of the country’s 608 districts were afflicted, at differing intensities, by various
insurgent and terrorist movements.[30]

Terrorism in India has often been alleged to be sponsored by Pakistan. After most acts of
terrorism in India, many journalists and politicians accuse Pakistan's intelligence agency,
the Inter-Services Intelligence of playing a role. Recently, both the US and Afghanistan
have accused Pakistan of carrying out terrorist acts in Afghanistan.[31]

Naxalism
Main article: Naxalism

Map showing the districts where the Naxalite movement is active

Naxalism is an informal name given to communist groups that were born out of the Sino-
Soviet split in the Indian communist movement. Ideologically they belong to various
trends of Maoism. Initially the movement had its centre in West Bengal. In recent years,
they have spread into less developed areas of rural central and eastern India, such as
Chattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh through the activities of underground groups like the
Communist Party of India (Maoist).[32] The CPI (Maoist) and some other Naxal factions
are considered terrorists by the Government of India and various state governments in
India.[33]

Caste related violence

Main articles: Caste system in India, Caste politics in India, and Caste-related violence in
India

Caste-related violence and hate crimes in India have occurred despite the gradual
reduction of casteism in the country. Independent India has witnessed considerable
amount of violence and hate crimes motivated by caste. Ranvir Sena, a caste-supremacist
fringe paramilitary group based in Bihar, has committed violent acts against Dalits and
other members of the scheduled caste community. Phoolan Devi, who belonged to
Mallah lower-caste, was mistreated and raped by upper-caste Thakurs at a young age.
She then became a bandit and carried out violent robberies against upper-caste people. In
1981, her gang massacred twenty-two Thakurs, most of whom were not involved in her
kidnapping or rape. Phoolan Devi went on to become a politician and Member of
Parliament.

Over the years, various incidents of violence against Dalits, such as Kherlanji Massacre
have been reported from many parts of India. At the same time, many violent protests by
Dalits, such as the 2006 Dalit protests in Maharashtra, have been reported as well.

The Mandal Commission was established in 1979 to "identify the socially or

educationally backward",[34] and to consider the question of seat reservations and quotas
for people to redress caste discrimination. In 1980, the commission's report affirmed the
affirmative action practice under Indian law whereby members of lower castes were
given exclusive access to a certain portion of government jobs and slots in public
universities. When V. P. Singh Government tried to implement the recommendations of
Mandal Commission in 1989, massive protests were held in the country. Many alleged
that the politicians were trying to cash in on caste-based reservations for purely pragmatic
electoral purposes.

In 1990s, many parties Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), the Samajwadi Party and the Janata
Dal started claiming that they are representing the backward castes. Many such parties,
relying primarily on Backward Classes' support, often in alliance with Dalits and
Muslims, rose to power in Indian states.[35] At the same time, many Dalit leaders and
intellectuals started realizing that the main Dalit oppressors were so-called Other
Backward Classes,[36] and formed their own parties, such as the Indian Justice Party. The
Congress (I) in Maharashtra long relied on OBCs' backing for its political success.[35]
Bharatiya Janata Party has also showcased its Dalit and OBC leaders to prove that it is
not an upper-caste party. Bangaru Laxman, the former BJP president (2001–2002) was a
former Dalit. Sanyasin Uma Bharati, former CM of Madhya Pradesh , who belongs to
OBC caste, was a former BJP leader. In 2006 Arjun Singh cabinet minister for MHRD of
the UPA government was accused of playing caste politics when he introduced
reservations for OBCs in educational institutions all around.

Overpopulation
Further information: Family planning in India
Further information: Demographics of India

India suffers from the problem of overpopulation.[37][38][39] Though India ranks second in
population, it ranks 33 in terms of population density below countries such as The
Netherlands, South Korea and Japan. To cure this problem, Indira Gandhi, Prime
Minister of India, had implemented a forced sterilization programme in the early 1970s
but failed. Officially, men with two children or more had to submit to sterilization, but
many unmarried young men, political opponents and ignorant, poor men were also
believed to have been sterilized. This program is still remembered and criticized in India,
and is blamed for creating a wrong public aversion to family planning, which hampered
Government programmes for decades.[40]

Economic issues

Percent of population living under the poverty line

Extent of corruption in Indian states, as measured in a 2005 study by Transparency
International India. (Darker regions are more corrupt)[41]
Further information: Economy of India

Poverty
Main article: Poverty in India

One-third of India's population (roughly equivalent to the entire population of the United
States) lives below the poverty line and India is home to one-third of the world's poor
people.

Though the middle class has gained from recent positive economic developments, India
suffers from substantial poverty. According to the new World Bank's estimates on
poverty based on 2005 data, India has 456 million people, 41.6% of its population, living
below the new international poverty line of $1.25 (PPP) per day. The World Bank further
estimates that 33% of the global poor now reside in India. Moreover, India also has 828
million people, or 75.6% of the population living below $2 a day, compared to 72.2% for
Sub-Saharan Africa.[42][43][44][45]

Wealth distribution in India is fairly uneven, with the top 10% of income groups earning
33% of the income.[46] Despite significant economic progress, 1/4 of the nation's
population earns less than the government-specified poverty threshold of $0.40/day.
Official figures estimate that 27.5%[47] of Indians lived below the national poverty line in
2004–2005.[48] A 2007 report by the state-run National Commission for Enterprises in the
Unorganised Sector (NCEUS) found that 25% of Indians, or 236 million people, lived on
less than 20 rupees per day[49] with most working in "informal labour sector with no job
or social security, living in abject poverty."[50]

Corruption
Main article: Corruption in India

Corruption is widespread in India. India is ranked 72 out of a 179 countries in

Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, although its score has
improved consistently from 2.7 in 2002 to 3.5 in 2007.[51] Corruption has taken the role of
a pervasive aspect of Indian politics and bureaucracy.[52]

In India, corruption takes the form of bribes, evasion of tax and exchange controls,
embezzlement, etc. A 2005 study done by Transparency International (TI) India found
that more than 50% had firsthand experience of paying bribe or peddling influence to get
a job done in a public office.[41] The chief economic consequences of corruption are the
loss to the exchequer, an unhealthy climate for investment and an increase in the cost of
government-subsidised services. The TI India study estimates the monetary value of petty
corruption in 11 basic services provided by the government, like education, healthcare,
judiciary, police, etc., to be around Rs.21,068 crores.[41] India still ranks in the bottom
quartile of developing nations in terms of the ease of doing business, and compared to
China and other lower developed Asian nations, the average time taken to secure the
clearances for a startup or to invoke bankruptcy is much greater.[53]

See also

• Social issues in the People's Republic of China

• Social issues in the United States

References

1. ^ [1]
2. ^ Preamble of the Constitution
3. ^ Ludden 1996, p. 253
4. ^ Barbara Harriss-White (2003), India Working: Essays on Society and Economy,
Cambridge University Press, p. 132, ISBN 0-521-00763-1
5. ^ a b Ram Puniyani (2003), Communal Politics: Facts Versus Myths, SAGE,
pp. 174, ISBN 0-7619-9667-2
6. ^ Basu, Tapan Kumar (1993), Khaki shorts and saffron flags: a critique of the
Hindu right, [New Delhi]: Orient Longman, pp. 20, ISBN 0-86311-383-4
7. ^ Hindu Extremists Attack Indian Churches, Torch Home of Prominent Christian
8. ^ Paul Brass, The Production of Hindu-Muslim Violence in Contemporary India,
University of Washington Press, 2003: p 1144.
9. ^ Bhatt, Chetan. "Majority ethnic" claims and authoritarian nationalism", in Eric
Kaufman (ed.) Rethinking Ethnicity: Majority Groups and Dominant Minorities,
Routledge, 2004.
10. ^ Joshi, Sanjay; Walhof, Darren R.; Peterson, Derek R. (2002), The invention of
religion: rethinking belief in politics and history, New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers
University Press, pp. 92, ISBN 0-8135-3093-8
11. ^ Jalal, Ayesha (1995), Democracy and authoritarianism in South Asia: a
comparative and historical perspective, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press, pp. 99, ISBN 0-521-47271-7
12. ^ International Religious Freedom Report 2007:India,
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2007/90228.htm
13. ^ Fritz Blackwell (2004), India: A Global Studies Handbook, ABC-CLIO, p. 126,
ISBN 978-1-57607-348-3
14. ^ Ashis Nandy (1991-02-18), Hinduism Versus Hindutva: The Inevitability Of A
Confrontation, The Times of India,
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/Socissues/hindutva.html, retrieved 2008-11-
10
15. ^ Kashmiri Pandits in Nandimarg decide to leave Valley, Outlook, 30 March
2003, http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=131481, retrieved 2007-11-
30
16. ^ Kashmir: The scarred and the beautiful. New York Review of Books, 1 May
2008, p. 14.
17. ^ 'I heard the cries of my mother and sisters', Rediff, 27 January 1998,
http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/jan/27kash.htm, retrieved 2007-11-30
18. ^ Migrant Pandits voted for end of terror in valley, The Tribune, 27 April 2004,
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040428/j&k.htm#1, retrieved 2007-11-30
19. ^ At least 58 dead in 2 attacks in Kashmir, CNN, 2 August 2000,
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ASIANOW/south/08/01/india.kashmir.massacre/,
retrieved 2007-11-30[dead link]
20. ^ City shocked at killing of Kashmiri Pandits, The Times of India, 25 March
2003, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/41306901.cms, retrieved
2007-11-30
21. ^ Phil Reeves (25 March 2003), Islamic militants kill 24 Hindus in Kashmir
massacre, The Independent, http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-99139517.html,
retrieved 2007-11-30
22. ^ Anti-Christian Violence on the Rise in India,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/1999/09/30/india1626.htm
23. ^ a b c d Anti-Christian Violence in India,
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Current_Affairs/Current_affairs.htm
l
24. ^ Anti-Christian Violence on the Rise in India
25. ^ Low, Alaine M.; Brown, Judith M.; Frykenberg, Robert Eric (eds.) (2002),
Christians, Cultural Interactions, and India's Religious Traditions, Grand Rapids,
Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, pp. 134, ISBN 0-7007-1601-7
26. ^ Subba, Tanka Bahadur; Som, Sujit; Baral, K. C (eds.) (2005), Between
Ethnography and Fiction: Verrier Elwin and the Tribal Question in India, New
Delhi: Orient Longman, ISBN 81-250-2812-9
27. ^ Ram Puniyani (2003), Communal Politics: Facts Versus Myths, SAGE, p. 167,
ISBN 0-7619-9667-2
28. ^ "150-yr-old church set afire in Madhya Pradesh". The Times Of India. 2008-09-
20. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/150-yr-
old_church_set_afire_in_Madhya_Pradesh/articleshow/3501987.cms.
29. ^ http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/protest-in-delhi-over-
violence-against-christians_100100429.html
30. ^ India Assessment – 2007
31. ^ http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?
sectionName=&id=faf54bd2-af68-4655-a747-28f7d1fc5cfa&&Headline=
%E2%80%98Pak+the+problem%2c+not+the+solution
%E2%80%99&strParent=strParentID
32. ^ Ramakrishnan, Venkitesh (2005-09-21), The Naxalite Challenge, Frontline
Magazine (The Hindu),
http://www.flonnet.com/fl2221/stories/20051021006700400.htm, retrieved 2007-
03-15
33. ^ Diwanji, A. K. (2003-10-02), Primer: Who are the Naxalites?, Rediff.com,
http://us.rediff.com/news/2003/oct/02spec.htm, retrieved 2007-03-15
34. ^ Bhattacharya, Amit. Who are the OBCs?, archived from the original on 2006-
06-27,
http://web.archive.org/web/20060627065912/http://www.theotherindia.org/caste/
who-are-the-obcs.html, retrieved 2006-04-19 Times of India, 8 April 2006.
35. ^ a b Caste-Based Parties, Country Studies US,
http://countrystudies.us/india/116.htm, retrieved 2006-12-12
36. ^ Danny Yee, Book review of Caste, Society and Politics in India: From the
Eighteenth Century to the Modern Age,
http://dannyreviews.com/h/Caste_India.html, retrieved 2006-12-11
37. ^
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/scisoc/environment/seniorsem03/Overpopulati
on_in_India.pdf
38. ^
http://web.archive.org/web/20091027071002/http://geocities.com/soc2504groupp
roject/overpopulation_in_india_and_chin.htm
39. ^ "Over-population warning as India's billionth baby is born". The Guardian
(London). 2000-05-11.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/may/11/population. Retrieved 2010-05-
23.
40. ^ http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Independent/Indira.html
41. ^ a b c Centre for Media Studies (2005), India Corruption Study 2005: To Improve
Governance Volume – I: Key Highlights, Transparency International India,
http://www.prajanet.org/newsroom/internal/tii/ICS2k5_Vol1.pdf.
42. ^ "One-third of world's poor in India: Survey". The Times Of India. 2008-08-27.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/One-
third_of_worlds_poor_in_India/articleshow/3409374.cms.
43. ^ "World Bank's new poverty norms find larger number of poor in India". The
Hindu (Chennai, India). 2008-08-28.
http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/28/stories/2008082856061300.htm.
44. ^ The Times Of India.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Editorials/Define_poverty_anew/articlesho
w/3423435.cms.
45. ^ Schifferes, Steve (2008-08-27). "World poverty 'more widespread'". BBC News.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7583719.stm. Retrieved 2010-05-23.
46. ^ "In Pictures – Middle Class, or Upper Class? ". India Together. Civil Society
Information Exchange. August 2003
47. ^ This figure is extremely sensitive to the surveying methodology used. The
Uniform Recall Period (URP) gives 27.5%. The Mixed Recall Period (MRP)
gives a figure of 21.8%
48. ^ Planning commission of India. Poverty estimates for 2004–2005
49. ^ This figure has been variously reported as either "2 dollars per day" or "0.5
dollars per day". The former figure comes from the PPP conversion rate, while the
latter comes from the official exchange rate. Also note that this figure does not
contradict the NSS derived figure, which uses calorie consumption as the basis for
its poverty line. It just uses a more inclusive poverty line
50. ^ Nearly 80 Percent of India Lives On Half Dollar A Day, Reuters, 10 August
2007, http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSDEL218894, retrieved
2007-08-15
51. ^ Believe it or not! India is becoming less corrupt. CNN-IBN. 26 September
2007.
 52. ^ Corruption in India
53. ^ Economic Survey 2004–2005

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption
Corruption
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Look up corrupt, corrupted, or corruption in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Contents
[hide]

• 1 Institutions dealing with political corruption

• 2 Entertainment with corruption themes
• 3 See also
• 4 References

• 5 External links

The word corrupt (Middle English, from Latin corruptus, past participle of corrumpere,
to destroy : com-, intensive pref. and rumpere, to break) when used as an adjective
literally means "utterly broken".[1] In modern English usage the words corruption and
corrupt have many meanings:

• Political corruption, the abuse of public power, office, or resources by

government officials or employees for personal gain, e.g. by extortion, soliciting
or offering bribes[2]
• Police corruption, a specific form of police misconduct designed to obtain
financial benefits, other personal gain, and/or career advancement for a police
officer or officers in exchange for not pursuing, or selectively pursuing, an
investigation or arrest
 • Corporate corruption, corporate criminality and the abuse of power by corporation
officials, either internally or externally, including the fact that police obstruct
justice.
• Corruption (philosophical concept), often refers to spiritual or moral impurity, or
deviation from an ideal
• Corruption Perceptions Index, published yearly by Transparency International
• Putrefaction, the natural process of decomposition in the human and animal body
following death
• Data corruption, an unintended change to data in storage or in transit
• Linguistic corruption, the change in meaning to a language or a text introduced by
cumulative errors in transcription as changes in the language speakers'
comprehension
• Bribery in politics, business, or sport
• Rule of law, governmental corruption of judiciary, includes governmental
spending on the courts, which is completely financially controlled by the
executive in many transitional and developing countries

Institutions dealing with political corruption

• Transparency International, a non-governmental organization that monitors and

publicizes corporate and political corruption in international development
• Global Witness, an international NGO established in 1993 that works to break the
links between natural resource exploitation, conflict, poverty, corruption, and
human rights abuses worldwide
• Group of States Against Corruption, a body established under the Council of
Europe to monitor the implementation of instruments adopted by member states
to combat political corruption
• Independent Commission Against Corruption (disambiguation)

Entertainment with corruption themes

• Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, a 2007 Wii game

• Corrupt (film), a 1981 film starring Harvey Keitel and John Lydon
• Corruption (1933 film), a 1933 American film directed by Charles E. Roberts
• Corrupt (1999 film), a 1999 film starring Ice-T and Silkk The Shocker
• Corrupt (Angel), an unproduced teleplay written for the television program Angel
• Kurupt (born 1972), rapper
• Corruption (video game), a 1988 computer game by Magnetic Scrolls
• Corrupted (band), a Japanese doom-metal band
• Corruption (film), a 1968 British film directed by Robert Hartford-Davis
• Fable Series, for the Xbox 360
• Chaorruption, a form of corruption caused by Drakath and his 13 Lords of Chaos
in Artix Entertainment's MMORPG, AdventureQuest Worlds
• Tagore, a telugu chiranjeevi film
See also

• Collusion, an agreement between two or more persons, sometimes illegal and

therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or
defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law
typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage
• Corruption by country, varies in different countries
• Constitutional economics, a research program in economics and constitutionalism
that has been described as extending beyond the definition of 'the economic
analysis of constitutional law' in explaining the choice "of alternative sets of
legal-institutional-constitutional rules that constrain the choices and activities of
economic and political agents
• Civil society, composed of the totality of voluntary civic and social organizations
and institutions that form the basis of a functioning society, as distinct from the
force-backed structures of a state (regardless of that state's political system) and
commercial institutions of the market
• Independence of the judiciary, the idea that the judiciary needs to be kept away
from the other branches of government

References

Also See: John Hoyle

1. ^ "Corrupt | Define Corrupt at Dictionary.com". Dictionary.reference.com.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/corrupt. Retrieved 2010-12-06.
2. ^ Chinhamo, Obert; Shumba, Gabriel (2007), Institutional working definition of
corruption, Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa

Political corruption
Political corruption is the use of legislated powers by government officials for
illegitimate private gain. Misuse of government power for other purposes, such as
repression of political opponents and general police brutality, is not considered political
corruption. Neither are illegal acts by private persons or corporations not directly
involved with the government. An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes political
corruption only if the act is directly related to their official duties.

