& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Can we keep it up?

Given the depth and breadth of corruption in the country, no one can deny that it will be only in the long term and through a comprehensive and well-designed strategic campaign with a multi-stakeholder ownership and engagement that corruption can be effectively controlled.

IFTEKHARUZZAMAN
THE Corruption Perception Index (CPD-2009 was released by TYansparency International (TI) on November 17. It provides international ranking of countries in terms of perceived degree of prevalence of political and administrative corruption. The index shows that Bangladesh is among nine out of the 180 countries included in this survey that have achieved "notable improvements." On a scale of 0-10 Bangladesh scored 2.4, compared to 2.1 last year. In terms of ranking, Bangladesh has become 13th from below which is 139th among 180, whereas in 2008 it was 10th from below or 147th among 180.
Other countries that are in the category of notable gainers like Bangladesh are Belarus, Guatemala, Lithuania, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Syria and Tonga. On the other hand, significant decliners are Bahrain, Greece, Iran, Malaysia, Malta and Slovakia.
Somalia, having scored 1.1, remains at the bottom -- as it was in 2007 and 2008, implying that corruption in that country is perceived to be the highest -- followed by Afghanistan and Myanmar in the 2nd and 3rd, and Sudan jointly with Iraq in the 4th position from below.
New Zealand, Denmark and Singapore are highest scorers with 9.4, 9.3 and 9.2 respectively, meaning that corruption is perceived to be lowest in these countries, closely followed by Sweden and Switzerland with 9.2 and 9.0 respectively.
Bangladesh's gain is notable as all its South Asian peers except India have received lower ranking than previous years. India has remained steady with 3.4; Afghanistan declined from 1.5 in 2008 to 1.3; Bhutan from 5.2 to 5.0; Maldives from 2.8 to 2.5; Nepal from 2.7 to 2.3; Pakistan from 2.5 to 2.4; and Sri Lanka from 3.2 to 3.1. However, except Afghanistan, Nepal and Pakistan all other South Asian countries remain in higher positions than Bangladesh.
It may be recalled that Bangladesh was earlier placed at the very bottom of the list for the fifth successive year from 2001-2005. Bangladesh was ranked number 3 in 2006, number 7 in 2007, and number 10 in 2008.
This year's performance is good news for many in Bangladesh. However, with the score remaining below 3 according to the index, we continue to be among countries where corruption is pervasive with deep and wide impacts.
This year's data are from 2008 until
September 2009 as the CPI is based on 2-year rolling estimates. Therefore. Bangladesh's performance reflects a perception of progress as a result of the nationwide crackdown on corruption during 2007-08, which was also accompanied by some institutional and legal reforms to strengthen the capacity to fight corruption.
It may also be a reflection of a perceived positive assessment of the fact that many of those reforms were carried forward, or so promised, by the government elected to power in December 2008 — to a great extent from an anti-corruption platform.
A key contributing factor to the index is the political and institutional capacity to prevent and control corruption. Therefore, whether or not the improvement achieved by Bangladesh will be sustainable and whether further progress will be achieved will depend on the government's will and capacity to deliver, especially in ensuring integrity, independence, impartiality and effectiveness of key institutions like the Parliament. Anti-Corruption Commission. Election Commission, Information Commission, Judiciary, law enforcement agencies, the public service and the Human Rights Commission.
The ruling alliance, especially the Awami League (AL), spared no effort to make a series of commitments, of which more than a dozen were specific to building and strengthening the anti-corruption institutional and policy infrastructure. After forming the government, the commitments have continued to be reiterated, especially at the top level, which helps retain the optimism.
However, there are also increasing indications for concern. The proposed reforms of the Anti-Corruption Commission, especially the reported exclusion of political and administrative corruption from its jurisdiction as well as assigning the status of chief executive to the secretary of the Commission, will not only be counterproductive to the government's election pledge but also be the easiest way to climb down again in the index.
The Parliament started very well with some unprecedented indicators. The committees were formed in the very first session, which also witnessed the speaker play a commendably balanced role in conduct of proceedings; the prime minister's question-answer sessions were lively, with participation of the opposition when they were available; the committees are also functioning well. But the boycotting of sessions by the opposition on ridiculous grounds, which could be easily addressed it only our political leadership could rise
above the confrontational and zero-sum game, does not auger well for an effective parliament, especially for its capacity to discharge the function of holding the government accountable.
The government's failure to refrain from introducing some basic changes to the procurement rules, especially to the effect that experience and expertise would not be mandatory up to a certain threshold, can be very detrimental to ensuring transparency. efficiency and integrity in the public sector. Corruption in public contracting always takes place through a triangular coalition between the political authority, public officials and the private sector. If the changes are pushed ahead, the prospect of sustaining the upward movement in the CPI will erode sooner than later.
The adoption of the Right to Information Act (RTl) in the Parliament must be commended. If properly enforced, it can bring wonders in promoting transparent governance and preventing corruption. Experience has shown a positive relationship between enforcement of RTl with capacity to control corruption in general, and score in CPI in particular. The government must move ahead firmly in strengthening the Information Commission and creating the capacity and skills to move from a culture of secrecy to that of openness. The civil society, NGOs and the media, who can play a great role by creating the capacity on both the supply and the demand side in this regard, must be taken into confidence.
The most formidable task would be to effectively challenge impunity. Corruption must be punished, and the law must be allowed to take its own course without any political or other forms of influence or Intervention. Corruption cases must be handled through due judicial process. Any effort to influence die judicial process by partisan political or odier means shall be counter-
productive. The lower the level of integrity, professionalism and public trust upon the judiciary, the lower the score in CPI.
The extent to which anti-corruption can be mainstreamed in the public service, including the administration and law-enforcement agencies, will be critical. The enhanced salary and benefits package in the public sector is a step in the right direction, but only partial. Equally important, if not more, are specific measures to free public service from partisan political influence. If appointments. promotions, rewards and punishments are determined on the basis of anything other than merit, efficiency and performance, integrity in public service shall remain a far cry. The Public Service Conduct Rules must be drastically reformed to introduce a code of ethics and integrity that would institutionalise positive and negative incentives against corruption.
As some of us will take satisfaction for the gain in CPI, though marginal and far from enough to be reflected in the way corruption affects daily life in Bangladesh, there is no scope for complacency. Given the depth and breadth of corruption in the country, no one can deny that it will be only in the long term and through a comprehensive and well-designed strategic campaign with a multi-stakeholder ownership and engagement that corruption can be effectively controlled. Failure to move ahead without fear or favour w’ould not only reverse the gain in CPI but also further disappoint the people, who voted the government to power with great enthusiasm. It is only natural to expect that the last thing that any government wants is to lose the trust of the people.
Dr iftekhanjzzaman is Executive Director of Transparent International Bangladesh