I.
Introduction
1
What is corruption?
Corruption
is the word that all the people don’t want to hear about. Here are the
definitions of corruption:
The simplest
definition is:
Corruption is
the misuse of public power (by elected politician or appointed civil
servant) for private gain. In order to ensure that not any public corruption
but also private corruption between individuals and businesses could be covered
by the same simple definition:
Corruption is
the misuse of public power (by elected politician or appointed civil
servant) for private gain.
A much more
difficult, scientific definition for the concept ‘corruption’ was developed by
professor (emeritus) Dr. Petrus van Duyne:
Corruption is
an improbity or decay in the decision-making process in which a decision-maker
consents to deviate or demands deviation from the criterion which should rule
his or her decision-making, in exchange for a reward or for the promise or
expectation of a reward, while these motives influencing his or her
decision-making cannot be part of the justification of the decision.
Major
corruption comes close whenever major events involving large sums of money, multiple
‘players’, or huge quantities of products (think of food and pharmaceuticals)
often in disaster situations, are at stake. Preferably, corruption flourishes
in situations involving high technology (no one understands the real quality
and value of products), or in situations that are chaotic. Think of civil war:
who is responsible and who is the rebel? Natural disasters like earthquakes,
floods, droughts. The global community reacts quickly but local government
might be disorganized and disoriented. Who maintains law and order? Or maybe
the purchase of a technologically far advanced aircraft, while only a few can
understand the technologies implied in development and production of such a
plane. Mostly, the sums of money involved are huge, a relatively small amount
of corrupt payment is difficult to attract attention. Or the number of actions
is very large, for instance in betting stations for results of Olympic Games or
international soccer-tournaments which can easily be manipulated. Geo-politics
might play a role like e.g. the East-West conflict did in the second half of
the 20th century, in which the major country-alliances sought support from
non-aligned countries.
II.
Corruption Issues
1.
Corruption in Cambodia
Corruption is perceived as abuse of
power. As reported by respondents in the research, corruption is pervasive, a
permanent part of Cambodian life. Its two main causes are thought to be
officials’ low salaries and high officials’ greed for power and wealth. On the
other hand, ordinary Cambodians lack community solidarity, have little
awareness of their rights, and are afraid. According to T.I.’s 2012 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI),
Cambodia ranked 157th among 176 countries and territories listed, with a score
of just 22 out of 100—a slight improvement on last year’s ranking of 164.
(The Cambodia Daily, 2012 – 2013,)
Nowadays, all the people in
Cambodia know clearly about the issues of corruption. Corruption the big
problem of developing our country, there are many issues that we have to know
more and understand about.
After decades of civil war and political violence,
corruption has pervaded almost every sectors of Cambodian public life, with a
system of patronage well entrenched in society. Both petty and grand forms of
corruption are widespread. Law enforcement agencies are perceived as the most
corrupt and inefficient sectors, lacking the independence, resources and
capacity to effectively investigate and prosecute corruption cases. Weak
systems of checks and balance, ineffective accountability mechanisms and scarce
opportunities for public participation further contribute to the deteriorating
situation. The enactment of the long awaited anti-corruption law has been
pending for years. (Anti-Corruption
Resource Centre, 2004)
2.
Anti-corruption law effects in Cambodia
As Cambodia has big corruption problem that must be reduce, Cambodia
government was started to make The Law to Anti-Corruption. According to PREAH
RACH KRAM by PREAH BAT SAMDECH NORODOM SIHAMONY, KING OF THE KINGDOM OF
CAMBODIA “The Law on Anti-Corruption approved by the National Assembly on March
11, 2010 it the meeting of the National Assembly, 4th legislature and entirely
adopted by the Senate on its form and legal concepts on the March 19, 2010 at
its 2nd legislature and Constitution Council was control Constitutionality and
declared constitutional follow by decision No. 110/003/2010 of April 01, 2010.”.
The purpose is to reduce the corruption in Cambodia, and is also help Cambodia
improve fast. But since the law was
start till nowadays, Law just is on the paper.