Forms of corruption vary, but include bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, patronage,
graft, and embezzlement. While corruption may facilitate criminal enterprise such as drug
trafficking, money laundering, and human trafficking, it is not restricted to these
activities.

The activities that constitute illegal corruption differ depending on the country or
jurisdiction. For instance, certain political funding practices that are legal in one place
may be illegal in another. In some cases, government officials have broad or poorly
defined powers, which make it difficult to distinguish between legal and illegal actions.
Worldwide, bribery alone is estimated to involve over 1 trillion US dollars annually.[1] A
state of unrestrained political corruption is known as a kleptocracy, literally meaning
"rule by thieves".
Contents
[hide]

• 1 Effects
o 1.1 Effects on politics, administration, and institutions
o 1.2 Economic effects
o 1.3 Environmental and social effects
o 1.4 Effects on Humanitarian Aid
o 1.5 Other areas: health, public safety, education, trade unions, etc.
• 2 Types
o 2.1 Bribery
o 2.2 Trading in influence
o 2.3 Patronage
o 2.4 Nepotism and cronyism
o 2.5 Electoral fraud
o 2.6 Embezzlement
o 2.7 Kickbacks
o 2.8 Unholy alliance
o 2.9 Involvement in organized crime
• 3 Conditions favorable for corruption
o 3.1 Relation to economic freedom
o 3.2 Size of public sector
• 4 Governmental corruption
• 5 Fighting corruption
• 6 Whistleblowers
• 7 Campaign contributions
• 8 Measuring corruption
• 9 See also
• 10 References
• 11 Further reading

• 12 External links
 Effects
Effects on politics, administration, and institutions

Detail from Corrupt Legislation (1896) by Elihu Vedder. Library of Congress Thomas
Jefferson Building, Washington, D.C.

Corruption poses a serious development challenge. In the political realm, it undermines

democracy and good governance by flouting or even subverting formal processes.
Corruption in elections and in legislative bodies reduces accountability and distorts
representation in policymaking; corruption in the judiciary compromises the rule of law;
and corruption in public administration results in the inefficient provision of services.
More generally, corruption erodes the institutional capacity of government as procedures
are disregarded, resources are siphoned off, and public offices are bought and sold. At the
same time, corruption undermines the legitimacy of government and such democratic
values as trust and tolerance.

Economic effects
See also: Corporate crime

Corruption undermines economic development by generating considerable distortions

and inefficiency. In the private sector, corruption increases the cost of business through
the price of illicit payments themselves, the management cost of negotiating with
officials, and the risk of breached agreements or detection. Although some claim
corruption reduces costs by cutting red tape, the availability of bribes can also induce
officials to contrive new rules and delays. Openly removing costly and lengthy
regulations are better than covertly allowing them to be bypassed by using bribes. Where
corruption inflates the cost of business, it also distorts the playing field, shielding firms
with connections from competition and thereby sustaining inefficient firms.

Corruption also generates economic distortions in the public sector by diverting public
investment into capital projects where bribes and kickbacks are more plentiful. Officials
may increase the technical complexity of public sector projects to conceal or pave the
way for such dealings, thus further distorting investment. Corruption also lowers
compliance with construction, environmental, or other regulations, reduces the quality of
government services and infrastructure, and increases budgetary pressures on
government.

Economists argue that one of the factors behind the differing economic development in
Africa and Asia is that in the former, corruption has primarily taken the form of rent
extraction with the resulting financial capital moved overseas rather than invested at
home (hence the stereotypical, but often accurate, image of African dictators having
Swiss bank accounts). In Nigeria, for example, more than $400 billion was stolen from
the treasury by Nigeria's leaders between 1960 and 1999.[2] University of Massachusetts
researchers estimated that from 1970 to 1996, capital flight from 30 sub-Saharan
countries totaled $187bn, exceeding those nations' external debts.[3] (The results,
expressed in retarded or suppressed development, have been modeled in theory by
economist Mancur Olson.) In the case of Africa, one of the factors for this behavior was
political instability, and the fact that new governments often confiscated previous
government's corruptly-obtained assets. This encouraged officials to stash their wealth
abroad, out of reach of any future expropriation. In contrast, Asian administrations such
as Suharto's New Order often took a cut on business transactions or provided conditions
for development, through infrastructure investment, law and order, etc.

Environmental and social effects

Corruption facilitates environmental destruction. Corrupt countries may formally have

legislation to protect the environment, it cannot be enforced if officials can easily be
bribed. The same applies to social rights worker protection, unionization prevention, and
child labor. Violation of these laws rights enables corrupt countries to gain illegitimate
economic advantage in the international market.

The Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen has observed that "there is no such
thing as an apolitical food problem." While drought and other naturally occurring events
may trigger famine conditions, it is government action or inaction that determines its
severity, and often even whether or not a famine will occur. Governments with strong
tendencies towards kleptocracy can undermine food security even when harvests are
good. Officials often steal state property. In Bihar, India, more than 80% of the
subsidized food aid to poor is stolen by corrupt officials.[4] Similarly, food aid is often
robbed at gunpoint by governments, criminals, and warlords alike, and sold for a profit.
The 20th century is full of many examples of governments undermining the food security
of their own nations – sometimes intentionally.[5]

Effects on Humanitarian Aid

The scale of humanitarian aid to the poor and unstable regions of the world grows, but it
is highly vulnerable to corruption, with food aid, construction and other highly valued
assistance as the most at risk.[6] Food aid can be directly and physically diverted from its
intended destination, or indirectly through the manipulation of assessments, targeting,
registration and distributions to favour certain groups or individuals.[6] Elsewhere, in
construction and shelter, there are numerous opportunities for diversion and profit
through substandard workmanship, kickbacks for contracts and favouritism in the
provision of valuable shelter material.[6] Thus while humanitarian aid agencies are usually
most concerned about aid being diverted by including too many, recipients themselves
are most concerned about exclusion.[6] Access to aid may be limited to those with
connections, to those who pay bribes or are forced to give sexual favours.[6] Equally,
those able to do so may manipulate statistics to inflate the number beneficiaries and
syphon of the additional assistance.[6]

Other areas: health, public safety, education, trade unions, etc.

See also: Police corruption

Corruption is not specific to poor, developing, or transition countries. In western

European countries, there have been cases of bribery and other forms of corruption in all
possible fields: under-the-table payments made to reputed surgeons by patients willing to
be on top of the list of forthcoming surgeries, bribes paid by suppliers to the automotive
industry in order to sell poor quality connectors used for instance in safety equipment
such as airbags, bribes paid by suppliers to manufacturers of defibrillators (to sell poor
quality capacitors), contributions paid by wealthy parents to the "social and culture fund"
of a prestigious university in exchange for it to accept their children, bribes paid to obtain
diplomas, financial and other advantages granted to unionists by members of the
executive board of a car manufacturer in exchange for employer-friendly positions and
votes, etc. Examples are endless. These various manifestations of corruption can
ultimately present a danger for the public health; they can discredit certain essential
institutions or social relationships.

Corruption can also affect the various components of sports activities (referees, players,
medical and laboratory staff involved in anti-doping controls, members of national sport
federation and international committees deciding about the allocation of contracts and
competition places).

There have also been cases against (members of) various types of non-profit and non-
government organisations, as well as religious organisations.

Ultimately, the distinction between public and private sector corruption sometimes
appears rather artificial and national anti-corruption initiatives may need to avoid legal
and other loopholes in the coverage of the instruments.

Types
Bribery
Main article: Bribery

A bribe is a payment given personally to a government official in exchange of his use of

official powers. Bribery requires two participants: one to give the bribe, and one to take
it. Either may initiate the corrupt offering; for example, a customs official may demand
bribes to let through allowed (or disallowed) goods, or a smuggler might offer bribes to
gain passage. In some countries the culture of corruption extends to every aspect of
public life, making it extremely difficult for individuals to stay in business without
resorting to bribes. Bribes may be demanded in order for an official to do something he is
already paid to do. They may also be demanded in order to bypass laws and regulations.
In addition to using bribery for private financial gain, they are also used to intentionally
and maliciously cause harm to another (i.e. no financial incentive). In some developing
nations, up to half of the population has paid bribes during the past 12 months.[7]

In recent years, efforts have been made by the international community to encourage
countries to dissociate and incriminate as separate offences, active and passive bribery.
Active bribery can be defined for instance as the promising, offering or giving by any
person, directly or indirectly, of any undue advantage [to any public official], for himself
or herself or for anyone else, for him or her to act or refrain from acting in the exercise
of his or her functions. (article 2 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS
173) of the Council of Europe). Passive bribery can be defined as the request or receipt
[by any public official], directly or indirectly, of any undue advantage, for himself or
herself or for anyone else, or the acceptance of an offer or a promise of such an
advantage, to act or refrain from acting in the exercise of his or her functions (article 3 of
the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173)). The reason for this dissociation
is to make the early steps (offering, promising, requesting an advantage) of a corrupt deal
already an offence and, thus, to give a clear signal (from a criminal policy point of view)
that bribery is not acceptable. Besides, such a dissociation makes the prosecution of
bribery offences easier since it can be very difficult to prove that two parties (the bribe-
giver and the bribe-taker) have formally agreed upon a corrupt deal. Besides, there is
often no such formal deal but only a mutual understanding, for instance when it is
common knowledge in a municipality that to obtain a building permit one has to pay a
"fee" to the decision maker to obtain a favourable decision. A working definition of
corruption is also provided as follows in article 3 of the Civil Law Convention on
Corruption (ETS 174): For the purpose of this Convention, "corruption" means
requesting, offering, giving or accepting, directly or indirectly, a bribe or any other
undue advantage or prospect thereof, which distorts the proper performance of any duty
or behaviour required of the recipient of the bribe, the undue advantage or the prospect
thereof.

Trading in influence

Trading in influence, or influence peddling in certain countries, refers to the situation

where a person is selling his/her influence over the decision process involving a third
party (person or institution). The difference with bribery is that this is a tri-lateral
relation. From a legal point of view, the role of the third party (who is the target of the
influence) does not really matter although he/she can be an accessory in some instances.
It can be difficult to make a distinction between this form of corruption and certain forms
of extreme and poorly regulated lobbying where for instance law- or decision-makers can
freely "sell" their vote, decision power or influence to those lobbyists who offer the
highest retribution, including where for instance the latter act on behalf of powerful
clients such as industrial groups who want to avoid the passing of certain environmental,
social, or other regulations perceived as too stringent, etc. Where lobbying is
(sufficiently) regulated, it becomes possible to provide for a distinctive criteria and to
consider that trading in influence involves the use of "improper influence", as in article
12 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173) of the Council of Europe.

Patronage
Main article: Patronage

Patronage refers to favoring supporters, for example with government employment. This
may be legitimate, as when a newly elected government changes the top officials in the
administration in order to effectively implement its policy. It can be seen as corruption if
this means that incompetent persons, as a payment for supporting the regime, are selected
before more able ones. In nondemocracies many government officials are often selected
for loyalty rather than ability. They may be almost exclusively selected from a particular
group (for example, Sunni Arabs in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the nomenklatura in the
Soviet Union, or the Junkers in Imperial Germany) that support the regime in return for
such favors. A similar problem can also be seen in Eastern Europe, for example in
Romania, where the government is often accused of patronage (when a new government
comes to power, in a few months time it changed most of the officials in the public
sector).

Nepotism and cronyism

Main articles: Nepotism and Cronyism

Favoring relatives (nepotism) or personal friends (cronyism) of an official is a form of

illegitimate private gain. This may be combined with bribery, for example demanding
that a business should employ a relative of an official controlling regulations affecting the
business. The most extreme example is when the entire state is inherited, as in North
Korea or Syria. A milder form of cronyism is an "old boy network", in which appointees
to official positions are selected only from a closed and exclusive social network – such
as the alumni of particular universities – instead of appointing the most competent
candidate.

Seeking to harm enemies becomes corruption when official powers are illegitimately
used as means to this end. For example, trumped-up charges are often brought up against
journalists or writers who bring up politically sensitive issues, such as a politician's
acceptance of bribes.

In the Indian political system, leadership of national and regional parties are passed from
generation to generation creating a system in which a family holds the center of power,
some examples are most of the dravidian parties of south India and also the largest party
in India - Congress.

Electoral fraud
Main article: Electoral fraud
Electoral fraud is illegal interference with the process of an election. Acts of fraud affect
vote counts to bring about an election result, whether by increasing the vote share of the
favored candidate, depressing the vote share of the rival candidates, or both. Also called
voter fraud, the mechanisms involved include illegal voter registration, intimidation at
polls, and improper vote counting.

Embezzlement
Main article: Embezzlement

Embezzlement is outright theft of entrusted funds. It is a misappropriation of property.

Another common type of embezzlement is that of entrusted government resources; for

example, when a director of a public enterprise employs company workers to build or
renovate his own house.

Kickbacks

A kickback is an official's share of misappropriated funds allocated from his or her

organization to an organization involved in corrupt bidding. For example, suppose that a
politician is in charge of choosing how to spend some public funds. He can give a
contract to a company that is not the best bidder, or allocate more than they deserve. In
this case, the company benefits, and in exchange for betraying the public, the official
receives a kickback payment, which is a portion of the sum the company received. This
sum itself may be all or a portion of the difference between the actual (inflated) payment
to the company and the (lower) market-based price that would have been paid had the
bidding been competitive. Kickbacks are not limited to government officials; any
situation in which people are entrusted to spend funds that do not belong to them are
susceptible to this kind of corruption. Kickbacks are also common in the pharmaceutical
industry, as many doctors and physicians receive pay in return for added promotion and
prescription of the drug these pharmaceutical companies are marketing. (See: Anti-
competitive practices, Bid rigging.)

Unholy alliance

An unholy alliance is a coalition among seemingly antagonistic groups, especially if one

is religious,[8] for ad hoc or hidden gain. Like patronage, unholy alliances are not
necessarily illegal, but unlike patronage, by its deceptive nature and often great financial
resources, an unholy alliance can be much more dangerous to the public interest. An
early, well-known use of the term was by Theodore Roosevelt (TR):

"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between
corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the
day." – 1912 Progressive Party Platform, attributed to TR[9] and quoted again in
his autobiography[10] where he connects trusts and monopolies (sugar interests,
Standard Oil, etc.) to Woodrow Wilson, Howard Taft, and consequently both
major political parties.
Involvement in organized crime

An illustrative example of official involvement in organized crime can be found from

1920s and 1930s Shanghai, where Huang Jinrong was a police chief in the French
concession, while simultaneously being a gang boss and co-operating with Du Yuesheng,
the local gang ringleader. The relationship kept the flow of profits from the gang's
gambling dens, prostitution, and protection rackets undisturbed.

The United States accused Manuel Noriega's government in Panama of being a

"narcokleptocracy", a corrupt government profiting on illegal drug trade. Later the U.S.
invaded Panama and captured Noriega.

Conditions favorable for corruption

This section is in a list format that may be better presented using prose. You
can help by converting this section to prose, if appropriate. Editing help is
available. (December 2009)

It is argued that the following conditions are favorable for corruption:

• Information deficits

•
o Lacking freedom of information legislation. The Indian Right to
Information Act 2005 has "already engendered mass movements in the
country that is bringing the lethargic, often corrupt bureaucracy to its
knees and changing power equations completely."[11]
o Lack of investigative reporting in the local media.
o Contempt for or negligence of exercising freedom of speech and freedom
of the press.For instance a new current case of online puplisher Wikileaks
and a editor or founder of Julian Assange.So the many
nations,international companys and important personage or
political,business etc.figures around the world which was suddenly
became very angry and obsessive campaigning to stop the publishing
many important documents and the new ones to come.But particularly the
goverments and government organisations or the institutions defending
itselves which under the "National Protection Law" or "Top Secret"
(Secrecy!) of the files as a very aggressive way against him and the
Wikileaks.
o Weak accounting practices, including lack of timely financial
management.
o Lack of measurement of corruption. For example, using regular surveys of
households and businesses in order to quantify the degree of perception of
corruption in different parts of a nation or in different government
institutions may increase awareness of corruption and create pressure to
combat it. This will also enable an evaluation of the officials who are
fighting corruption and the methods used.
 o Tax havens which tax their own citizens and companies but not those from
other nations and refuse to disclose information necessary for foreign
taxation. This enables large scale political corruption in the foreign
nations.[12][citation needed]
• Lacking control of the government.

