|
The Star - March 18, 2008
Best way to fight graft
WORLDWIDE, new governments pronounce
passionately that combating corruption is their priority
agenda during their tenure.
Malaysia is no different. The fight against corruption
has been an evolving story since 1957.
The first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra was
instrumental in the enactment of the Prevention of
Corruption Act 1961 and the establishment of the
Anti-Corruption Agency.
In 1998, the then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
directed the formation of Integrity Management
Committees in government agencies to investigate abuse
of power and mismanagement.
Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi instituted various
measures to eradicate corruption - such as the Royal
Police Commission to Enhance the Operation and
Management of the Police Force in 2003.
The National Integrity Plan was launched in 2006 and the
Institute Integrity of Malaysia was established.
The Anti–Corruption Academy, a regional centre for
anti-corruption training became operational in 2005.
Despite these efforts, corruption continues to be
described as being pandemic in the country.
Party manifestoes for the last general elections
therefore gave top priority to fighting corruption.
Newly appointed Mentri Besar of Selangor Tan Sri Khalid
Ibrahim and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng have
pronounced to continue the battle against corruption.
It is unclear how they will do this. Khalid has stated
he would look into a Freedom of Information Act (FOI)
for greater transparency in the award of projects.The
FOI gives citizens the right of access to bureaucratic
documents. This may be helpful but enactment of laws and
their implementation are not instantaneous.
Anti-corruption advocates point out that “prosecution is
a blunt tool against corruption.”
Prevention is better than cure in the battle against
corruption as experiences from developed economies such
as Britain, Germany, South Korea and developing
economies such as Colombia and Indonesia indicate.
One anti-corruption tool being used extensively in these
countries is the Integrity Pact developed by
Transparency International.
It is intended to prevent corruption during the award of
contracts for major investment projects.
The IP contains rights and obligations that no party
will pay, offer, demand or accept bribes of any kind or
collude with competitors to obtain the contract or while
carrying it out.
Bidders will also disclose commissions paid in relation
to the contract.
The IP is binding on both contract suppliers and
contract bidders.
Sanctions and punitive actions as well as future
exclusions from contract bidding are some of the actions
that can be taken against those who violate the IP.
Additionally, adherence to IP is monitored by
non-governmental organizations.
The IP can be tailored to the needs of federal, state
governments and local authorities.
In Britain, IPs are being increasingly used in defence
agreements and the construction industry.
The Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of
Europe has adopted the use of IP in defence contracts.
In Germany the IP was successfully used in the expansion
of the Berlin-Schonefeld airport.
South Korea has significantly reduced corruption through
the Korean Pact on Anti-Corruption and Transparency
(K-PACT) which involves the public and private sectors,
politicians and civil society.
It has improved transparency and built investor
confidence.
The implementation of IP is cost-effective and takes
about four months for all the processes to be put in
place from training of public officials, industry, civil
society, procedural changes, preparation of documents.
Both Barisan Nasional and opposition-led states could
make IP implementation as their priority in the battle
against corruption.
For a start, opposition MPs should set the example by
signing an IP that they will not abuse their power or
accept bribes.
JOSIE FERNANDEZ,
Integrity Institute of Malaysia.
|