Cambodia
continues to rank among the most corrupt countries in the world and much need
to be done to enforce the Anti-Corruption Law and investigate allegations of
corruption, “Transparency International (T.I.) Cambodia said”. As
our daily activity every day, we always meet people live with corruption. They
always use their money or property to get the power or do everything that they
want to do. And the Anti-corruption is less practice because mostly who corrupt
is in government official. As we know Cambodia has corruption especially in the
government official the roots of the political and government corruption in
Cambodia go deep. I n its purest form, the world’s most corrupt government
exploit country’s natural and historical resources for their private benefits.
Resources of each country should be used to benefit all of the country’s
citizens but instead they are used to fund exclusive lifestyles and power-grips
of the select few while ordinary people are abandoned to live in poverty .the
government of Cambodia took the idea of corruption a whole step further and
aside from feeding their own bank accounts at the expense of the people , it
also use the poverty instituted and maintained by their own corruption as a
store front that attracts donation from developed countries.
About second corruption we know by Western
Sponsorship of Cambodian Corruption (Mark, 2010). In 2009, Cambodian government
received $1 Billion in donation from Western government .This money which from
come taxes paid by people was given to the Cambodian government as fund for
recon-station of the country and alleviation of poverty and accelerate the
development of Cambodia have failed .Corrupt Cambodian government receives the
money, but it is laundered to make it possible to trace and once safely
untraceable, it ends up in the bank accounts of corrupt senior officials close
to Hun Sen. All efforts to alleviate poverty in Cambodia are thus hindered,
completely wasting tax-payer money.
The third once corruption in Cambodian judges
is the corrupt government of Cambodia like untouchable they are and enjoys
their unlimited and undisputed power their position provide. Judiciary system
of Cambodia is not independent. It is owned and controlled by the government.
Judges are appointed based on their political affiliation. Corruption can be
found in all walks of life in Cambodia, but with the justice being part of the
corrupt government, nobody has any real chance at freedom or justice and no
signed contracts or land titles have any value as it’s always and only he who
has better connections that wins the case.
To sum up, according to these reasons above
we can say that corruption law in Cambodia just on the paper. It doesn’t mean
that the laws don’t affect at all but it just some affect.
3.
Corruption consequences
When we say about the consequences,
Corruption has many problems that effect to all people in Cambodia. Our country
cannot develop fast by corruption also. According to the book “Saart SaOm” wrote that; “Corruption invariably implies the notion of
taking advantage, prevaricating, exploiting others. For all respondents, it is
indeed against the law - but it thrives because of the disparities of power in
Cambodian society. Corruption is an illegal activity; through which people with
some degree of power (usually referred to as “the rich and powerful”)
prevaricate over those who have less power: the strong violate the rights of
the weak. Corruption is, if anything, unfair. First and foremost, corruption
according to respondents is abuse of power.
According
to “Vathanak Sina Neang” The endemic corruption has severe consequences for the
quality of governance and efforts to attain sustainable development. Corruption
is a form of public theft. Instead of acting “grease”, corruption serves as a
kind of “sand” in the gears of public policy decision-making.
A.
Political Consequences
Corruption
is insidious, attacking the quality of governance and national stability by undermining
the legitimacy of the political process. If fosters contempt for the public
service and leads to cynicism about politics. It distorts decision-making,
resulting in the wrong projects, prices and contractors, substandard delivery,
and promoting of corruption at lower levels. Corruption in the election has
also serious consequences. Because of the election campaigns are expensive,
candidates and parties rely on funding from wealthy individuals or
corporations.
B.
Economic Consequences
Corruption
compromises the achievement of sustainable development objectives. Briber results
in additional business costs, a burden to small entrepreneurs, and the
allocation of the country’s human capital and talent. The continuous attention
demanded of business by corrupt officials also threatens economic productivity.
Corruption
distorts the fair rules of competition. A majority of firms doing business in
Cambodia identified unfair or informal competition as at least a moderate
problem. Of a variety of potential practices of competitors evaluated that the
competitors conspiring to make them in unfair and difficult situation in of
competitors evaluated that the competitors conspiring to make them in unfair
and difficult situation in competitions, such as limit of their access to
market and suppliers, competitors, some perceived that the does not treat firms
equally.
Corruption
becomes focused on the highest bribe, denying the public advantage of a
competitive marketplace.