•
o Lacking civic society and non-governmental organizations which monitor
the government.
o An individual voter may have a rational ignorance regarding politics,
especially in nationwide elections, since each vote has little weight.
o Weak civil service, and slow pace of reform.
o Weak rule of law.
o Weak legal profession.
o Weak judicial independence.
o Lacking protection of whistleblowers.
o Lack of benchmarking, that is continual detailed evaluation of procedures
and comparison to others who do similar things, in the same government
or others, in particular comparison to those who do the best work. The
Peruvian organization Ciudadanos al Dia has started to measure and
compare transparency, costs, and efficiency in different government
departments in Peru. It annually awards the best practices which has
received widespread media attention. This has created competition among
government agencies in order to improve.[13]
• Opportunities and incentives
o Individual officials routinely handle cash, instead of handling payments by
giro or on a separate cash desk—illegitimate withdrawals from supervised
bank accounts are much more difficult to conceal.
o Public funds are centralized rather than distributed. For example, if $1,000
is embezzled from a local agency that has $2,000 funds, it is easier to
notice than from a national agency with $2,000,000 funds. See the
principle of subsidiarity.
o Large, unsupervised public investments.
o Sale of state-owned property and privatization.[citation needed]
o Poorly-paid government officials.
o Government licenses needed to conduct business, e.g., import licenses,
encourage bribing and kickbacks.
o Long-time work in the same position may create relationships inside and
outside the government which encourage and help conceal corruption and
favoritism. Rotating government officials to different positions and
geographic areas may help prevent this; for instance certain high rank
officials in French government services (e.g. treasurer-paymasters general)
must rotate every few years.
o Costly political campaigns, with expenses exceeding normal sources of
political funding, especially when funded with taxpayer money.
 o Less interaction with officials reduces the opportunities for corruption. For
example, using the Internet for sending in required information, like
applications and tax forms, and then processing this with automated
computer systems. This may also speed up the processing and reduce
unintentional human errors. See e-Government.
o A windfall from exporting abundant natural resources may encourage
corruption.[14] (See Resource curse)
o War and other forms of conflict correlate with a breakdown of public
security.
• Social conditions
o Self-interested closed cliques and "old boy networks".
o Family-, and clan-centered social structure, with a tradition of
nepotism/favouritism being acceptable.
o A gift economy, such as the Chinese guanxi or the Soviet blat system,
emerges in a Communist centrally planned economy.
o In societies where personal integrity is rated as less important than other
characteristics (by contrast, in societies such as 18th and 19th century
England, 20th century Japan, and post-war western Germany, where
society showed almost obsessive regard for "honor" and personal integrity,
corruption was less frequently seen)[citation needed]
o Lacking literacy and education among the population.
o Frequent discrimination and bullying among the population.
o Tribal solidarity, giving benefits to certain ethnic groups

Relation to economic freedom

According to a study of the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, lack of
economic freedom explains 71% of corruption[15]: the poorer the Index of Economic
Freedom, the more corruption there is in a country. Below is a list of examples of
governmental activities that limit economic freedom, create opportunities for corruption
(incentives for individuals and/or companies to buy privileges or favors worth of money,
from politicians or officials), and have in recent economic history also led to corruption:

• Licenses, permits, etc.

• Foreign trade restrictions. Officials may then, e.g., sell import or export permits.
• Credit bailouts.
• State ownership of utilities and natural resources. 'In analyzing India's state-run
irrigation system, professor Shyam Kamath - - wrote: Public-sector irrigation
systems everywhere are typically plagued with cost and time overruns, endemic
inefficiency, chronic excess demands, and widespread corruption and rent
seeking.'
• Access to loans at below-market rates. In Chile, '$4.6 billion was awarded to
government banks in direct subsidies through "soft" loans' between 1940 and
1973.[15]
Size of public sector

It is a controversial issue whether the size of the public sector per se results in corruption.
As mentioned above, low degree of economic freedom explains 71% of corruption. The
actual share may be even greater, as also past regulation affects the current level of
corruption due to the slowing of cultural changes (e.g., it takes time for corrupted
officials to adjust to changes in economic freedom).[16] The size of the public sector in
terms of taxation is only one component of economic un-freedom, so the empirical
studies on economic freedom do not directly answer this question.

Extensive and diverse public spending is, in itself, inherently at risk of cronyism,
kickbacks, and embezzlement. Complicated regulations and arbitrary, unsupervised
official conduct exacerbate the problem. This is one argument for privatization and
deregulation. Opponents of privatization see the argument as ideological. The argument
that corruption necessarily follows from the opportunity is weakened by the existence of
countries with low to non-existent corruption but large public sectors, like the Nordic
countries.[17] However, these countries score high on the Ease of Doing Business Index,
due to good and often simple regulations, and have rule of law firmly established.
Therefore, due to their lack of corruption in the first place, they can run large public
sectors without inducing political corruption.

Like other governmental economic activities, also privatization, such as in the sale of
government-owned property, is particularly at the risk of cronyism. Privatizations in
Russia, Latin America, and East Germany were accompanied by large scale corruption
during the sale of the state owned companies. Those with political connections unfairly
gained large wealth, which has discredited privatization in these regions. While media
have reported widely the grand corruption that accompanied the sales, studies have
argued that in addition to increased operating efficiency, daily petty corruption is, or
would be, larger without privatization, and that corruption is more prevalent in non-
privatized sectors. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that extralegal and unofficial
activities are more prevalent in countries that privatized less.[18]

There is the counter point, however, that oligarchy industries can be quite corrupt
( "competition" like collusive price-fixing, pressuring dependent businesses, etc. ), and
only by having a portion of the market owned by someone other than that oligarchy, i.e.
public sector, can keep them in line ( if the public sector gas company is making money
& selling gas for 1/2 of the price of the private sector companies... the private sector
companies won't be able to simultaneously gouge to that degree & keep their customers:
the competition keeps them in line ). Private sector corruption can increase the
poverty/helplessness of the population, so it can affect government corruption, in the
long-term.

In the European Union, the principle of subsidiarity is applied: a government service

should be provided by the lowest, most local authority that can competently provide it.
An effect is that distribution of funds into multiple instances discourages embezzlement,
because even small sums missing will be noticed. In contrast, in a centralized authority,
even minute proportions of public funds can be large sums of money.

Governmental corruption

If the highest echelons of the governments also take advantage from corruption or
embezzlement from the state's treasury, it is sometimes referred with the neologism
kleptocracy. Members of the government can take advantage of the natural resources
(e.g., diamonds and oil in a few prominent cases) or state-owned productive industries. A
number of corrupt governments have enriched themselves via foreign aid, which is often
spent on showy buildings and armaments.

A corrupt dictatorship typically results in many years of general hardship and suffering
for the vast majority of citizens as civil society and the rule of law disintegrate. In
addition, corrupt dictators routinely ignore economic and social problems in their quest to
amass ever more wealth and power.

The classic case of a corrupt, exploitive dictator often given is the regime of Marshal
Mobutu Sese Seko, who ruled the Democratic Republic of the Congo (which he renamed
Zaire) from 1965 to 1997. It is said that usage of the term kleptocracy gained popularity
largely in response to a need to accurately describe Mobutu's regime. Another classic
case is Nigeria, especially under the rule of General Sani Abacha who was de facto
president of Nigeria from 1993 until his death in 1998. He is reputed to have stolen some
US$3–4 billion. He and his relatives are often mentioned in Nigerian 419 letter scams
claiming to offer vast fortunes for "help" in laundering his stolen "fortunes", which in
reality turn out not to exist.[19] More than $400 billion was stolen from the treasury by
Nigeria's leaders between 1960 and 1999.[20]

More recently, articles in various financial periodicals, most notably Forbes magazine,
have pointed to Fidel Castro, General Secretary of the Republic of Cuba since 1959, of
likely being the beneficiary of up to $900 million, based on "his control" of state-owned
companies.[21] Opponents of his regime claim that he has used money amassed through
weapons sales, narcotics, international loans, and confiscation of private property to
enrich himself and his political cronies who hold his dictatorship together, and that the
$900 million published by Forbes is merely a portion of his assets, although that needs to
be proven.[22]

Fighting corruption

Mobile telecommunications and radio broadcasting help to fight corruption, especially in

developing regions like Africa,[23] where other forms of communications are limited.

In the 1990s, initiatives were taken at an international level (in particular by the European
Community, the Council of Europe, the OECD) to put a ban on corruption: in 1996, the
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, for instance, adopted a comprehensive
Programme of Action against Corruption and, subsequently, issued a series of anti-
corruption standard-setting instruments:

• the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173);

• the Civil Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 174);
• the Additional Protocol to the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS
191);
• the Twenty Guiding Principles for the Fight against Corruption (Resolution (97)
24);
• the Recommendation on Codes of Conduct for Public Officials (Recommendation
No. R (2000) 10); and
• the Recommendation on Common Rules against Corruption in the Funding of
Political Parties and Electoral Campaigns (Rec(2003)4)

The purpose of these instruments was to address the various forms of corruption
(involving the public sector, the private sector, the financing of political activities, etc.)
whether they had a strictly domestic or also a transnational dimension. To monitor the
implementation at national level of the requirements and principles provided in those
texts, a monitoring mechanism - the Group of States Against Corruption (also known as
GRECO) was created.

Further conventions were adopted at the regional level under the aegis of the
Organization of American States (OAS or OEA), the African Union, and in 2003, at the
universal level under that of the United Nations.

Whistleblowers
Main article: Whistleblower

Campaign contributions

In the political arena, it is difficult to prove corruption. For this reason, there are often
unproven rumors about many politicians, sometimes part of a smear campaign.

Politicians are placed in apparently compromising positions because of their need to

solicit financial contributions for their campaign finance. If they then appear to be acting
in the interests of those parties that funded them, it could be considered corruption.
Though donations may be coincidental, the question asked is, why are they funding
politicians at all, if they get nothing for their money.

Laws regulating campaign finance in the United States require that all contributions and
their use should be publicly disclosed. Many companies, especially larger ones, fund both
the Democratic and Republican parties. Certain countries, such as France, ban altogether
the corporate funding of political parties. Because of the possible circumvention of this
ban with respect to the funding of political campaigns, France also imposes maximum
spending caps on campaigning; candidates that have exceeded those limits, or that have
handed in misleading accounting reports, risk having their candidacy ruled invalid, or
even being prevented from running in future elections. In addition, the government funds
political parties according to their successes in elections.

In some countries, political parties are run solely off subscriptions (membership fees).

Even legal measures such as these have been argued to be legalized corruption, in that
they often favor the political status quo. Minor parties and independents often argue that
efforts to rein in the influence of contributions do little more than protect the major
parties with guaranteed public funding while constraining the possibility of private
funding by outsiders. In these instances, officials are legally taking money from the
public coffers for their election campaigns to guarantee that they will continue to hold
their influential and often well-paid positions.

As indicated above, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recognised in

1996 the importance of links between corruption and political financing. It adopted in
2003 the Recommendation on Common Rules against Corruption in the Funding of
Political Parties and Electoral Campaigns (Rec(2003)4). This text is quite unique at
international levels as it aims i.a. at increasing transparency in the funding of political
parties and election campaigns (these two areas are difficult to dissociate since parties are
also involved in campaigning and in many countries, parties do not have the monopoly
over the presentation of candidates for elections), ensuring a certain level of control over
the funding and spending connected with political activities, and making sure
infringements are subject to effective, proportionate, and dissuasive sanctions. In the
context of its monitoring activities, the Group of States Against Corruption has identified
a great variety of possible improvements in those areas (see the country reports adopted
under the Third Evaluation Round).

Measuring corruption

Measuring corruption statistically is difficult if not impossible due to the illicit nature of
the transaction and imprecise definitions of corruption.[24] While "corruption" indices first
appeared in 1995 with the Corruption Perceptions Index, all of these metrics address
different proxies for corruption, such as public perceptions of the extent of the problem.
[25]

Transparency International, an anti-corruption NGO, pioneered this field with the

Corruption Perceptions Index, first released in 1995. This work is often credited with
breaking a taboo and forcing the issue of corruption into high level development policy
discourse. Transparency International currently publishes three measures, updated
annually: a Corruption Perceptions Index (based on aggregating third-party polling of
public perceptions of how corrupt different countries are); a Global Corruption
Barometer (based on a survey of general public attitudes toward and experience of
corruption); and a Bribe Payers Index, looking at the willingness of foreign firms to pay
bribes. The Corruption Perceptions Index is the best known of these metrics, though it
has drawn much criticism[25][26][27] and may be declining in influence.[28]
The World Bank collects a range of data on corruption, including survey responses from
over 100,000 firms worldwide and a set of indicators of governance and institutional
quality. Moreover, one of the six dimensions of governance measured by the Worldwide
Governance Indicators is Control of Corruption, which is defined as "the extent to which
power is exercised for private gain, including both petty and grand forms of corruption,
as well as 'capture' of the state by elites and private interests."[29] While the definition
itself is fairly precise, the data aggregated into the Worldwide Governance Indicators is
based on any available polling: questions range from "is corruption a serious problem?"
to measures of public access to information, and not consistent across countries. Despite
these weaknesses, the global coverage of these datasets has led to their widespread
adoption, most notably by the Millennium Challenge Corporation.[24]

In part in response to these criticisms, a second wave of corruption metrics has been
created by Global Integrity, the International Budget Partnership, and many lesser known
local groups, starting with the Global Integrity Index, first published in 2004. These
second wave projects aim not to create awareness, but to create policy change via
targeting resources more effectively and creating checklists toward incremental reform.
Global Integrity and the International Budget Partnership each dispense with public
surveys and instead uses in-country experts to evaluate "the opposite of corruption" –
which Global Integrity defines as the public policies that prevent, discourage, or expose
corruption.[30] These approaches compliment the first wave, awareness-raising tools by
giving governments facing public outcry a checklist which measures concrete steps
toward improved governance.[24]

Typical second wave corruption metrics do not offer the worldwide coverage found in
first wave projects, and instead focus on localizing information gathered to specific
problems and creating deep, "unpackable" content that matches quantitative and
qualitative data. Meanwhile, alternative approaches such as the British aid agency's
Drivers of Change research skips numbers entirely and favors understanding corruption
via political economy analysis of who controls power in a given society.[24]

See also
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Political corruption

Corruption by country

• Corruption in local government

• Police corruption
• Political class
• Political machine
• Power elite

History of corruption

• Andrew Johnson
 • Ulysses S. Grant presidential administration scandals
• Category:George W. Bush administration controversies
• Category:Nixon administration controversies
• Category:Reagan administration controversies

Forms or aspects of corruption

• Baksheesh
• Crony capitalism
• Electoral fraud
• Honest services fraud
• Political scandal
• Professional courtesy

Good governance

• Constitutional economics
• Civil society
• Comitology
• Due diligence

Theoretical aspects

• Conflict of interest
• Principal-agent problem
• Rent seeking

Anti-corruption authorities and measures

• GEMAP
• The Council of Europe's Group of States Against Corruption (French: Groupe
d'Etats contre la corruption) or GRECO, the body and mechanism established to
monitor the implementation of:
o the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173);
o the Civil Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 174);
o the Additional Protocol to the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption
(ETS 191);
o the Twenty Guiding Principles for the Fight against Corruption
(Resolution (97) 24);
o the Recommendation on Codes of Conduct for Public Officials
(Recommendation No. R (2000) 10); and
o the Recommendation on Common Rules against Corruption in the
Funding of Political Parties and Electoral Campaigns (Rec(2003)4)
o http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/corruption
• Independent Commission Against Corruption
• Inter-American Convention Against Corruption
 • United Nations Convention against Corruption
• Report Public Corruption

Corruption in fiction

• The Financier (1912), The Titan (1914), and The Stoic (1947), Theodore Dreiser's
Trilogy of Desire, based on the life of the notorious transit mogul Charles Tyson
Yerkes
• Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (Hollywood film 1939)
• Atlas Shrugged (1957 novel)
• Henry Adams' novel Democracy (1880)
• Carl Hiaasen's novel Sick Puppy (1999)
• Much of the Batman comic book series
• V for Vendetta comic book series
• The Ghost in the Shell Anime films and series
• Animal Farm a novel by George Orwell
• Training Day (2001 film)
• Exit Wounds (2001 film)
• American Gangster (2007 film)
• Robert Penn Warren's novel All the King's Men (1946)

