The '2006 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI)', launched on Monday by Transparency International (TI), points to a strong correlation between corruption and poverty, with a concentration of impoverished states at the bottom of the ranking.
"Corruption traps millions in poverty," said Transparency International chairperson Huguette Labelle. "Despite a decade of progress in establishing anti-corruption laws and regulations, today's results indicate that much remains to be done before we see meaningful improvements in the lives of the world's poorest citizens."
The '2006 Corruption Perceptions Index' is a composite index that draws on multiple expert opinion surveys that poll perceptions of public sector corruption in 163 countries around the world, the greatest scope of any CPI to date. It scores countries on a scale from 0 to 10 - with zero indicating high levels of perceived corruption, and ten indicating low levels of perceived corruption.
"Although Pakistan has made tangible efforts towards the strengthening of public procurement, the perception of corruption remains very high - a situation particularly worrying, given the amount of humanitarian aid pledged for reconstruction following the October 2005 earthquake. And the perceived levels of corruption in case of Pakistan indicates some improvement with CPI score improving from 2.1 in 2005 to 2.2 in 2006, compared to higher improvement in the CPI of Bangladesh and India," said Adil Gilani, Chairman Transparency International Pakistan. "Political will, judicial independence and effective non-discriminatory accountability mechanism for non-compliance of procedures including privatisation, and Public Procurement Rules 2004 by civil/defence departments as well as the public corporations and authorities are urgently needed to implement the recent reforms to successfully combat corruption".
A strong correlation between corruption and poverty is evident in the results of the CPI 2006. Almost three-quarters of the countries in the CPI score below five (including all low-income countries and all but two African states) indicating that most countries in the world face serious perceived levels of domestic corruption. Seventy-one countries - nearly half - score below three, indicating that corruption is perceived as rampant. Haiti has the lowest score at 1.8; Guinea, Iraq and Myanmar share the penultimate slot, each with a score of 1.9. Finland, Iceland and New Zealand share the top score of 9.6.
"Firms and professional associations for lawyers, accountants and bankers have a special responsibility to take stronger action against corruption," said Transparency International Chief Executive David Nussbaum. "Led by prosecuting attorneys, forensic auditors and compliance officers, they can be the stalwarts of a successful fight against corruption."
Countries with a significant worsening in perceived levels of corruption include Brazil, Cuba, Israel, Jordan, Laos, Seychelles, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia and the United States. Countries with a significant improvement in perceived levels of corruption include Algeria, Czech Republic, India, Japan, Latvia, Lebanon, Mauritius, Paraguay, Slovenia, Turkey, Turkmenistan and Uruguay.
A concentration of so-called 'failed states' is apparent at the bottom of the ranking. Iraq has sunk to second-to-last place, with pre-war survey data no longer included in this year's CPI.
While the industrialised countries score relatively high on the CPI 2006, we continue to see major corruption scandals in many of these countries. Although corruption in this context may have less of an impact on poverty and development than in developing countries, these scandals demonstrate that there is no room for complacency.
The weak performance of many countries indicates that the facilitators of corruption continue to assist political elites to launder, store and otherwise profit from unjustly acquired wealth, which often includes looted state assets. The presence of willing intermediaries - who are often trained in or who operate from leading economies - encourages corruption; it means the corrupt know there will be a banker, accountant, lawyer or other specialist ready to help them generate, move or store their illicit income.
Acts of corruption involve a giver (the supply side) and a taker (the demand side). TI advocates strong measures to curb bribery's supply side, including the criminalisation of overseas bribery under the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, as well as its demand side, including disclosure of assets for public officials and adoption of codes of conduct.
-- Promotion and, where necessary, adoption of corruption-specific codes of conduct by professional associations for their members, for instance the International Bar Association, International Compliance Association, and professional associations for accountants;
-- Public education to ensure that honest intermediaries better understand their role;
-- Legal or professional sanctions for legal, financial and accounting professionals that enable corruption; Greater scrutiny of the role of insufficiently transparent financial centres in facilitating corrupt transactions.-PR