|
|
Corruption and Knaves both big and small
Thursday, 19 July 2012 - 10:40 AM SL Time
 Share On Facebook
|
|
|
The highly engrossing debate in Parliament on Tuesday on bribery and corruption should help in underscoring afresh the complex dimensions of the seeming conundrum. As in the case of sexual violence and linked issues, the state, the public and concerned sections are hamstrung in arriving at a clear-cut point of view on graft on account of a paucity of reliable information. That is, the problem needs to be probed and researched in depth and reliable statistical information, in particular, made available for relevant policy and decision-making.
Nevertheless, the belief persists that the problem is pervasive and there is plentiful evidence of a `circumstantial` nature to believe that this is really so. For instance, there are some politicians and petty state officials who graduate from rural obscurity to `New Rich` status, once they begin to register a presence in public life. They begin in mud huts but within a couple of years end up in `Colombo 7`, palatial mansions. There are some `small people` in revenue-earning agencies of the state, who, within a few years, could fling money quite prodigally for the purchase of sizeable and plush real estate.
However, such dangerous knavery is not only confined to some sections of the down-and-outs, the `petty bourgeoisie` and those who are seen as painfully eking out an existence. If the `circumstantial evidence` of the kind just cited is considered reliable proof to go by, the get-rich-quick mania seems to be both widespread and characteristic of a wide cross section of society.
But quite convincing although such evidence may be, we cannot do without sound and reliable statistical evidence on which to base our assessments and pronouncements on matters as weighty as corruption and bribery. Evidence could be `emotionally` convincing but this is no fool-proof guide to the truth. Accordingly, thorough-going investigation of the issue is very much needed and we need agencies of the state as well as research bodies to do the needful. Meanwhile, we have no reason to believe that the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption is in a `passive mode` on the question of cracking-down on graft and connected blights. Rather than criticize the institution destructively the Lankan polity would do well to address its mind to ways of strengthening and giving more teeth to this all-important organization. The Commission`s annual report and other performance documents would convey what it has been doing to manage the corruption question and these may need to be adequately studied before judgment is passed on it.
A common complaint against the Commission is that it more often than not nets the `fry` rather than the `sharks`. This may seem to be so, but there is an official procedure to be followed in netting the bigger Knaves and if this course of action is not adhered to by those making complaints, not very much could be done about the Knaves in `big places`. It was mentioned by an MP in the course of Tuesday`s Parliamentary debate that most persons aware of corruption in top places are reluctant to go through with the official requirement of putting down things in writing out of fear of possible repercussions.
This was seen as a deterrent against launching positive action against corruption. This line of thinking cannot be accepted because allegations of corruption need to be made with a deep sense of responsibility and it is when these accusations are put down in writing that they carry any weight and prompt the Commission into probing the allegations. Besides, the Commission could be relied on to keep secret and confidential all sensitive information passed-on to it. Nevertheless, the Commission could look closely at these and more comments on its seeming limitations and devise further means of ensuring strict confidentiality. Such measures could perhaps induce the public into cooperating with the authorities in curbing corruption. There is no denying that the whip must be cracked on the corrupt, both big and small. Sleaze gets in the way of democratic development and its costs could be staggering. We have no choice but to enhance and expand the capacity of the Commission.
The fashioning of corruption-busting institutions which would be answerable to Parliament and the public is an essential foundation for the flourishing of the people`s Rights.
|
|
|
|
Search All News and Discussions