References

1. ^ African corruption 'on the wane', 10 July 2007, BBC News

2. ^ "Nigeria's corruption busters". Unodc.org.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/nigerias-corruption-busters.html.
Retrieved 2009-12-05.
3. ^ "When the money goes west". New Statesman. 2005-03-14.
http://www.newstatesman.com/Economy/200503140015. Retrieved 2009-11-05.
4. ^ "Will Growth Slow Corruption In India?". Forbes.
http://www.forbes.com/2007/08/15/wipro-tata-corruption-ent-law-
cx_kw_0814whartonindia.html.
5. ^ Sheeter, Laura (2007-11-24). "Ukraine remembers famine horror". BBC News.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7111296.stm. Retrieved 2009-12-05.
6. ^ a b c d e f Sarah Bailey (2008) Need and greed: corruption risks, perceptions and
prevention in humanitarian assistance Overseas Development Institute
7. ^ "How common is bribe-paying?".
http://www.transparency.org/news_room/latest_news/press_releases/2005/09_12_
2005_barometer_2005. "...a relatively high proportion of families in a group of
Central Eastern European, African, and Latin American countries paid a bribe in
the previous twelve months."
8. ^ "Kentucky's unholy alliance". Kpac2.blogspot.com. 2007-04-05.
http://kpac2.blogspot.com/2007/04/unholy-alliance.html. Retrieved 2009-12-05.
9. ^ By Patricia OToole Sunday, Jun. 25, 2006 (2006-06-25). "O'Toole, Patricia,
"The War of 1912," TIME in Partneship with CNN, Jun. 25, 2006". Time.com.
 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1207791-2,00.html. Retrieved
2009-12-05.
10. ^ "Roosevelt, Theodore. ''An Autobiography:'' XV. The Peace of Righteousness,
Appendix B, New York: Macmillan, 1913". Bartleby.com.
http://www.bartleby.com/55/15b.html. Retrieved 2009-12-05.
11. ^ "AsiaMedia :: Right to Information Act India's magic wand against corruption".
Asiamedia.ucla.edu. 2006-08-31. http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?
parentid=52046. Retrieved 2009-11-05.
12. ^ Mathiason, Nick (2007-01-21). "Western bankers and lawyers 'rob Africa of
$150bn every year". London: Observer.guardian.co.uk.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,,1994976,00.html. Retrieved
2009-12-05.
13. ^ "Why benchmarking works - PSD Blog - World Bank Group".
Psdblog.worldbank.org. 2006-08-17.
http://psdblog.worldbank.org/psdblog/2006/08/why_benchmarkin.html#more.
Retrieved 2009-11-05.
14. ^ Damania; Bulte, Erwin (July 2003). "Resources for Sale: Corruption,
Democracy and the Natural Resource Curse" (pdf). Centre for International
Economic Studies, University of Adelaide.
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/cies/papers/0320.pdf. Retrieved 2010-12-11.
15. ^ a b Economic Freedom and Corruption, Alejandro A. Chafuen and Eugenio
Guzmán, Chapter 3 in 2000 Index of Economic Freedom
16. ^ Heritage.org, Economic Freedom and Corruption (pdf), Alejandro A. Chafuen
and Eugenio Guzmán
17. ^ "Lessons From the North". Project Syndicate. http://www.project-
syndicate.org/commentary/sachs110. Retrieved 2009-11-05.
18. ^ Privatization in Competitive Sectors: The Record to Date. Sunita Kikeri and
John Nellis. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 2860, June 2002.
Econ.Chula.ac.th Privatization and Corruption. David Martimort and Stéphane
Straub. IDEI.fr
19. ^ Who wants to be a millionaire? – An online collection of Nigerian scam mails
20. ^ "Nigeria's corruption totals $400 billion". Malaysia Today. June 27, 2005.
Archived December 11, 2007 at the Wayback Machine.
21. ^ "Fidel Castro net worth rises, according to 'Forbes'". Usatoday.Com. 2006-05-
04. http://www.usatoday.com/money/2006-05-04-castro_x.htm. Retrieved 2009-
11-05.
22. ^ Shapiro, Ben (2006-08-05). "Ben Shapiro :: Townhall.com :: The death of Fidel
Castro". Townhall.com.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/BenShapiro/2006/08/02/the_death_of_fidel
_castro. Retrieved 2009-11-05.
23. ^ "Mobile Phones and Radios Combat Corruption in Burundi - Voices from
Emerging Markets". Voicesfromemergingmarkets.com. 2009-03-12.
http://voicesfromemergingmarkets.com/?p=19. Retrieved 2009-11-05.
24. ^ a b c d "A Users' Guide to Measuring Corruption". Global Integrity. September 5,
2008. http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2008/09/users-guide-to-measuring-
corruption.html. Retrieved 2010-12-11.
 25. ^ a b Galtung, Fredrik (2006). "Measuring the Immeasurable: Boundaries and
Functions of (Macro) Corruption Indices," in Measuring Corruption, Charles
Sampford, Arthur Shacklock, Carmel Connors, and Fredrik Galtung, Eds.
(Ashgate): 101–130.
26. ^ Sik, Endre (2002). "The Bad, the Worse and the Worst: Guesstimating the
Level of Corruption," in Political Corruption in Transition: A Skeptic's
Handbook, Stephen Kotkin and Andras Sajo, Eds. (Budapest: Central European
University Press): 91–113.
27. ^ Arndt, Christiane and Charles Oman (2006). Uses and Abuses of Governance
Indicators (Paris: OECD Development Centre).
28. ^ "Media citing Transparency International". Google.com.
http://www.google.com/trends?q=Transparency+International&ctab=-
1&geo=all&date=all. Retrieved 2009-12-05.
29. ^ "A Decade of Measuring the Quality of Governance". The International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank. 2007. p. 3. Archived May
27, 2008 at the Wayback Machine.
30. ^ "The Global Integrity Report: 2009 Methodology White Paper". Global
Integrity. 2009. http://report.globalintegrity.org/methodology/whitepaper.cfm.
Retrieved 2010-12-11.

[edit] Further reading

• Michael W. Collier. (2009) Political Corruption in the Caribbean Basin:

Constructing a Theory to Combat Corruption excerpt and text search
• Charles Copeman and Amy McGrath (eds.)(1997), Corrupt Elections. Ballot
Rigging in Australia, Towerhouse Publications, Kensington, NSW
• Donatella della Porta, and Alberto Vannucci, (1999). Corrupt Exchanges: Actors,
Resources, and Mechanisms of Political Corruption. New York: Aldine de
Gruyter.
• Axel Dreher, Christos Kotsogiannis, Steve McCorriston (2004), Corruption
Around the World: Evidence from a Structural Model.
• Kimberly Ann Elliott, (ed.) (1997) Corruption and the Global Economy
• Edward L. Glaeser and Claudia Goldin, (eds.) (2006), Corruption and Reform:
Lessons from America's Economic History U. of Chicago Press, 386 pp. ISBN 0-
226-29957-0.
• Mark Grossman. Political Corruption in America: An Encyclopedia of Scandals,
Power, and Greed (2 vol. 2008)
• Arnold J. Heidenheimer, Michael Johnston and Victor T. LeVine (eds.) (1989),
Political Corruption: A Handbook 1017 pages.
• Richard Jensen. (2001) "Democracy, Republicanism and Efficiency: The Values
of American Politics, 1885-1930," in Byron Shafer and Anthony Badger, eds,
Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History,
1775-2000 pp 149–180; online edition
• Michael Johnston, Victor T. LeVine, and Arnold Heidenheimer, eds. (1970)
Political Corruption: Readings in Comparative Analysis
 • Michael Johnston (2005), Syndromes of Corruption: Wealth, Power, and
Democracy
• Junichi Kawata. (2006) Comparing Political Corruption And Clientelism excerpt
and text search
• George C. Kohn (2001). The New Encyclopedia of American Scandal
• Johann Graf Lambsdorff (2007), The Institutional Economics of Corruption and
Reform: Theory, Evidence and Policy Cambridge University Press
• Amy McGrath, (1994), The Forging of Votes, Tower House Publications,
Kensington, NSW
• Amy McGrath, (2003), Frauding of Elections, Tower House Publications and
H.S. Chapman Society, Brighton-le Sands, NSW
• Amy McGrath, (1994), The Frauding of Votes, Tower House Publications,
Kensington, NSW
• Amy McGrath, (2005), The Stolen Election, Australia 1987 According to Frank
Hardy, Author of Power Without Glory, Towerhouse Publications and H.S.
Chapman Society, Brighton-le Sands, NSW
• John Mukum Mbaku. (1999) Bureaucratic and Political Corruption in Africa:
The Public Choice Perspective
• Stephen D. Morris. (2009) Political Corruption in Mexico: The Impact of
Democratization
• Peter John Perry. (2002) Political Corruption in Australia: A Very Wicked Place?
• John F. Reynolds. (1988). Testing Democracy: Electoral Behavior and
Progressive Reform in New Jersey, 1880-1920 on corrupt voting methods
• Robert North Roberts. (2001) Ethics in U.S. Government: An Encyclopedia of
Investigations, Scandals, Reforms, and Legislation
• James C. Scott. (1972) Comparative Political Corruption
• Mark Wahlgren Summers. (1993) The Era of Good Stealings, corruption in
American politics 1868-1877
• Darrell M. West (2000), Checkbook Democracy. How Money Corrupts Political
Campaigns, Northeastern University Press, Boston (Mass.) ISBN 1-55553-440-6
• Alexandra Wrage (2007) Bribery and Extortion: Undermining Business,
Governments and Security
• Woodward, C. Vann, ed. Responses of the Presidents to Charges of Misconduct
(1975), American presidents from Washington to Lyndon Johnson

Police corruption
This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (March 2009)

Police corruption is a specific form of police misconduct designed to obtain financial

benefits, other personal gain, and/or career advancement for a police officer or officers in
exchange for not pursuing, or selectively pursuing, an investigation or arrest.
One common form of police corruption is soliciting and/or accepting bribes in exchange
for not reporting organized drug or prostitution rings or other illegal activities. Another
example is police officers flouting the police code of conduct in order to secure
convictions of suspects — for example, through the use of falsified evidence. More
rarely, police officers may deliberately and systematically participate in organized crime
themselves.

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.

Contents
[hide]

• 1 Corrupt acts by police officers

• 2 Prevalence of police corruption
• 3 Further reading
• 4 See also
o 4.1 People & Fictional Characters involved in Police corruption
o 4.2 Topics
• 5 References

• 6 External links

Corrupt acts by police officers

Police officers have various opportunities to gain personally from their status and
authority as law enforcement officers. The Knapp Commission, which investigated
corruption in the New York City Police Department in the early 1970s, divided corrupt
officers into two types: meat-eaters, who "aggressively misuse their police powers for
personal gain," and grass-eaters, who "simply accept the payoffs that the happenstances
of police work throw their way."[1]

The sort of corrupt acts that have been committed by police officers have been classified
as follows:[2]

• Corruption of authority: police officers receiving free drinks, meals, and other
gratuities.
• Kickbacks: receiving payment from referring people to other businesses. This
can include, for instance, contractors and tow truck operators.[3]
• Opportunistic theft from arrestees and crime victims or their corpses.
• Shakedowns: accepting bribes for not pursuing a criminal violation.
• Protection of illegal activity: being "on the take", accepting payment from the
operators of illegal establishments such as brothels, casinos, or drug dealers to
protect them from law enforcement and keep them in operation.
 • "Fixing": undermining criminal prosecutions by losing traffic tickets or failing to
appear at judicial hearings, for bribery or as a personal favor.
• Direct criminal activities of law enforcement officers themselves.[4]
• Internal payoffs: prerogatives and perquisites of law enforcement organizations,
such as shifts and holidays, being bought and sold.
• The "frameup": the planting or adding to evidence, especially in drug cases.

Prevalence of police corruption

Accurate information about the prevalence of police corruption is hard to come by, since
the corrupt activities tend to happen in secret and police organizations have little
incentive to publish information about corruption.[5] Police officials and researchers alike
have argued that in some countries, large-scale corruption involving the police not only
exists but can even become institutionalized.[6] One study of corruption in the Los
Angeles Police Department (focusing particularly on the Rampart scandal) proposed that
certain forms of police corruption may be the norm, rather than the exception, in
American policing.[7]

Where corruption exists, the widespread existence of a Blue Code of Silence among the
police can prevent the corruption from coming to light. Officers in these situations
commonly fail to report corrupt behavior or provide false testimony to outside
investigators to cover up criminal activity by their fellow officers.[8] The well-known case
of Frank Serpico, a police officer who spoke out about pervasive corruption in the NYPD
despite the open hostility of other members, illustrates how powerful the code of silence
can be. In Australia in 1994, by 46 votes to 45, independent politician John Hatton forced
the New South Wales state government to override the Independent Commission Against
Corruption and the advice of senior police to establish a ground-breaking Royal
Commission into Police Corruption[9]

Further reading

• Sanja Kutnjak Ivković, Fallen blue knights: controlling police corruption (Oxford
U.P, 2005; ISBN 0195169166)
• Lawrence W. Sherman, Scandal and Reform: Controlling Police Corruption
(Univ. Calif. Press, 1974)
• Stanley Einstein, Menachem Amir, Police corruption: paradigms, models, and
concepts : challenges for developing countries (Office of International Criminal
Justice, 2003; ISBN 0942511840)
• Tim Newburn, "Understanding and preventing police corruption: lessons from the
literature", Police Research Series, Paper 110, 1999.
• Colonel Frank McKetta, "Police, Politics, Corruption : the mixture dangerous to
freedom and justice"
See also

People & Fictional Characters involved in Police corruption

• Brians Iron (from Resident Evil series)

• Edwin Atherton
• Charles Becker
• Harold Challenor
• Ali Dizaei[4]
• Antoinette Frank
• John Hatton
• Simon Illingworth
• Jon Kavanaugh
• Terry Lewis
• David Mack
• William King and Antonio Murray
• Vic Mackey
• Haji Mammadov
• Eliot Ness
• Rafael Perez
• Roger Rogerson
• Richie Roberts
• Frank Serpico
• Andre Stander
• Abel Turner from Lakeview Terrace
• Shane Vendrell
• Eon Taylor
• Frank McKetta
• Adrian Schoolcraft

Topics

• 1992 Los Angeles riots

• Blue wall of silence
• Copwatch
• False arrest
• Falsification of Evidence
• Fitzgerald Inquiry
• ICAC
• Intimidation
• Knapp Commission
• Operation Countryman
• Police brutality
• Police misconduct
• Political corruption
• Political repression
 • Rampart scandal
• Surveillance abuse
• Wickersham report

References

1. ^ Thomas C. Mackey, "Meat-eaters and Grass-eaters," H-Net, November 1997,

available at http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=1503. Accessed 6
February 2010.
2. ^ Newburn, 1999, p. 4
3. ^ Tim Prenzler, Police Corruption: Preventing Misconduct and Maintaining
Integrity, ISBN 978-1-4200-7796-4
4. ^ a b "Met Commander Ali Dizaei guilty of corruption". BBC News. 2010-02-08.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8504308.stm. Retrieved 2010-02-08.
5. ^ Sanja Kutnjak Ivkovic, "To Serve and Collect: Measuring Police Corruption,"
The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 93, no. 2/3 (2003): 600.
6. ^ Peter Kratcoski, "International Perspectives on Institutional and Police
Corruption," Police Practice and Research 3, no. 1 (2002): 74.
7. ^ "I am simply saying that the current institution of law enforcement in America
does appear to reproduce itself according counter-legal norms, and that attempts
to counteract this reproduction via the training one receives in police academies,
the imposition of citizen review boards, departments of Internal Affairs, etc. do
not appear to mitigate against this structural continuity between law enforcement
and crime. Specifically the continuity between the breaking of procedural rules as
a matter of routine and the kind of large scale criminal corruption we saw in
Rampart bears further investigation." Judith Grant, "Assault Under Color of
Authority: Police Corruption as Norm in the LAPD Rampart Scandal and in
Popular Film," New Political Science 25, no. 3 (2003): 404.
8. ^ Jerome Skolnick, "Corruption and the Blue Code of Silence," Police Practice
and Research 3, no. 1 (2002): 8.
9. ^ ABC Stateline The Stench Friday, November 6, 2009
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/11/06/2735960.htm accessed 16 May
2010

Corporate crime
In criminology, corporate crime refers to crimes committed either by a corporation (i.e.,
a business entity having a separate legal personality from the natural persons that manage
its activities), or by individuals that may be identified with a corporation or other
business entity (see vicarious liability and corporate liability). Note that some forms of
corporate corruption may not actually be criminal if they are not specifically illegal under
a given system of laws. For example, some jurisdictions allow insider trading.

Corporate crime overlaps with:

 • white-collar crime, because the majority of individuals who may act as or
represent the interests of the corporation are employees or professionals of a
higher social class;
• organized crime, because criminals can set up corporations either for the purposes
of crime or as vehicles for laundering the proceeds of crime. Organized crime has
become a branch of big business and is simply the illegal sector of capital. It has
been estimated that, by the middle of the 1990s, the "gross criminal product" of
organized crime made it the twentieth richest organization in the world—richer
than 150 sovereign states (Castells 1998: 169). The world’s gross criminal
product has been estimated at 20 percent of world trade. (de Brie 2000); and
• state-corporate crime because, in many contexts, the opportunity to commit crime
emerges from the relationship between the corporation and the state.

Contents
[hide]

• 1 Definitional issues
o 1.1 Legal person
o 1.2 Function of law
o 1.3 Enforcement policy
• 2 Discussion
o 2.1 Criminalization
o 2.2 Penalties
• 3 Enforcement and legal or quasi-legal corrupt activities
• 4 See also
• 5 References

• 6 External links

Definitional issues
Legal person

An 1886 decision of the United States Supreme Court, in Santa Clara County v. Southern
Pacific Railroad 118 U.S. 394 (1886), has been cited by various courts in the US as
precedent to maintain that a corporation can be defined legally as a 'person', as described
in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment
stipulates that,

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person
of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
In English law, this was matched by the decision in Salomon v Salomon & Co [1897] AC
22. In Australian law, under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), a corporation is legally a
'person'.

This doctrine of corporate personhood has often impeded prosecution of corporate crime
by allowing corporations to claim Bill of Rights protections in court, sometimes with
success.[citation needed]

Function of law

History shows that laws have always served as instruments of regulation. Lea (2001)
argues that whereas crime used to be the exceptional event, disrupting the otherwise
normal socio-economic processes, as crime becomes more frequent it lost its status as an
exceptional event and became "a standard, background feature of our lives—a taken for
granted element of late modernity." (Garland 1996: 446)

Enforcement policy
See also: Police corruption

Corporate crime has become politically sensitive in some countries. In the United
Kingdom, for example, following a number of fatal disasters on the rail network and at
sea, the term is commonly used in reference to corporate manslaughter and to involve a
more general discussion about the technological hazards posed by business enterprises
(see Wells: 2001). Similar incidents of corporate crime, such as the 1985 Union Carbide
accident in Bhopal, India (Pearce & Tombs: 1993) and the behaviour of the
pharmaceutical industry (Braithwaite: 1984).

The Law Reform Commission of New South Wales offers an explanation of such
criminal activities:

"Corporate crime poses a significant threat to the welfare of the community.

