Editorial
Fresh eye-opener to handling corruption
A way forward emerges from the public opinion survey
The Global Corruption Barometer 2010, the most extensive survey to-date on people's perception of and experience with corruption, conducted for the first time worldwide by the Transparency International (TI) makes some extraordinary revelations. Sampling opinions of 1,049 Bangladeshis in 64 districts, the TIB finds that, contrasted with an world average of 22 percent, 60 percent of Bangladeshis favoured the government over other organisations to fight corruption.
It may sound a somewhat ironic preference for the government. For, its constituents like the police, civil service, land and registry services, utilities, education administration are placed atop the corruption curve. So the natural question to ask would be: with what arsenal the government is to fight corruption?
It is also a tall order because the political parties, especially ruling party, judiciary and parliament are themselves regarded by the public as being no less involved in corruption. The NGOs too, are not excluded in the perception.
However, it is a remarkable, though not a surprising choice indicated by fellow countrymen in putting their trust in the government for effectively curbing corruption. The reason is to be found in the public longing to see an elected government in the role of a major doer in reversing the incidence of corruption with the opposition oversight at play. For all practical purposes also that is a natural expectation to harbour.
It is also noteworthy that public opinion places the media in the second position on the trust criterion. The public, media and rights activist groups can only help but its the government that should not only play an exemplary role but also seen to be leading the way out of corruption. Indeed 90-95 percent Bangladeshi respondents are willing to extend a hand in fighting corruption and 93 percent believe ordinary people can make difference in combating itespecially, the petty variety. But institutionally, the fight has to be spearheaded by the government.
Whereas the strongest voice against corruption should be heard from the government, it is the ruling party excesses that the government happens to be soft on. In dealing with suspected or real offences including corruption in the opposition, the government moves with speed but not so about its own party followers.
There is a rising concern over corruption in some ministries. Government should show zero tolerance to the malady within to be leading the way in the fight. Looking around, despite the high integrity of Monmohan Singh as Indian Prime Minister, a cabinet colleague's excesses are casting a shadow on his government.
We would urge the government not to be either self-congratulatory or defensive in the face of the TIB findings rather to use the information as a tool to combat corruption, institutional and petty. It must go all out, take the public with it, in a comprehensive crusade against corruption.
Comments