The
poor bear the heaviest burden in such situation, reinforcing gaps between rich
and poor. Corruption results in tax evasion and significant losses of revenue
for the State. I slow direct foreign and domestic investment because it is
perceived as a form of taxation. Corruption causes major misallocation of
scarce resources. Instead of meeting basis needs such as food, health and
education, resources are sometimes used to finance purely prestige projects
with no economic value. In short, the corruption is at root of
under-development and poverty.
C.
Social Consequences
The
political and economic consequences have significant social impact. The
corruption demoralizes the population and leads to a lack of confidence on the
State Institutions. If it is allowed to expand, corruption erodes political
legitimacy. Corruption also causes unequal distribution of public assets and
funds to different social class. Very often the poor are the victim of the
corruption. Unfortunately, many Cambodian (84%) treat bribery as the normal way
of life in their country.
Corruption damages human resources, and such
damage can affect the economy. For all respondents, it’s most important impact
on individuals concerns their living standards. Corruption increases the costs
of goods and services and, since job selection is often corrupt, decreases job
opportunities and quality of service.
In brief, uncontrolled corruption also
undermines the credibility of democratic institutions and works against good
governance. It is the most visible consequence are poor public services,
increased social polarization, disinvestments and exclusion.
Corruption on its most basic level is the
diversion of public finance and material resources away from the public use for
which they are intended. Corruption is simply the private benefit of a few
powerful officials at the expense of the people. Money that should go to the
treasury in order to provide for the people, through corruption is instead
going into the pockets of the senior officials.
In a speech at the conference on
Corruption and its impact on National Reconstruction and Reconciliation,
Finance Minister estimated that the state as losing up to USD 100 million a
year to corruption, primarily because of illegal logging, rubber exportation
and fishing (CSD, 1995). Other sources are skeptical that the above assessment
was quite low and put the cost at $300 million
Corrupt practices are responsible for a
catalogue of environmental disasters, in particular the destruction of
Cambodia’s forests – natural resources which the country can, but ill afford to
lose. In 1997, the International Monetary fund canceled $ 60 million in loans
to Cambodia because of corruption tin the timber industry. Taking its lead from
the IMF, The World Bank declined to renew its budgetary support. Over three
years, that support had amounted to roughly $ 85 million.
Given the Cambodian daily experience, it’s
not surprising that there is a significant level of agreement on at least three
subjects: corruption is a permanent part of Cambodian life; it implies
co-operation between the giver and the taker; and it has some social utility.
The under-25s and those with at least secondary education have the same levels
of agreement as the others: the outlook on corruption is not tempered by
education or youth.
Money is, as one would expect the main means
of corruption, occasionally substituted, or complemented, by non-monetary gifts
(from cigarettes and beer to cars and property). The routine of corruption
within society involves all social strata, in a dual movement, top-to-bottom
and back.
On one hand, people in a position of power (typically, high officials)
not only take bribes directly, but tolerate and encourage bribe taking by their
subordinates, down to the interface with the public – who have no choice but to
pay. On the other, in a bottom-to-top direction, subordinates routinely hand
over a share of the bribes they extort to their own superiors (whom usually
they’ve paid to get their job in the first place).
After discovering that large quantity of
rice reportedly worth more than a million dollars was stolen, the WFP alerted
the government of the scandal. Many people, including its staffs and government
officials involved in this fraud. The WFP has halted new food for work
activities until it can implement safeguards against corruption. Prime Minister
Hun Sen agreed to reimburse the WFP for it losses.
Interestingly, more than half the respondents
are specifically worried about the educational system. The consensus is it is
steadily degenerating, because teachers (from primary school to university) and
education officials obtain their jobs through corruption, independent of
qualifications and ability, and cannot impart knowledge to the next
generation.