Given the pervasive presence of corporations in a wide range of activities in our
society, and the impact of their actions on a much wider group of people than are
affected by individual action, the potential for both economic and physical harm
caused by a corporation is great."[1]

Similarly, Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman (1999) assert:

"At one level, corporations develop new technologies and economies of scale.
These may serve the economic interests of mass consumers by introducing new
products and more efficient methods of mass production. On another level, given
the absence of political control today, corporations serve to destroy the
foundations of the civic community and the lives of people who reside in them."
Discussion
Criminalization

Behavior can be regulated by the civil law (including administrative law) or the criminal
law. In deciding to criminalize particular behavior, the legislature is making the political
judgment that this behavior is sufficiently culpable to deserve the stigma of being
labelled as a crime. In law, corporations can commit the same offences as natural
persons. Simpson (2002) avers that this process should be straightforward because a state
should simply engage in victimology to identify which behavior causes the most loss and
damage to its citizens, and then represent the majority view that justice requires the
intervention of the criminal law. But states depend on the business sector to deliver a
stable economy, so the politics of regulating the individuals and corporations that supply
that stability become more complex. For the views of Marxist criminology, see Snider
(1993) and Snider & Pearce (1995), for Left realism, see Pearce & Tombs (1992) and
Schulte-Bockholt (2001), and for Right Realism, see Reed & Yeager (1996). More
specifically, the historical tradition of sovereign state control of prisons is ending through
the process of privatisation. Corporate profitability in these areas therefore depends on
building more prison facilities, managing their operations, and selling inmate labor. In
turn, this requires a steady stream of prisoners able to work. (Kicenski: 2002)

The majority of crimes are committed because the offender has the 'right opportunity',
i.e., where the offender simply sees the chance and thinks that he or she will be able to
commit the crime and not be detected.[dubious – discuss][citation needed] For the most part,[peacock term]
greed, rather than conceit, is the motive, and the rationalisation for choosing to break the
law usually arises out of a form of contempt for the victim, namely that he, she or it will
be powerless to prevent it, and has it coming for some reason. For these purposes, the
corporation is the vehicle for the crime. This may be a short-term crime, i.e., the
corporation is set up as a shell to open credit trading accounts with manufacturers and
wholesalers, trades for a short period of time and then disappears with the revenue and
without paying for the inventory. Alternatively and most commonly, the primary purpose
of the corporation is as a legitimate business, but criminal activity is secretly intermixed
with legal activity to escape detection. To achieve a suitable level of secrecy, senior
managers will usually be involved. The explanations and exculpations may therefore
centre around rogue individuals who acted outside the organizational structures, or there
may be a serious examination of the occupational and organisational structures (often
hinged on the socio-economic system, gender, racism and/or age) that facilitated the
criminal conduct of a corporation

Bribery and corruption are problems in the developed world, and the corruption of public
officials is thought[according to whom?] to be a large cause of crime in poor countries that have
large IMF debts and IMF sovereign obligations.
Penalties

In part, this will be a function of the public perception of the degrees of societal
culpability involved. Weissman and Mokhiber (1999) catalog the silence and indifference
of the major media in the face of the widespread corporate corruption. Only in part is this
justifiable. The news media find it difficult to respond to corporate crime both because
reporting may compromise the trial by tainting the jury's perceptions, or because of the
danger of defamation proceedings. Further, major corporate crime is often complicated
and more difficult to explain to the lay public, as against street or property crimes, which
may provide graphic visual evidence of harm to victims injured, or of property that has
been damaged or vandalized in spectacular fashion. But, more significantly, the news
media are owned by large corporations which may also own prisons. Thus, the political
decisions on the resources to allocate to investigate and prosecute will tend to match the
electorate's understanding of the dangers posed by 'crime'. In sentencing, the fact that the
convicted individuals may have had an impeccable character as presidents, CEOs,
chairmen, directors and managers is likely to be a mitigating factor.

Examples of criminal behavior in most jurisdictions include: insider trading, antitrust

violations, fraud (usually involving the consumers), damage to the environment,
exploitation of labour in violation of labor and health and safety laws, and the failure to
maintain a fiduciary responsibility towards stockholders.

Enforcement and legal or quasi-legal corrupt activities

One example, may be in the area of takeovers and top executive compensation:

It is fairly easy for a top executive to reduce the price of his/her company's stock—due to
information asymmetry. The executive can accelerate accounting of expected expenses,
delay accounting of expected revenue, engage in off balance sheet transactions to make
the company's profitability appear temporarily poorer, or simply promote and report
severely conservative (e.g. pessimistic) estimates of future earnings. Such seemingly
adverse earnings news will be likely to (at least temporarily) reduce share price. (This is
again due to information asymmetries since it is more common for top executives to do
everything they can to window dress their company's earnings forecasts). There are
typically very few legal risks to being 'too conservative' in one's accounting and earnings
estimates.

A reduced share price makes a company an easier takeover target. When the company
gets bought out (or taken private)—at a dramatically lower price—the takeover artist
gains a windfall from the former top executive's actions to surreptitiously reduce share
price. This can represent 10s of billions of dollars (questionably) transferred from
previous shareholders to the takeover artist. The former top executive is then rewarded
with a golden handshake for presiding over the firesale that can sometimes be in the 100s
of millions of dollars for one or two years of work. (This is nevertheless an excellent
bargain for the takeover artist, who will tend to benefit from developing a reputation of
being very generous to parting top executives).
Similar issues occur when a publicly held asset or non-profit organization undergoes
privatization. Top executives often reap tremendous monetary benefits when a
government owned or non-profit entity is sold to private hands. Just as in the example
above, they can facilitate this process by making the entity appear to be in financial crisis
—this reduces the sale price (to the profit of the purchaser), and makes non-profits and
governments more likely to sell. Ironically, it can also contribute to a public perception
that private entities are more efficiently run, reinforcing the political will to sell off public
assets. Again, due to asymmetric information, policy makers and the general public see a
government owned firm that was a financial 'disaster'—miraculously turned around by
the private sector (and typically resold) within a few years.

See also

• Accounting scandals
• Anti-globalization movement
• Business ethics
• Corporate abuse
o Enron
• Industrial espionage
• Misleading financial analysis
• The Corporation - Documentary and book about the abuses of corporations
• Mark Thomas & Billy Bragg - British campaigners for corporate accountability
and manslaughter laws
• CorpWatch
• Multinational Monitor
• Corporate Accountability International
• Political corruption
• List of companies convicted of felony offenses in the United States

References

1. ^ http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/ip20chp01

• Braithwaite, John. (1984). Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industry.

London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Books. ISBN 0-7102-0049-8
• Castells, Manuel. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society (The Information Age:
Economy Society and Culture. volume I.) Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-22140-
9
• Clinard, Marshall B. & Yeager, Peter Cleary. (2005). Corporate Crime. Somerset,
NJ: Transaction Publishers. ISBN 1-4128-0493-0
• de Brie, Christian (2000) ‘Thick as thieves’ Le Monde Diplomatique (April)[1]
• Ermann, M. David & Lundman, Richard J. (eds.) (2002). Corporate and
Governmental Deviance: Problems of Organizational Behavior in Contemporary
Society. (6th edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-513529-6
• Friedrichs, David O. (2002). "Occupational crime, occupational deviance, and
workplace crime: Sorting out the difference". Criminal Justice, 2, pp243–256.
 • Garland, David (1996), "The Limits of the Sovereign State: Strategies of Crime
Control in Contemporary Society", British Journal of Criminology Vol 36 pp445–
471.
• Gobert, J & Punch, M. (2003). Rethinking Corporate Crime, London:
Butterworths. ISBN 0-406-95006-7
• Kicenski, Karyl K. (2002). The Corporate Prison: The Production of Crime &
the Sale of Discipline. [2]
• Law Reform Commission for New South Wales. Issues Paper 20 (2001) -
Sentencing: Corporate Offenders. [3]
• Lea, John. (2001). Crime as Governance: Reorienting Criminology. [4]
• Mokhiber, Russell & Weismann, Robert. (1999). Corporate Predators : The Hunt
for Mega-Profits and the Attack on Democracy. Common Courage Press. ISBN 1-
56751-158-9
• Pearce, Frank & Tombs, Steven. (1992). "Realism and Corporate Crime", in
Issues in Realist Criminology. (R. Matthews & J. Young eds.). London: Sage.
• Pearce, Frank & Tombs, Steven. (1993). "US Capital versus the Third World:
Union Carbide and Bhopal" in Global Crime Connections: Dynamics and
Control. (Frank Pearce & Michael Woodiwiss eds.).
• Peèar, Janez (1996). "Corporate Wrongdoing Policing" College of Police and
Security Studies, Slovenia. [5]
• Reed, Gary E. & Yeager, Peter Cleary. (1996). "Organizational offending and
neoclassical criminology: Challenging the reach of a general theory of crime".
Criminology, 34, pp357–382.
• Schulte-Bockholt, A. (2001). "A Neo-Marxist Explanation of Organized Crime".
Critical Criminology, 10
• Simpson, Sally S. (2002). Corporate Crime, Law, and Social Control.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Snider, Laureen. (1993). Bad Business: Corporate Crime in Canada, Toronto:
Nelson.
• Snider, Laureen & Pearce, Frank (eds.). (1995). Corporate Crime: Contemporary
Debates, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
• Vaughan, Diane. (1998). "Rational choice, situated action, and the social control
of organizations". Law & Society Review, 32, pp23–61.
• Wells, Celia. (2001). Corporations and Criminal Responsibility (Second Edition).
Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-826793-2

Corruption (philosophical concept)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption often refers to spiritual or

moral impurity, or deviation from an ideal. Frequently, this takes the form of contrasting
a pure spiritual form with a corrupted manifestation in the physical world. Many
philosophers, in fact, have regarded the physical world as inevitably corrupt (Plato being
the most famous example of this school of thought).

Another philosophical use of the term "corruption" is in opposition to "generation," as in

Aristotle's book On Generation and Corruption also known as On Coming to Be and
Passing Away. In this sense, corruption is the process of ceasing to exist and is closely
related to the concept of dying given certain views about the nature of living things.

In a moral sense, corruption generally refers to decadence or hedonism.

In theological or political debates, certain viewpoints are sometimes accused of being

corruptions of orthodox systems of belief, which is to say, they are accused of having
deviated from some older correct view.

Corruption Perceptions Index

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Overview of the index of perception of corruption, 2010.

9 - 10 6 - 6.9 3 - 3.9
8 - 8.9 5 - 5.9 2 - 2.9
7 - 7.9 4 - 4.9 1 - 1.9
No Information

Since 1995, Transparency International has published an annual Corruption Perceptions

Index (CPI)[1] ordering the countries of the world according to "the degree to which
corruption is perceived to exist among public officials and politicians".[2] The
organization defines corruption as "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain".[3]
The 2003 poll covered 133 countries; the 2007 survey, 180. A higher score means less
(perceived) corruption. The results show seven out of every ten countries (and nine out of
every ten developing countries) with an index of less than 5 points out of 10.

Contents
[hide]

• 1 Methods and interpretation

• 2 Validity of method
• 3 Criticism
• 4 Rankings
• 5 See also
• 6 References

• 7 External links

Methods and interpretation

Transparency International commissioned Johann Graf Lambsdorff of the University of

Passau to produce the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI).[2] The CPI 2005 draws on 16
different polls and surveys from 10 independent institutions[citation needed]. The institutions
who provided data for the CPI 2005 are: Columbia University, Economist Intelligence
Unit, Freedom House, Information International, International Institute for Management
Development, Merchant International Group, Political and Economic Risk Consultancy,
United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, World Economic Forum and World
Markets Research Centre. Early CPIs used public opinion surveys, but now only
"experts" are used. TI requires at least three sources to be available in order to rank a
country in the CPI.[2]

"TI writes in their FAQ on the CPI that "residents' viewpoints correlate well with those of
experts abroad. In the past, the experts surveyed in the CPI sources were often business
people from industrialised countries; the viewpoint of less developed countries was
underrepresented. This has changed over time, giving increasingly voice to respondents
from emerging market economies."[2]

As this index is based on polls, the results are subjective, and less reliable for countries
with fewer sources. Also, what is legally defined (or perceived) to be corruption, differs
between jurisdictions: a political donation legal in some jurisdiction may be illegal in
another; a matter viewed as acceptable tipping in one country may be viewed as bribery
in another. In former Soviet states, the term "corruption" itself has become a proxy for
the broader frustration with all changes since the breakup of the USSR. In the Arab
world, terms for corruption had to be invented by advocates as recently as the 1990s.[citation
needed]
Statistics like this are, by nature, imprecise; statistics from different years aren't
necessarily comparable. The ICCR itself explains, "…year-to-year changes in a country's
score result not only from a changing perception of a country's performance but also from
a changing sample and methodology. Each year, some sources are not updated and must
be dropped from the CPI, while new, reliable sources are added. With differing
respondents and slightly differing methodologies, a change in a country's score may also
relate to the fact that different viewpoints have been collected and different questions
been asked… [despite] anti-corruption reform… [or] recent exposure of corruption
scandals… [i]t is often difficult to improve a CPI score over a short time period, such as
one or two years. The CPI is based on data from the past three years (for more on this,
see the question on the sources of data, below). This means that a change in perceptions
of corruption would only emerge in the index over longer periods of time".[4]

Validity of method

The validity of the method has been assessed according to Paul G. Wilhelm's paper [5]
[clarification needed]
. However, more cross-validations need to be established to demonstrate its
applicability.

Criticism

The Corruption Perceptions Index has drawn increasing criticism in the decade since its
launch, leading to calls for the index to be abandoned.[6][7][8] This criticism has been
directed at the quality of the Index itself, and the lack of actionable insights created from
a simple country ranking.[9][10] Because corruption is willfully hidden, it is impossible to
measure directly; instead proxies for corruption are used. The CPI uses an eclectic mix of
third-party surveys to sample public perceptions of corruption through a variety of
questions, ranging from "Do you trust the government?" to "Is corruption a big problem
in your country?"

The use of third-party survey data is a source of criticism. The data can vary widely in
methodology and completeness from country to country. The methodology of the Index
itself changes from year to year, thus making even basic better-or-worse comparisons
difficult. Media outlets, meanwhile, frequently use the raw numbers as a yardstick for
government performance, without clarifying what the numbers mean.

The lack of standardization and precision in these surveys is cause for concern. The
authors of the CPI argue that averaging enough survey data will solve this; others argue
that aggregating imprecise data only masks these flaws without addressing them.[11] In
one case, a local Transparency International chapter disowned the index results after a
change in methodology caused a country's scores to increase—media reported it as an
"improvement".[12] Other critics point out that definitional problems with the term
"corruption" makes the tool problematic for social science.

Aside from precision issues, a more fundamental critique is aimed at the uses of the
Index. Critics are quick to concede that the CPI has been instrumental in creating
awareness and stimulating debate about corruption. However, as a source of quantitative
data in a field hungry for international datasets, the CPI can take on a life of its own,
appearing in cross-country and year-to-year comparisons that the CPI authors themselves
admit are not justified by their methodology. The authors state in 2008: "Year-to-year
changes in a country's score can either result from a changed perception of a country's
performance or from a change in the CPI’s sample and methodology. The only reliable
way to compare a country’s score over time is to go back to individual survey sources,
each of which can reflect a change in assessment." [13]

The CPI produces a single score per country, which as noted above, cannot be compared
year-to-year. As such, the Index is nearly useless as a tool for evaluating the impact of
new policies.[14] In the late 2000s, the field has moved towards unpackable, action-
oriented indices (such as those by the International Budget Partnership or Global
Integrity), which typically measure public policies that relate to corruption, rather than try
to assess "corruption" as a whole via proxy measures like perceptions.[9] These alternative
measures use original (often locally collected) data and are limited in scope to specific
policy practices (such as public access to parliamentary budget documents).

Rankings

Worldwide Corruption Perceptions ranking of countries

published by Transparency International

Rank Index
Country
2010 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006[19] 2005[20] 2004[21] 2003 2002
[15] [16] [17] [18]

