ARTICLE: Measuring corruption accurately is just not impossible. Economists have used indirect mathematical tools to come up with guesstimates. It is irrelevant whether corruption in Pakistan is to the tune of two or three billion rupees a day or as Chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Admiral Fasih Bukhari (retired) in his press conference on Thursday now puts it at 10 to 12 billion rupees a day.
There is a mismatch between the ruling parties estimations - who base their estimate on the size of the Federal Budget - which is less - but is clearly an erroneous way of calculation of corruption. What is important is not the guesstimate but plugging the areas which provide the opportunity and where the black money is being parked. The single biggest place for parking bribe or tax-evaded money is land, i.e., property. The biggest source for this is the extractive political institution, i.e. the powers of Prime Minister and Chief Minister to parcel out government land for pittance. This is the single most misused power because of faulty land record.
Prior to colonial rule, land belonged to the tiller. In order to expand their rule over the Sub-continent - Zamindari nizam was created. And, the Zamindar, i.e., the landed bourgeois was allowed to raise the police force. The office of Inspector General of Police was created to only inspect the force at the local level and the inspector in the force was to assist him. Indian Sub-continent's experience of colonial rule was markedly different from America's where inclusive political and economic institutions, which developed in colonial period, continued into the 19th century.
People fondly remember the economic progress achieved under the authoritarian regime of Ayub Khan. He and his authoritarian elite were motivated by their desire to strengthen the state and develop economy so that Pakistan could by force take the disputed territory of Kashmir. We ended up losing our Eastern part. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's model of state capitalism was profoundly devoid of political reform. Military intervention by Zia-ul-Haq did not reverse this process of state capitalism. And both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif failed to undertake reform whereby they could change the extractive nature of political institutions which distribute power unevenly and enable the political and economic elite to exercise unchecked political control over the rest of society. Unfortunately, however, our society is still faced with a question whether or not economic institutions are inclusive. We are yet to find an answer to another question whether or not the nature of these institutions is a collective choice and is determined by the distribution of political power in society. Musharraf started on the right track; however, to perpetuate his rule he paid lip service to civil, political and property rights. However, he did allow adoption of technologies developed elsewhere like cell phones and satellite television. These two technologies have penetrated Pakistan and created two more power centres besides the military and judiciary. The present civilian set-up has had difficulties in handling this. A more proactive judiciary and vibrant media have glaringly exposed corruption at the top to the masses. Hitherto, the average man was only exposed to corruption in his daily dealings with state functionaries.
Political reform has to be accompanied by civil service reforms. Both have to go hand-in-hand to reduce corruption. Decentralization down to the local government level is yet to be completed. The power to gift land by the executive branch has to end. Land records need to be digitally kept. And, power of hiring posting and promotion needs to be decentralised. Every Ministry must have its own human resource and administrative departments so that expertise is developed. And, transfers from one ministry to another must end. A strong government can maintain law and order, build infrastructure, enforce contracts and provide public goods. However, the state's strength arises from the choices its ruling elite undertakes. Pakistan has failed to exploit its geographical location - crossroad between the two large markets China and India and the oil wealth available for investment from the Middle East. Bad governance is indeed devastating, but so too are geo-political threats coupled with ethnic, sectarian and religious divide within. There are many different illnesses in our underperforming economy. Poverty itself is creating self-reinforcing, traps and making savings and investment impossible. Key to understanding development is to remain open and create myriad of pathways through which reforms can be undertaken.
Politics matters and bad governance do indeed kill development. Bad governments need to be voted out by the electorate otherwise the people will need to continually suffer. Media can expose and judiciary can strike down bad policies. But reform and political will remain the primary task of the executive branch. Parliament elects a government and can also bring it down. As such reformation of the Parliament and the civil service has to be the starting point to reduce corruption.
Comments
Comments are closed.