1 Denmark 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5
New
1 9.3 9.4 9.3 9.4 9.6 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.4
Zealand
Singapor
1 9.3 9.2 9.2 9.3 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.4 9.4
e
4 Finland 9.2 8.9 9.0 9.4 9.6 9.6 9.7 9.7 9.9
4 Sweden 9.2 9.2 9.3 9.3 9.2 9.2 9.3 9.3 9.0
6 Canada 8.9 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.5 8.4 8.7 9.0 8.9
Netherla
7 8.8 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.6 8.9 9.0 8.8
nds
Switzerla
8 8.7 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.1 8.8 8.5 8.4
nd
8 Australia 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.8 8.6 8.5
10 Norway 8.6 8.6 7.9 8.7 8.8 8.9 8.8 8.5 8.6
11 Iceland 8.5 8.7 8.9 9.2 9.6 9.7 9.6 9.4 9.2
11 Luxemb 8.5 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.6 8.5 8.7 9.0 8.7
 ourg
Hong
13 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.0 8.2 7.9
Kong
14 Ireland 8.0 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.4 7.4 7.5 6.9 7.5
15 Austria 7.9 7.9 8.1 8.1 8.6 8.7 8.0 7.8 7.8
15 Germany 7.9 8.0 7.9 7.8 8.0 8.2 7.7 7.3 7.4
Barbado
17 7.8 7.4 7.0 6.9 6.7 6.9
s
17 Japan 7.8 7.7 7.3 7.5 7.6 7.3 7.0 7.1 7.1
19 Qatar 7.7 7.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 5.9 5.6
United
20 7.6 7.7 7.7 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.7 8.3
Kingdom
21 Chile 7.2 6.7 6.9 7.0 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.5
22 Belgium 7.1 7.1 7.3 7.1 7.3 7.4 7.6 7.1 6.6
United
22 7.1 7.5 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.6 7.5 7.7 7.6
States
24 Uruguay 6.9 6.7 6.9 6.7 6.4 5.9 5.5 5.1 5.1
25 France 6.8 6.9 6.9 7.3 7.4 7.5 6.9 6.3 6.7
26 Estonia 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.5 6.7 6.4 5.5 5.6 5.6
27 Slovenia 6.4 6.6 6.7 6.6 6.4 6.1 5.9 6.0 5.2
28 Cyprus 6.3 6.6 6.4 5.3 5.6 5.7 5.4 6.1
United
28 Arab 6.3 6.5 5.9 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.1 5.2
Emirates
30 Israel 6.1 6.1 6.0 6.1 5.9 6.3 6.4 7.0 7.3
30 Spain 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.7 6.8 7.0 6.9 7.1 7.0
32 Portugal 6.0 5.8 6.1 6.5 6.6 6.5 6.6 6.3 6.3
Puerto
33 5.8 5.8 5.8
Rico
Botswan
33 5.8 5.6 5.8 5.4 5.6 5.9 6.0 5.7 6.4
a
33 Taiwan 5.8 5.6 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.9 5.6 5.7 5.6
36 Bhutan 5.7 5.0 5.4 5.0
37 Malta 5.6 5.2 5.8 5.8 6.4 6.4
38 Brunei 5.5 5.5
South
39 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.1 5.1 5.0 4.5 4.3 4.5
Korea
Mauritiu
39 5.4 5.4 5.5 4.7 5.1 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.5
s
41 Oman 5.3 5.5 5.5 4.7 5.4 6.3 6.1 6.3
 Costa
41 5.3 5.3 5.1 5.0 4.1 4.2 4.9 4.3 4.5
Rica
41 Poland 5.3 5.0 4.6 4.2 3.7 3.4 3.5 3.6 4.0
Dominic
44 5.2 5.9 6.0 5.6 4.5 3.0 2.9 3.3 3.2
a
Cape
45 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.9
Verde
46 Macau 5.0 5.3 5.4 5.7 6.6
Lithuani
46 5.0 4.9 4.6 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.8
a
48 Bahrain 4.9 5.1 5.4 5.0 5.7 5.8 5.8 6.1
Seychell
49 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.5 3.6 4.0 4.4
es
50 Hungary 4.7 5.1 5.1 5.3 5.2 5.0 4.8 4.8 4.9
50 Jordan 4.7 5.0 5.1 4.7 5.3 5.7 5.3 4.6 4.5
Saudi
50 4.7 4.3 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.4 4.5
Arabia
Czech
53 4.6 4.9 5.2 5.2 4.8 4.3 4.2 3.9 3.7
Republic
54 Kuwait 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.8 4.7 4.6 5.3
South
54 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.8
Africa
56 Malaysia 4.4 4.5 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.1 5.0 5.2 4.9
56 Namibia 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.7 5.7
56 Turkey 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.1 3.8 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.2
59 Latvia 4.3 4.5 5.0 4.8 4.7 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.7
59 Slovakia 4.3 4.5 5.0 4.9 4.7 4.3 4.0 3.7 3.7
59 Tunisia 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.2 4.6 4.9 5.0 4.9 4.8
62 Croatia 4.1 4.1 4.4 4.1 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.8
62 Ghana 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.3 3.9
Macedon
62 4.1 3.8 3.6 3.3 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.3
ia
62 Samoa 4.1 4.5 4.4 4.5
66 Rwanda 4.0 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.5 3.1
67 Italy 3.9 4.3 4.8 5.2 6.2 6.2 5.2
68 Georgia 3.8 4.1 3.9 3.4 2.8 2.3 2.0 1.8 2.4
69 Cuba 3.7 4.4 4.3 4.2 3.5 3.8 3.7 4.6
Montene
69 3.7 3.9 3.4 3.3
gro
69 Romania 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.1 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.6
69 Brazil 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.7 3.9 3.9 4.0
73 Bulgaria 3.6 3.8 3.6 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 4.0
El
73 3.6 3.4 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.2 3.7 3.4 3.2
Salvador
73 Panama 3.6 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.1 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.0
Trinidad
73 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.2 3.8 4.2 4.6 4.9
and Tobago
73 Vanuatu 3.6 3.2 2.9 3.1
78 Greece 3.5 3.8 4.7 4.6 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.2
Colombi
78 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.9 4.0 3.8 3.7 3.6
a
78 Peru 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.4
78 Thailand 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.3 3.6 3.8 3.6 3.3 3.2
78 Lesotho 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.4
78 China 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.4 3.5
78 Serbia[22] 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.0 2.8 2.7 2.3
85 Malawi 3.4 3.3 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.9
85 Morocco 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.7
87 India 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.3 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.7
87 Albania 3.3 3.2 3.4 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.5
87 Liberia 3.3 3.1 2.4 2.1 2.2
87 Jamaica 3.3 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.7 3.6 3.3 3.8 4.0
Bosnia
91 and 3.2 3.2 3.3 2.9 2.9 3.1 3.3
Herzegovina
91 Djibouti 3.2 3.0 2.9
Rank Index
Country
2010 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002
91 Swaziland 3.2 3.6 3.6 3.3 2.5 2.7
91 Guatemala 3.2 3.4 3.1 2.8 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.4 2.5
91 Sri Lanka 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.7
91 Gambia 3.2 2.9 1.9 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.5
91 Kiribati 3.2 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.7
98 Burkina Faso 3.1 3.6 3.5 2.9 3.2 3.4
98 Mexico 3.1 3.3 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6
98 Egypt 3.1 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.4
101 Dominican Republic 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.8 3.0 2.9 3.3 3.5
101 Tonga 3.0 3.0 2.4 1.7
101 Zambia 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.6
101 São Tomé and Príncipe 3.0 2.8 2.7 2.7
105 Moldova 2.9 3.3 2.9 2.8 3.2 2.9 2.3 2.4 2.1
105 Senegal 2.9 3.0 3.4 3.6 3.3 3.2 3.0 3.2 3.1
105 Argentina 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.5 2.5 2.8
105 Kazakhstan 2.9 2.7 2.2 2.1 2.6 2.6 2.2 2.4 2.3
105 Algeria 2.9 2.8 3.2 3.0 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.6
110 Benin 2.8 2.9 3.1 2.7 2.5 2.9 3.2
110 Gabon 2.8 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.0 2.9 3.3
110 Indonesia 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.3 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.9
110 Bolivia 2.8 2.7 3.0 2.9 2.7 2.5 2.2 2.3 2.2
110 Solomon Islands 2.8 2.8 2.9 2.8
110 Kosovo 2.8
116 Ethiopia 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.5 3.5
116 Mali 2.7 3.1 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.2 3.0
116 Mongolia 2.7 3.0 3.0 2.8 3.0 3.0
116 Vietnam 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.4
116 Guyana 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.5
116 Tanzania 2.7 3.0 3.2 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.5 2.7
116 Mozambique 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.7
123 Armenia 2.6 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.9 3.1 3.0
123 Madagascar 2.6 3.4 3.2 3.1 2.8 3.1 2.6 1.7
123 Niger 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.3 2.4 2.2
123 Eritrea 2.6 2.6 2.8 2.9 2.6 2.6
127 Belarus 2.5 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.6 3.3 4.2 4.8
127 Syria 2.5 2.1 2.4 2.9 3.4 3.4 3.4
127 Lebanon 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.6 3.1 2.7 3.0
127 Nicaragua 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.5
127 Ecuador 2.5 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.2
127 Timor-Leste 2.5 2.2 2.6 2.6
127 Uganda 2.5 2.6 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.2 2.1
134 Azerbaijan 2.4 1.9 2.1 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.8 2.0
134 Nigeria 2.4 2.7 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.6
134 Honduras 2.4 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.7
134 Togo 2.4 2.7 2.3 2.4
134 Bangladesh 2.4 2.1 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.2
134 Philippines 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.6
134 Sierra Leone 2.4 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.2
134 Ukraine 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.2 2.3 2.4
134 Zimbabwe 2.4 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.7
143 Pakistan 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.5 2.6
143 Maldives 2.3 2.8 3.3
143 Mauritania 2.3 2.8 2.6 3.1
146 Cameroon 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.2
146 Nepal 2.2 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.8
146 Libya 2.2 2.6 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.1
146 Côte d'Ivoire 2.2 2.0 2.1 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.7
146 Paraguay 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.7
146 Yemen 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.4 2.6 2.4
146 Haiti 2.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.5 2.2
146 Iran 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.9 2.9 3.0
154 Comoros 2.1 2.5 2.6
154 Russia 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.8 2.7 2.7
154 Kenya 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.9
154 Papua New Guinea 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.3 2.6 2.1
154 Cambodia 2.1 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.3 1.5 1.3 1.2
154 Central African Republic 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.4
154 Laos 2.1 2.0 1.9 2.6 3.3
154 Tajikistan 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.8
154 Republic of the Congo 2.1 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.2
154 Guinea-Bissau 2.1 1.9 2.2
Democratic Republic of
164 2.0 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.0
the Congo
164 Guinea 2.0 1.6 1.9 1.9
 164 Kyrgyzstan 2.0 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.1
164 Venezuela 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.5
168 Angola 1.9 2.2 1.9 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.7
168 Equatorial Guinea 1.9 1.7 1.9 2.1 1.9
170 Burundi 1.8 1.9 2.5 2.4 2.3
171 Chad 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.7
172 Sudan 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3
172 Turkmenistan 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 1.8 2.0
172 Uzbekistan 1.6 1.8 1.7 2.7 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.9
175 Iraq 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.9 2.2 2.1 2.2
176 Afghanistan 1.4 1.5 1.8 2.5
176 Myanmar 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6
178 Somalia 1.1 1.0 1.4 2.1
– Belize 2.9 3.0 3.5 3.7 3.8 4.5
– Grenada 3.4 3.5
- Saint Lucia 7.0 7.1 6.8
Saint Vincent and the
- 6.4 6.5 6.1
Grenadines

See also

• Global Integrity
• Bribe Payers Index
• List of European countries by Corruption Perceptions Index

References

1. ^ Corruption Perception Report accessed on January 9, 2007

2. ^ a b c d "Frequently Asked Questions: TI Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI
2005)". http://www.icgg.org/corruption.cpi_2005_faq.html. Retrieved 2005-11-
22.
3. ^ "About Us". http://www.transparency.org/about_us. Retrieved 2010-10-27.
4. ^ "ICCR FAQ". http://www.icgg.org/corruption.cpi_2004_faq.html. Retrieved
2005-07-04.
5. ^ Wilhelm, Paul G. (2002). "International Validation of the Corruption
Perceptions Index: Implications for Business Ethics and Entrepreneurship
Education". Journal of Business Ethics (Springer Netherlands) 35 (3): 177–189.
doi:10.1023/A:1013882225402.
6. ^ Galtung, Fredrik (2006). "Measuring the Immeasurable: Boundaries and
Functions of (Macro) Corruption Indices," in Measuring Corruption, Charles
Sampford, Arthur Shacklock, Carmel Connors, and Fredrik Galtung, Eds.
(Ashgate): 101-130. The author, a former Transparency International researcher
and pioneer in the development of the Bribe Payers Index (BPI), addresses several
criticisms of the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). He argues that the CPI
should be radically revised and complemented by additional indicators.
7. ^ Sik, Endre (2002). "The Bad, the Worse and the Worst: Guesstimating the
Level of Corruption," in Political Corruption in Transition: A Skeptic's
Handbook, Stephen Kotkin and Andras Sajo, Eds. (Budapest: Central European
University Press): 91-113.
8. ^ "The Uses and Abuses of Governance Indicators". OECD.
http://www.oecd.org/document/25/0,2340,en_2649_33935_37081881_1_1_1_1,0
0.html.
9. ^ a b "Bangladesh's economists question corruption perception index". The
HINDU News Update Service. 2007-09-27.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200709270921.htm. Retrieved 2007-
09-28.
10. ^ "Hey Experts: Stop Abusing the CPI". Global Integrity.
http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2009/02/hey-experts-stop-abusing-
corruption.html.
11. ^ "A Users' Guide to Measuring Corruption". Global Integrity & UNDP.
http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2008/09/users-guide-to-measuring-
corruption.html.
12. ^ "TI's Index: Local Chapter Not Having It". Global Integrity.
http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2008/09/tis-index-local-chapter-not-having-
it.html.
13. ^ "CPI: Methodology FAQ". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2008/faq#interp
reting4.
14. ^ "A Users' Guide to Measuring Corruption". Global Integrity & UNDP.
http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2008/09/users-guide-to-measuring-
corruption.html.
15. ^ "CPI 2010 table". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results.
Retrieved 2010-10-26.
16. ^ "CPI 2009 table". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2009/cpi_2009
_table. Retrieved 2009-11-18.
17. ^ "CPI 2008 table". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2008/cpi2008/cpi_2008_table.
Retrieved 2008-12-17.
18. ^ "CPI 2007 table". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2007/cpi_2007/cpi_2007_table
. Retrieved 2007-10-01.
 19. ^ "CPI 2006 table". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/cpi_2006/cpi_table. Retrieved
2006-11-17.
20. ^ "CPI 2005 table". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2005/cpi_2005#cpi. Retrieved
2007-12-03.
21. ^ "CPI 2004 table". Transparency International.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2004. Retrieved
2007-12-03.
22. ^ The years 2002–2005 show data for Serbia and Montenegro

Transparency International
Transparency International (TI) is a non-governmental organization that monitors and
publicizes corporate and political corruption in international development. It publishes an
annual Corruption Perceptions Index, a comparative listing of corruption worldwide. The
headquarters is located in Berlin, Germany but operates through more than 70 national
chapters.[1]

Contents
[hide]

• 1 History
• 2 Organisation and role
• 3 Corruption Perceptions Index
• 4 Competitiveness and corruption
• 5 See also
• 6 References

• 7 External links

History

TI was founded in May 1993 through the initiative of Peter Eigen, a former regional
director for the World Bank. Founding board members included Eigen, Hansjörg
Elshorst, Joe Githongo, Fritz Heimann, Michael Hershman, Kamal Hossain, Dolores L.
Español, George Moody Stuart, Jerry Parfitt, Jeremy Pope and Frank Vogl.[2][3][4] Eigen
acted as Chairman and Pope was Managing Director.[4]

In 1995, TI developed the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). The CPI ranked nations
on the prevalence of corruption within each country, based upon surveys of business
people. The CPI was subsequently published annually. It was criticized for poor
methodology and unfair treatment of developing nations, while also being praised for
highlighting corruption and embarrassing governments.[5]
In 1999, TI began publishing the Bribe Payers Index (BPI) which ranked nations
according to the prevalence that a country's multinational corporations would offer
bribes.[5]

Organisation and role

TI is organised as a group of some 100 national chapters, with an international secretariat

in Berlin, Germany. Originally founded in Germany in May 1993 as a not-for-profit
organisation, TI is now an international non-governmental organisation, and claims to be
moving towards a completely democratic organisational structure. TI says of itself:

"Transparency International is the global civil society organisation leading the fight
against corruption. It brings people together in a powerful worldwide coalition to end the
devastating impact of corruption on men, women and children around the world. TI's
mission is to create change towards a world free of corruption."

Since 1995, TI has issued an annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI); it also publishes
an annual Global Corruption Report, a Global Corruption Barometer and a Bribe Payers
Index.

TI does not undertake investigations on single cases of corruption or expose individual

cases. It develops tools for fighting corruption and works with other civil society
organisations, companies and governments to implement them. The goal of TI is to be
non-partisan and to build coalitions against corruption.

TI's biggest success has been to put the topic of corruption on the world's agenda.
International Institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund
now view corruption as one of the main obstacles for development, whereas prior to the
1990s this topic was not broadly discussed. TI furthermore played a vital role in the
introduction of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the OECD Anti-
Bribery Convention.

Corruption Perceptions Index

Main article: Corruption Perceptions Index

The CPI—besides the World Bank corruption index[6]—is the most commonly used
measure for corruption in countries worldwide. To form this index, TI compiles surveys
that ask businessmen and analysts, both in and outside the countries they are analyzing,
their perceptions of how corrupt a country is. Relying on the number of actual corruption
cases would not work since laws and enforcement of laws differ significantly from
country to country.

The CPI has received criticisms over the years. The main one stems from the difficulty in
measuring corruption, which by definition happens behind the scenes. The CPI therefore
needs to rely on third-party survey which have been criticized as potentially unreliable.
Data can vary widely depending on the public perception of a country, the completeness
of the surveys and the methodology used. The second issue is that data cannot be
compared from year to year because TI uses different methodologies and samples every
year. This makes it difficult to evaluate the result of new policies.[7] The CPI authors
replied to these criticims by reminding that the CPI is meant to measure perception and
not "reality". They argue that "perceptions matter in their own right, since... firms and
individuals take actions based on perceptions".[8]

Competitiveness and corruption

A review of the linkages between countries' competitiveness and the incidence of

corruption was initiated at a TI workshop in Prague, November 1998 and picked-up in
the International Anti-Corruption Conference three years later.[9]

Professor Mara Faccio, Hanna Chair in Entrepreneurship & Associate Professor of

Finance at the Krannert School of Management at Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana
USA has issued a number of papers on this subject, including a study entitled
“Differences between Politically Connected and Non-Connected Firms: A Cross Country
Comparison” [10]

See also

• Transparency (humanities)

References

1. ^ Kumar, Brij (March 1998). Ethics in International Management. Walter de

Gruyter. p. 208. ISBN 978-3110154481.
2. ^ "When and why was Transparency International (TI) founded?", FAQ,
Transparency International
3. ^ Hicks, Bill (2010). "Transparency International". Pinkindustry.com.
4. ^ a b Larmour, Peter (September 2006). Bowden, Brett. ed. Global standards of
market civilization. Routledge. pp. 95–106. ISBN 0415375452.
5. ^ a b Chaikin, David (June 2009). Corruption and money laundering: a symbiotic
relationship. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 12–13. ISBN 0230613608.
6. ^ Anticorruption at web.worldbank.org
7. ^ "A Users' Guide to Measuring Corruption". Global Integrity & UNDP.
http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2008/09/users-guide-to-measuring-
corruption.html.
8. ^ Uslaner, Eric M. (2008). Corruption, inequality, and the rule of law: the
bulging pocket makes the easy life. Cambridge University Press. pp. 11–17.
ISBN 0521874890. http://books.google.com/books?
id=TLvfSVkZYo4C&pg=PA11.
9. ^ "tenth international anti-corruption conference: The Prague agenda" (in
English) (HTML). Differences between Politically Connected and Non-
Connected Firms: A Cross Country Comparison. Financial Management, Autumn
 2010, vol 39(3), 905-927. doi:2002 November. http://10iacc.org/content.phtml?
documents=400. Retrieved 2010 Dec 10.
10. ^ "Differences between Politically Connected and Non-Connected Firms: A
Cross Country Comparison" (in English) (HTML). Differences between
Politically Connected and Non-Connected Firms: A Cross Country Comparison.
Financial Management, Autumn 2010, vol 39(3), 905-927. doi:2010 November.
http://www.krannert.purdue.edu/faculty/mfaccio/home.asp. Retrieved 2010 Dec
10.

Data corruption
Data corruption refers to errors in computer data that occur during transmission,
retrieval, or processing, introducing unintended changes to the original data. Computer
storage and transmission systems use a number of measures to provide data integrity, or
lack of errors. In general, when there is a data corruption, the file containing that data
would be inaccessible, and the system or the related application will give an error. For
example, if a Microsoft Word file is corrupted, when you try to open that file with MS
Word, you will get an error message, and the file would not be opened. Some programs
can give a suggestion to repair the file automatically (after the error), and some programs
cannot repair it. It depends on the level of corruption, and the in-built functionality of the
application to handle the error. There are various causes of the corruption.

Data corruption during transmission has a variety of causes. Interruption of data

transmission causes information loss. Environmental conditions can interfere with data
transmission, especially when dealing with wireless transmission methods. Heavy clouds
can block satellite transmissions. Wireless networks are susceptible to interference from
devices such as microwave ovens.

Data loss during storage has two broad causes: hardware and software failure. Head
crashes and general wear and tear of media fall into the former category, while software
failure typically occurs due to bugs in the code.

When data corruption behaves as a Poisson process, where each bit of data has an
independently low probability of being changed, data corruption can generally be
detected by the use of checksums, and can often be corrected by the use of error
correcting codes.

If an uncorrectable data corruption is detected, procedures such as automatic

retransmission or restoration from backups can be applied. Certain levels of RAID disk
arrays have the ability to store and evaluate parity bits for data across a set of hard disks
and can reconstruct corrupted data upon of the failure of a single or multiple disks,
depending on the level of RAID implemented.

If appropriate mechanisms are employed to detect and remedy data corruption, data
integrity can be maintained. This is particularly important in banking, where an
undetected error can drastically affect an account balance, and in the use of encrypted or
compressed data, where a small error can make an extensive dataset unusable.[1]

References

1. ^ Data Integrity by Cern April 2007 Cern.ch

Corruption (linguistics)
Corruption or bastardisation is a way of referring to certain changes in a language and
their prescriptive evaluation. The most common way that a word can be said to be
corrupted is the change of its spelling through errors and gradual changes in
comprehension, transcription, and hearing. This is especially common with words
borrowed from another language. For example Guangzhou was formerly known as
"Canton" in English, which is a transliteration of Guangdong following the rules of
French sound structures. The terms "corruption" and "bastardisation" are rooted in
prescriptivist theories of language.

Language corruption may refer to two similar things:

• Change of words, as described above.

• Difference from the so-called "purity" of standard language. For example, the
split infinitive has long been disputed as either a corruption or norm of the
English language.

Text bastardisation is:

• Unauthorized alteration and publication of a text inconsistent with the original

purpose or the author's intention. For example:

A year after rejecting the novel, Gallimard published a bastardised text

“ called Ravages, which dispensed with the first, sexually explicit pages of
the manuscript. „
Contents
[hide]

• 1 History
• 2 Examples
• 3 See also

• 4 References

History

In the past, with unstandardized spelling for English and other languages, a word would
be pronounced differently by people who encountered the word in text and not speech.
Eventually, such changes could become standardized. A large number of these changes
occurred during the 19th century. English is now highly standardized with some dialectal
variation.

The mass written communication of the Internet promotes even greater standardization;
however, its informal nature often encourages intentional language changes. In online
interactive games, chat rooms and other situations, common typographical errors and
attempts at humor have created a number of new alternate spellings (see leet).

Examples

Some commonly known words and phrases which are the result of linguistic corruption
include:

• "vamoose" (from the Spanish verb vamos, which means "Let's go")[1]
• "Cajun" (from "Acadian")[2]
• "spitting image" (from "spit and image" or "spirit and image")[3]
• "parting shot" (from "Parthian shot")[4]
• "That doesn't jive (with the facts)" (from "That doesn't jibe with the facts")[5]
• tow the line (from "toe the line")[6]

See also
• Solecism • Eggcorn
• Barbarism • Mondegreen
• Contrafact • English As She Is Spoke
• Lectio difficilior potior • Deliberate misspelling
• Neologism • Fallacy of quoting out of context

• Portmanteau • Appropriation (music)

References

1. ^ Gonzaléz, Félix Rodriguez (1996). Spanish Loanwords in the English

Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. p. 39. ISBN 3110148455.
http://books.google.com/?
id=09NEuGHh2R8C&pg=PA13&dq=vamoose+etymology.
2. ^ Webre, Steven (Autumn, 1998). "Among the Cybercajuns: Constructing
Identity in the Virtual Diaspora". Louisiana History: the Journal of the Louisiana
Historical Association (Louisiana Historical Association) 39 (4): 443–456.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/4233537.
3. ^ Horn, Laurence R. (Spring 2004). "Spitten image : Etymythology and Fluid
Dynamics". American Speech 79 (1): 33–58. doi:10.1215/00031283-79-1-33.
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/american_speech/v079/79.1horn.pdf.
4. ^ Findley, Carter V (2005). The Turks in World History. Oxford University Press.
p. 26. ISBN 0195177266. http://books.google.com/?id=2_41FJ-
pgRAC&pg=PP14&dq=%22parting+shot%22+parthian.
5. ^ "The Mavens' Word of the Day (for July 11, 2000)". Random House.
http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20000711. Retrieved 2009-
02-12.
6. ^ Hodgson, Charles (2007). Carnal Knowledge: A Navel Gazer's Dictionary of
Anatomy, Etymology, and Trivia. New York: St. Martin's Griffin. pp. 208–209.
ISBN 0312371217. http://books.google.com/?
id=IAzfurRydecC&pg=PA208&dq=%22tow+the+line%22#PPA209,M1.

Bribery
Bribery, a form of corruption, is an act implying money or gift given that alters the
behavior of the recipient. Bribery constitutes a crime and is defined by Black's Law
Dictionary as the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to
influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal duty. The
bribe is the gift bestowed to influence the recipient's conduct. It may be any money,
good, right in action, property, preferment, privilege, emolument, object of value,
advantage, or merely a promise or undertaking to induce or influence the action, vote, or
influence of a person in an official or public capacity.
Contents
[hide]

• 1 Forms of Bribery
• 2 Government
o 2.1 Tax treatment of bribes
• 3 Medicine
• 4 Politics
• 5 Business
• 6 Sport corruption
• 7 Notable instances of bribery
• 8 See also
• 9 References

• 10 External links

Forms of Bribery

Many types of bribes exist: tip, gift, perk, skim, favor, discount, waived fee/ticket, free
food, free ad, free trip, free tickets, sweetheart deal, kickback/payback, funding, happy
meal, inflated sale of an object or property, lucrative contract, grease money, donation,
campaign contribution, fund raiser, sponsorship/backing, higher paying job, stock
options, secret commission, or promotion (rise of position/rank).

One must be careful of differing social and cultural norms when examining bribery.
Expectations of when a monetary transaction is appropriate can differ from place to
place. Political campaign contributions in the form of cash, for example, are considered
criminal acts of bribery in some countries, while in the United States they are legal.
Tipping, for example, is considered bribery in some societies, while in others the two
concepts may not be interchangeable. In some Spanish-speaking countries, bribes are
referred to as "mordida" (literally, "bite"); in Arab countries they are Baksheesh or
Bakshish. However, Bakshish is more akin to tipping and is socially permissible. French-
speaking countries often use the expressions "dessous-de-table" ("under-the-table"
commissions), "pot-de-vin" (literally, "wine-pot"), or "commission occulte" ("secret
commission" or "kickback"). While the last two expressions contain inherently a negative
connotation, the expression "dessous-de-table" can be often understood as a commonly
accepted business practice (for instance, on the occasion of a real estate transaction
before the notary, a partial payment made between the buyer and seller; needless to say,
this is a good way to launder money). In German the common term is Schmiergeld
("greasing money"). In certain Scandinavian countries, the expression "mutbrot"
(literally, "butter-bread") is quite commonly used and does not have the same negative
connotation as "bribe", even though according to the Transparency International
corruption perception index, corruption would be rare in that part of the world.
The offence may be divided into two great classes: the one, where a person invested with
power is induced by payment to use it unjustly; the other, where power is obtained by
purchasing the suffrages of those who can impart it. Likewise, the briber might hold a
powerful role and control the transaction; or in other cases, a bribe may be effectively
extracted from the person paying it, although this is better known as extortion.

The forms that bribery take are numerous. For example, a motorist might bribe a police
officer not to issue a ticket for speeding, a citizen seeking paperwork or utility line
connections might bribe a functionary for faster service. In Eugene, Oregon, bribery is an
important aspect of the local SLUG Queen pageant that sets it apart from other pageants.
The Slug Queens set the rare example of creating an environment where bribery is both
accepted and encouraged. The moment a new queen is crowned, the old queens, who are
the judges of the pageant, are open to bribery.

Bribery may also take the form of a secret commission, a profit made by an agent, in the
course of his employment, without the knowledge of his principal. Euphemisms abound
for this (commission, sweetener, back-kick etc.) Bribers and recipients of bribery are
likewise numerous although bribers have one common denominator and that is the
financial ability to bribe.

Bribery around the world is estimated at about $1 trillion (£494bn).[1]

As indicated on the pages devoted to political corruption, efforts have been made in
recent years by the international community to encourage countries to dissociate and
incriminate as separate offences, active and passive bribery. From a legal point of view,
active bribery can be defined for instance as the promising, offering or giving by any
person, directly or indirectly, of any undue advantage [to any public official], for himself
or herself or for anyone else, for him or her to act or refrain from acting in the exercise
of his or her functions. (article 2 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS
173) of the Council of Europe). Passive bribery can be defined as the request or receipt
[by any public official], directly or indirectly, of any undue advantage, for himself or
herself or for anyone else, or the acceptance of an offer or a promise of such an
advantage, to act or refrain from acting in the exercise of his or her functions (article 3 of
the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173)).

The reason for this dissociation is to make the early steps (offering, promising, requesting
an advantage) of a corrupt deal already an offence and, thus, to give a clear signal (from a
criminal policy point of view) that bribery is not acceptable. Besides, such a dissociation
makes the prosecution of bribery offences easier since it can be very difficult to prove
that two parties (the bribe-giver and the bribe-taker) have formally agreed upon a corrupt
deal. Besides, there is often no such formal deal but only a mutual understanding, for
instance when it is common knowledge in a municipality that to obtain a building permit
one has to pay a "fee" to the decision maker to obtain a favourable decision.
Government

A grey area may exist when payments to smooth transactions are made. United States law
is particularly strict in limiting the ability of businesses to pay for the awarding of
contracts by foreign governments; however, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act contains
an exception for "grease payments"; very basically, this allows payments to officials in
order to obtain the performance of ministerial acts which they are legally required to do,
but may delay in the absence of such payment. In some countries, this practice is the
norm, often resulting from a developing nation not having the tax structure to pay civil
servants an adequate salary. Nevertheless, most economists regard bribery as a bad thing
because it encourages rent seeking behaviour. A state where bribery has become a way of
life is a kleptocracy.

Tax treatment of bribes

The tax status of bribes is an issue for governments since the bribery of government
officials impedes the democratic process and may interfere with good government. In
some countries, such bribes are considered tax-deductible payments. However, in 1996,
in an effort to discourage bribery, the OECD Council recommended that member
countries cease to allow the tax-deductibility of bribes to foreign officials. This was
followed by the signing of the Anti-Bribery Convention. Since that time, the majority of
the OECD countries which are signatories of the convention have revised their tax
policies according to this recommendation and some have extended the measures to
bribes paid to any official, sending the message that bribery will no longer be tolerated in
the operations of the government.[2]

Medicine

Pharmaceutical corporations may seek to reward doctors for heavy prescription of their
drugs through gifts. The American Medical Association has published ethical guidelines
for gifts from industry which include the tenet that physicians should not accept gifts if
they are given in relation to the physician’s prescribing practices.[1] Doubtful cases
include grants for traveling to medical conventions that double as tourist trips.

Dentists often receive samples of home dental care products such as toothpaste, which are
of negligible value; somewhat ironically, dentists in a television commercial will often
state that they get these samples but pay to use the sponsor's product.

In countries offering state-subsidized or nationally funded healthcare where medical

professionals are underpaid, patients may use bribery to solicit the standard expected
level of medical care. For example, in many formerly Communist countries from what
used to be the Eastern Bloc it may be customary to offer expensive gifts to doctors and
nurses for the delivery of service at any level of medical care in the non-private health
sector.[3][4]
Politics

Politicians receive campaign contributions and other payoffs from powerful corporations,
organizations or individuals when making choices in the interests of those parties, or in
anticipation of favorable policy. However, such a relationship does not meet the legal
standards for bribery without evidence of a quid pro quo. See also influence peddling and
political corruption.

Business

A campaign to prevent bribes in Zambia.

Employees, managers, or salespeople of a business may offer money or gifts to a

potential client in exchange for business. For instance, the service company Aramark was
recently accused of offering gifts to an assistant warden in the New Mexico Prison
System in exchange for a contract allowing Aramark to provide the food services in the
state's prisons.

More recently, in 2006, German prosecutors conducted a wide-ranging investigation of

Siemens AG to determine if Siemens employees paid bribes in exchange for business.

In some cases where the system of law is not well-implemented, bribes may be a way for
companies to continue their businesses. In the case, for example, custom officials may
harass a certain firm or production plant, officially stating they are checking for
irregularities, halting production or stalling other normal activities of a firm. The
disruption may cause losses to the firm that exceed the amount of money to pay off the
official. Bribing the officials is a common way to deal with this issue in countries where
there exists no firm system of reporting these semi-illegal activities. A third party, known
as a White Glove, may be involved to act as a clean middleman.

Specialist consultancies have been set up to help multinational companies and SMEs with
a commitment to anti-corruption to trade more ethically and benefit from compliance
with the law.

Contracts based on or involving the payment or transfer of bribes ("corruption money",

"secret commissions", "pots-de-vin", "kickbacks") are void.[5]

Sport corruption
Main article: Match fixing
Referees and scoring judges may be offered money, gifts, or other compensation to
guarantee a specific outcome in an athletic or other sports competition. A well-known
example of this manner of bribery in sport would be the 2002 Olympic Winter Games
figure skating scandal, where the French judge in the pairs competition voted for the
Russian skaters in order to secure an advantage for the French skaters in the ice dancing
competition.

Additionally, bribes may be offered by cities in order to secure athletic franchises, or

even competitions, as happened with the 2002 Winter Olympics. It is common practice
for cities to "bid" against each other with stadiums, tax benefits, and licensing deals to
secure or keep professional sports franchises.

Athletes themselves can be paid to under-perform, generally so that a gambler or

gambling syndicate can secure a winning bet. A classic example of this was the 1919
World Series, better known as the Black Sox Scandal.

Finally, in some sports, elements of the game may be tampered with – the classic
example being from horse racing, where a groom or other person with access to the
horses before the race may be bribed to over-feed an animal, or even administer a
sedative or amphetamine (known as "horse doping" in order to make a horse faster or
slower to respectively increase or reduce a their chances of winning). Another type of
bribery done for financial gain through gambling is to bet against a clear favorite, and
ensure that the favorite has an "off day", or attempt to "hop up" a long shot in an attempt
to collect big winnings by betting on the heavy odds against it.

Notable instances of bribery

• Gerald Garson, former New York Supreme Court Justice, convicted of accepting
bribes to manipulate outcomes of divorce proceedings.
• John Jenrette, former American politician convicted of accepting a bribe in the
FBI's Abscam operation
• Martin Thomas Manton, former U.S. federal judge convicted of accepting bribes

See also
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Bribery

Wikisource has the text of the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article Bribery.

• Bid rigging
• Bribe Payers Index
• Conflict of interest
• Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
• Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO) of the Council of Europe
• Lobbying
 • Match fixing
• Organized crime
• Pay to Play
• Point shaving
• Political corruption
• Price fixing
• Transparency International
• Principal-agent problem
• Corruption in India

• The UK Bribery Act 2010

References

• This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public

domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopædia Britannica (Eleventh ed.).
Cambridge University Press.

1. ^ African corruption 'on the wane', 10 July 2007, BBC News

2. ^ “Tax Treatment of Bribes: About”, OECD Centre for Tax Policy and
Administration, OECD.org, 17 July 2007
<http://www.oecd.org/about/0,3347,en_2649_34551_1_1_1_1_1,00.html>.
3. ^ Lewis, Mauree. (2000). Who is paying for healthcare in Eastern Europe and
Central Asia? World Bank Publications.
4. ^ Bribes for basic care in Romania. The Guardian Weekly (March 26th 2008).
5. ^ International principle of law Trans-Lex.org

Corruption in India
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Political corruption in India is a major concern. However, according to Transparency

International's Corruption Perception Index (CPI), India is one of the least corrupt
governments in South Asia. It has a CPI score of 3.3 (rank 87th), compared to Pakistan
(2.3, rank 143th), Bangladesh (2.4, rank 134th), Nepal (2.2, rank 146th), and Sri Lanka
(3.2, rank 92nd) in 2010[1]. A 2005 study done by Transparency International in India
found that more than 75% of the people had firsthand experience of paying bribe or
peddling influence to get any type of job done in a public office.[2] Taxes and bribes are a
daily life fact, common between state borders; Transparency International estimates that
truckers pay annually US$5 billion in bribes.[3] For 2010, India was ranked 87th of 178
countries in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, with a CPI score
of 3.3, which is a slight worsening of it's 2009 score of 3.4 (rank 84th)[4]. India compares
favorably with other BRIC countries, with China having a CPI score of 3.5 (decreasing
from 3.6 in 2009) rank 78th, Brazil 3.7 (rank 69th), and Russia 2.1 (rank 154th, the worst
of the BRICs) [5].

Criminalization of Indian politics is a major setback as well as a serious problem.[6][7] In

July 2008 The Washington Post reported that nearly a fourth of the 540 Indian Parliament
members faced criminal charges, "including human trafficking, immigration rackets,
embezzlement, rape and even murder".[8] An international watchdog conducted a study on
the illicit flight of money from India, perhaps the first ever attempt at shedding light on a
subject steeped in secrecy, concludes that India has been drained of $462 billion (over Rs
20 lakh crore) between 1948 and 2008. The amount is nearly 40% of India's gross
domestic product.[9].

Overview of the index of perception of corruption, 2010

Contents
[hide]

• 1 History
o 1.1 Politics
o 1.2 Bureaucracy
 1.2.1 Land and property
 1.2.2 Tendering processes and awarding contracts
 1.2.3 Medicine
 1.2.4 Death Certificates
 1.2.5 Transport
 1.2.6 Income tax
 1.2.7 Preferential award of public resources
o 1.3 Judiciary
o 1.4 Armed forces
o 1.5 Police
o 1.6 Religious institutions
o 1.7 Educational Instituions
• 2 Anti-corruption efforts
o 2.1 Right to information act
o 2.2 Ombudsmen
o 2.3 Computerization
o 2.4 Whistleblowers
o 2.5 Creation of Anti-Corruption Police and Courts
o 2.6 Private sector initiatives
• 3 See also
• 4 References
• 5 Further reading
• 6 External links

o 6.1 Indian government

History

The economy of India was under socialist-inspired policies for an entire generation from
the 1950s until the late 1980s. The economy was subject to extensive regulation,
protectionism, and public ownership, leading to pervasive corruption and slow growth.[10]
[11][12][13]
License Raj was often at the core of corruption.

The Vohra Report was submitted by the former Indian Union Home Secretary, N.N.
Vohra, in October 1993. It studied the problem of the criminalisation of politics and of
the nexus among criminals, politicians and bureaucrats in India.

The report contained several observations made by official agencies on the criminal
network which was virtually running a parallel government. It also discussed criminal
gangs who enjoyed the patronage of politicians, of all parties, and the protection of
government functionaries. It revealed that political leaders had become the leaders of
gangs. They were connected to the military. Over the years criminals had been elected to
local bodies, State Assemblies and Parliament. The unpublished annexures to the Vohra
Report were believed to contain highly explosive material.

According to Jitendra Singh, "in the bad old days, particularly pre-1991, when the
License Raj held sway, and by design, all kinds of free market mechanisms were hobbled
or stymied, and corruption emerged almost as an illegitimate price mechanism, a
shadowy quasi-market, such that scarce resources could still be allocated within the
economy, and decisions could get made. [...] These were largely distortions created by
the politico-economic regime. While a sea change has occurred in the years following
1991, some of the distorted cultural norms that took hold during the earlier period are
slowly being repaired by the sheer forces of competition. The process will be long and
slow, however. It will not change overnight."[14] One of the major problems and obstacles
to development that many developing countries face is corruption by greedy, power-
hungry politicians, which is endemic in certain parts of the world.

Politics
Main article: Indian political scandals

Criminalization of Indian politics is a problem.[6][15]

In July 2008 The Washington Post reported that nearly a fourth of the 540 Indian
Parliament members faced criminal charges, "including human trafficking, immigration
rackets, embezzlement, rape and even murder".[8] At state level, things are often worse. In
Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections 2002, candidates with criminal records won the
majority of seats.

Bureaucracy

A 2005 study done by Transparency International (TI) in India found that more than 50%
of the people had firsthand experience of paying bribe or peddling influence to get a job
done in a public office.[2] Taxes and bribes are common between state borders;
Transparency International estimates that truckers pay annually US$5 billion in bribes.[3]
A 2009 survey of the leading economies of Asia, revealed Indian bureaucracy to be not
just least efficient out of Singapore, Hong Kong, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia,
Taiwan, Vietnam, China, Philippines and Indonesia; further it was also found that
working with India's civil servants was a "slow and painful" process.[16].

Land and property

Officials often steal state property. In Bihar, more than 80% of the subsidized food aid to
poor is stolen [14]. In cities and villages throughout India, Mafia Raj consisting of
municipal and other government officials, elected politicians, judicial officers, real estate
developers and law enforcement officials, acquire, develop and sell land in illegal ways.
[17]
.

Tendering processes and awarding contracts

Government officials having discretionary powers in awarding contracts engage in

preferential treatment for selected bidders, display negligence in quality control
processes[citation needed]. Many state-funded construction activities in India, such as road
building, are dominated by construction mafias, which are groupings of corrupt public
works officials, materials suppliers, politicians and construction contractors.[18] Shoddy
construction and material substitution (e.g. mixing sand in cement while submitting
expenses for cement) result in roads and highways being dangerous, and sometimes
simply washed away when India's heavy monsoon season arrives.[19]

Medicine

In Government Hospitals, corruption is associated with non availability of medicines (or

duplicate/fake medicines), getting admission, consultations with doctors and availing
diagnostic services.[2]. There have been cases of diversion of medical supplies from
government hospitals and clinics[citation needed] as well as supply and distribution of
medicines of inferior quality[citation needed] some hospitals are charging extra amounts from
rich peoples. in india there is a unfair co-operation for medi-insurance companies and
hospital.

Death Certificates

The greiving families are often asked to pay a bribe to get their loved one's Death
Certificates in the offices run by the Government. It happens in the open and yet nobody
cares.

Transport

Officials who oversee transportation regulations, safety norms, traffic violations engage
in rent seeking activity. Typically a lenient treatment for an offending driver or vehicle is
accompanied by expectation of a bribe[citation needed]. India has multiple jurisdictions for
vehicular laws as well as overlapping laws at the central government and state
government level which worsens bureaucratic complications. This leads to facilitation
payments to accelerate normal government processes[citation needed].

Income tax

There have been several cases of collusion of officials of the income tax department of
India for a favorable tax treatment in return for bribes [20][21]

Preferential award of public resources

As detailed earlier, land in areas with short supply is relatively common with government
entities awarding public land to private concerns at negligible rates. Other examples
include the award of mining leases to private companies without a levy of taxes that is
proportionate to the market value of the ore[citation needed].

Judiciary

Corruption is rampant in the judicial system of India. According to Transparency

International, judicial corruption in India is attributable to factors such as "delays in the
disposal of cases, shortage of judges and complex procedures, all of which are
exacerbated by a preponderance of new laws".[22]

On the basis of various reports in media like Times of India

[www.timesofindia.com], Hindustan Times [www.hindustantimes.com]---various
allegations of corruption against Balakrishnan, currently chairman of the National
Human Rights Commission and also the former chief justice of India (CJI) As A
local TV channel of Thiruvananthapuram has reported that former Chief Justice K G
Balakrishnan’s son-in-law P V Srinijan, who did not have any land asset four years ago,
is now worth a fortune. Srinijan, a member of the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee
(KPCC), had unsuccessfully contested as a Congress candidate in the Assembly elections
from the SC reserved constituency of Narakkal in Ernakulam in 2006. He was also a
vice-president of the State Youth Congress. According to land registration documents
cited by Asianet TV channel, Sreenijan purchased 2.5 acres of riverfront property for `14
lakh in Thrissur in 2007.People in the locality claimed that the market rate for one cent
(one-hundredth of an acre) of land in the area now is `2 lakhs. The channel showed
footage of a resort under construction on the river front property.[citation needed]Advocates in
the Kerala High Court were baffled how Srinijin, a lawyer by profession, was able to
accumulate huge wealth as he was not in full fledged practice.

Armed forces

The Indian Armed Forces have frequently witnessed corruption involving senior armed
forces officers from the Indian Army, Indian Navy and Indian Air Force. Many officers
have been caught for allegedly selling defence stores in the black market in the border
districts of Indian states and territories. Recent sukhna land scandal involving four Indian
Lieutenant Generals has shaken public faith in the country's growing military at a time
when large sums are being spent on modernising the armed forces. A string of eye-
popping fraud cases has damaged the institution in recent years.[23][24][25]

Police

Despite State prohibitions against torture and custodial misconduct by the police, torture
is widespread in police custody, which is a major reason behind deaths in custody.[26][27]
The police often torture innocent people until a 'confession' is obtained to save influential
and wealthy offenders.[28] G.P. Joshi, the programme coordinator of the Indian branch of
the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative in New Delhi comments that the main issue
at hand concerning police violence is a lack of accountability of the police.[29]

Religious institutions

In India, the corruption has also crept into religious institutions. Some of the Church of
North India are making money by selling Baptism certificates.[30] A group of church
leaders and activists has launched a campaign to combat the corruption within churches.
The chief economic consequences of corruption are the loss to the economy an unhealthy
climate for investment and an increase in the cost of government-subsidised services. The
TI India study estimates the monetary value of petty corruption in 11 basic services
provided by the government, like education, healthcare, judiciary, police, etc., to be
around 21,068 crore (US$4.6 billion). India still ranks in the bottom quartile of
developing nations in terms of the ease of doing business, and compared to China and
other lower developed Asian nations, the average time taken to secure the clearances for
a startup or to invoke bankruptcy is much greater.

Educational Instituions

Don't know why the semester system of education has been adopted by the State, as well
as Central Governments. The system of semester is nothing else parrotlessoning. In the
semester type of education, there are internal assessment tests, attendance, practical test
marks will be awarded to the students. For awarding these the teachers are collecting
money from the students. Some students, though they are poor, adjusting the required
money in the fear that otherwise they will get less marks. The absentee student or poor
performed students will find out this type of shortcut way to get more marks from the
teacher may comeforward to pay the reqquired money to the teacher and will succeed.
Though it is shameful on the part of teachers but also dirty teachers will do this type of
unhealthy practices and work against their ethics.

Anti-corruption efforts
Right to information act
Main article: Right to Information Act

The Right to Information Act (2005) and equivalent acts in the states, that require
government officials to furnish information requested by citizens or face punitive action,
computerisation of services and various central and state government acts that established
vigilance commissions have considerably reduced corruption or at least have opened up
avenues to redress grievances.[2][31] The 2006 report by Transparency International puts
India at the 70th place and states that significant improvements were made by India in
reducing corruption.[32][33]
Ombudsmen

The LokAyukta is an anti-government corruption organization in the Indian states [34][35].

These institutions are based on the Ombudsman in Scandinavian countries. An
amendment to the Constitution has been proposed to implement the Lokayukta uniformly
across Indian States as a three-member body, headed by a retired Supreme Court judge or
high court chief justice, and comprise of the state vigilance commissioner and a jurist or
an eminent administrator as other members [36].

Computerization

• Bhoomi is a project jointly funded by the Government of India and the Karnataka
local government to digitize the paper land records and create a software
mechanism to control changes to the land registry in Karnataka. The project was
designed to eliminate the long-standing problem of inefficiency and corruption.
• Introduction of smart cards for vehicle registration and drivers licenses by
Karnataka Regional Transport Organization[37].
• Enforcement automation of traffic violations by Bangalore Traffic Police [38].

Whistleblowers

Whistleblowers play a major role in the fight against corruption. India currently does not
have a law to protect whistleblowers, which was highlighted by the assassination of
Satyendra Dubey.

Creation of Anti-Corruption Police and Courts

Some have called for the Central Government to create an anti-theft law enforcement
agency that investigates and prosecutes corruption at all levels of government, including
state and local level. Special courts that are more efficient than the traditional Indian
courts with traveling judges and law enforcement agents are being proposed. The
proposal has not yet been acted upon by the Indian government. Certain states such as
Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh Anti-corruption Bureau) and Karnataka (Lokayukta)
have similar agencies and courts [39][34]. The creation of a central agency with specialized
courts with broad powers, however, is likely to have greater impact in curbing corruption
at all levels[opinion][citation needed].

Private sector initiatives

Several new initiatives have come up in the private sector to raise awareness about
Corruption related issues and to build anti-corruption platforms. http://5thpillar.org is one
such organization that is promoting the use of Zero Rupee Notes [40] to fight corruption by
shaming the officials who ask for bribe. Another popular initiative Jaago Re!One Billion
Votes from Tata Tea has now changed its focus from voter registration to fighting
corruption [41]. nobribe.org is another platform for corruption free India and advocates the
use of direct and regular measurement of corruption to force the hands of the leadership
into dealing with corruption related issues[42].

See also

• Indian political scandals

• Corruption Perceptions Index
• List of countries by Corruption Perceptions Index
• Socio-economic issues in India
• License Raj
• Mafia Raj
• Corruption in Mumbai
• Rent seeking
• Lok Ayukta
• Notable Scams in India

References

1. ^ http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results
2. ^ a b c d Centre for Media Studies (20/tii/ICS2k5_Vol1.pdf). India Corruption
Study 2005: To Improve Governance Volume – I: Key Highlights. Transparency
International India.
3. ^ a b India: Where Shipping Is Shaky. Businessweek
4. ^
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2009/cpi_2009
_table
5. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
6. ^ a b "A special report on India: The democracy tax is rising: Indian politics is
becoming ever more labyrinthine". The Economist. December 11, 2008.
http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12749771.
7. ^ The criminalisation of Indian democracy (May 2, 2007). "Jo Johnson".
Financial Times. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/21d0f5f8-f8c1-11db-a940-
000b5df10621.html. Retrieved 2007-05-12.
8. ^ a b Wax, Emily (2008-07-24). "With Indian Politics, the Bad Gets Worse".
Washington Times. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2008/07/23/AR2008072303390.html. Retrieved 2010-04-30.
9. ^ Prabhakar, Binoy. "Black money trail: 'India drained of Rs 20 lakh crore during
1948-2008'". timesofindia.com. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Black-
money-trail-India-drained-of-Rs-20-lakh-crore-during-1948-
2008/articleshow/6946266.cms.
10. ^ Eugene M. Makar (2007). An American's Guide to Doing Business in India.
11. ^ "Economic survey of India 2007: Policy Brief". OECD.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/52/39452196.pdf.
12. ^ "The India Report". Astaire Research.
http://www.ukibc.com/ukindia2/files/India60.pdf.
13. ^ "India's Rising Growth Potential". Goldman Sachs. 2007.
http://www.usindiafriendship.net/viewpoints1/Indias_Rising_Growth_Potential.p
df.
14. ^ a b "Will Growth Slow Corruption In India?". Forbes.
http://www.forbes.com/2007/08/15/wipro-tata-corruption-ent-law-
cx_kw_0814whartonindia.html.
15. ^ The criminalisation of Indian democracy (May 2, 2007). "Jo Johnson".
Financial Times. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/21d0f5f8-f8c1-11db-a940-
000b5df10621.html. Retrieved 2007-05-12.
16. ^ Indian bureaucracy ranked worst in Asia: Survey The Times of India, June 3,
2009.
17. ^ K.R. Gupta and J.R. Gupta, Indian Economy, Vol #2, Atlantic Publishers &
Distributors, 2008, ISBN 8126909269. Snippet: ... the land market already stands
subverted and an active land mafia has already been created ...
18. ^ "Mulayam Hits Mafia Hard". India Today. 2006-10-16.
http://archives.digitaltoday.in/indiatoday/20061016/state-up.html. Retrieved
2008-10-30. Snippet: ... The road sector has always been the main source of
income for the mafia. They either ask their men directly to grab the contracts or
allow an outsider to take the contract after accepting a hefty commission ... a
large number of criminals have been grabbing contracts under the protective
umbrella of parties like SP, BSP, BJP, as well as the Congress ... opportunity to
refurbish the image of his Government by initiating a crackdown on the mafia-
contractor-engineer nexus ...
19. ^ "Killer roads in India and rethinking the death penalty". The Wall Street
Journal. liveMint.com. 2008-09-01.
http://blogs.livemint.com/blogs/romanticrealist/archive/2008/09/01/killer-roads-
in-india-and-rethinking-the-death-penalty.aspx. Retrieved 2008-10-30.[dead link]
Snippet: ... this year's rains have destroyed 581 roads in the state with 139 road
accidents killing 373 people through 10 August ... they spoke about a road
building contractor mafia that pretty much has a lock on many projects for
redoing roads--apparently year after year ...
20. ^ "Corruption in Income-Tax: beaten by Babudom". LiveMint.
http://www.livemint.com/2007/04/01225456/Corruption-in-IncomeTax-beat.html.
21. ^ "Two Income Tax officials booked for corruption". Indian Express.
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/two-income-tax-officials-booked-for-
corruption/414293/.
22. ^ Praful Bidwai. "INDIA: Legal System in the Dock".
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=37972.
23. ^ Is corruption widespread in the Indian armed forces? How can it be dealt with?
- India - DNA
24. ^ 義美聯電-數位影音多媒體刊物
25. ^ Corruption in Indian Armed Forces: 72 officers sold their weapons for profit -
Army
26. ^ Torture main reason of death in police custody The Tribune
27. ^ Custodial deaths in West Bengal and India's refusal to ratify the Convention
against Torture Asian Human Rights Commission 26 February 2004
28. ^ Custodial deaths and torture in India Asian Legal Resource Centre
29. ^ Police Accountability in India: Policing Contaminated by Politics
30. ^ Are even the Priests taking to corruption?
31. ^ Example of a central government department's implementation of the Right to
Information Act.
32. ^ Transparency International Press release
33. ^ Transparency International Press release
34. ^ a b "Karnataka Lokayukta". National Informatics Center.
http://lokayukta.kar.nic.in. Retrieved 2010-06-24.
35. ^ "Karnataka Anti-Corruption Laws (Acts)". National Informatics Center.
http://lokayukta.kar.nic.in/acts.htm. Retrieved 2010-06-24.
36. ^ "Lokayukta may get constitutional status". Deccan Herald.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/78301/lokayukta-may-get-constitutional-
status.html. Retrieved 2010-06-30.
37. ^ "Smart new driving licence issued in Bangalore". Live Mint.
http://www.livemint.com/2009/06/25170233/Smart-new-driving-licence-
issu.html.
38. ^ "Bangalore Traffic Police". Bangalore Traffic Police.
http://www.bangaloretrafficpolice.gov.in/.
39. ^ "A.P. Departments > Anti-Corruption Bureau". A.P. Government.
http://www.aponline.gov.in/apportal/departments/departments.asp?
dep=13&org=83. Retrieved 2010-06-25.
40. ^ "Zero Rupee Note". 5thpillar.org. http://5thpillar.org/~pillar/india/ZRN.
41. ^ "Jaago Re Campaign from Tata Tea". Tata Tea. http://www.jaagore.com/.
42. ^ "nobribe.org". nobribe.org. http://www.nobribe.org.