The outcomes of corruption for society at
large are therefore described as very severe. Corruption keeps Cambodian
society lagging behind other countries. Some respondents add that “the nation
has lost its honor” in the eyes of foreigners. The “rich and powerful” have
acquired a disproportionate share of the country’s already limited wealth, at
the expenses of ordinary people. (Saart Saom, 2007)
Recently, the World Bank’s report revealed
that the pervasive corruption, a suffocating bureaucracy and weak law
enforcement are crippling the growth of private business, rending them
uncompetitive globally economy. Roughly, 80 percent of 800 firms surveyed in
the report acknowledged that “the necessity of paying bribes,” which eats up an
averages of 5.2 percent of total sales revenue – more than double the amount
paid by their counterpart in Bangladesh, Pakistan and China. The report is also
mentioning “Trade facilitation practices in Cambodia stand out in having high
official and unofficial costs, delays, uncertainly and discretion – a critical
problem for a country that must rely on exports for growth. In addition to
corruption fees, the report found, firms also pay in time wasted through
bureaucratic delays. The complaints of business regarding overlapping and
time-consuming governmental procedure need to be thoroughly examined, and when
these complaints must be justified and corrected. We agree that corruption is negative (in most
interviewees’ words, “a very bad thing”) for Cambodia: basically, the economy’s
growth is slower, there is high unemployment and inflation, many people are
unfairly treated and lose hope, and there is a loss of confidence in the
government.
III.
What
should be done to fight corruption in Cambodia?
Corruption is observed as impossible to
eliminate completely, but respondents without dissent thought it could be
reduced if the salaries of officials were substantially raised. Most officials
would be then ashamed to keep asking for money. This action should be combined
with a strong anti-corruption law, to be actively enforced, and with more
pressure on the part of donor countries, IOs and NGOs. For instance, corruption
affects everyone in Cambodia such as corruption takes away funding for our
schools and health centers, creates instability in and distrust of our
government, prevents our businesses from growing and employing more people, and
increases the cost of government service to us. So Cambodia is ranked as one of
the most corrupt countries in the world as stated in Transparency
International`s 2005 Corruption Perception Index.
It’s natural to think of elections when we think of
political corruption. People or organizations with their own agendas can skew
voting. They may secretly give parties big donations. Or parties and candidates
can buy votes instead of winning them. But political corruption isn’t just
about election rigging. It can lead politicians in office to steer away from
good government. Their decisions can benefit those who fund them. The public
interest comes second. Political corruption can divert scarce resources from
poor and disadvantaged people. This is especially common in countries where
democratic institutions are weak or absent. Private rather than public
interests dictate policy. This means an ethical line has been crossed.
Governments can’t act freely and democracy can’t function. Our trust in
politicians is damaged. We can turn away from involvement with how we’re
governed. Then political corruption continues unchecked.
In fact for the last
fifteen years, under the new so-called “democratic” constitution, the political
situation has deteriorated. The same leaders who have been governing Cambodia
for nearly two decades are the same people who have made the country so corrupt
by using their position and power to create wealth not to help benefit Cambodia
but purely for personal self-gain and their family’s own self-interest.
Consequently this has resulted in much suffering for the poor struggling
Cambodian people through land grabbing (mostly targeting the indigenous people
and farmers), illegal logging, and underpayment of government workers such as
teachers. In fact, so bad did it become that the corrupt ruling government
started to view the personal charisma of specific opposition politicians and
their clear ability to meet the democratic demands of the people for change, as
a threat to their leadership! Thus key politicians have been thrown out from
government and from the National Assembly and threats were imposed on other
Members of Parliament. A complete u-turn was made and the type of enthusiastic
achievement witnessed in the early first years has now totally fallen away and
there remains only the old well-oiled and rigid "corrupt" system that
Cambodians unfortunately know too well.
The political environment
now began to turn extremely bitter. With the backing of their leaders, the
authorities have been working in overdrive to protect their corrupt interests.
Officials from the highest level down have used their party and political
status to conduct their business. As a result, the much needed state apparatus,
including administrative infrastructure, has not emerged and Cambodia continues
to struggle to function with no proper institutions. Instead of rule and
procedures in place, personal client networks were expanded and took over the
running of the State. The principle areas affected are forestry, mining and
investment.
For Cambodia however it has
resulted in a crisis situation. It means that a country which is not at all
well-endowed with material resources must bear the economic burden of an
inflated and corrupt public sector. A major consequence of this and which is
perhaps at the very core of the corruption issue as noted by the World Bank
(World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 580) is a serious institutional instability
in the public sector. At the level of formal organisation this manifests itself
in ambiguous lines of authority, unclear and inefficient government procedures
and poorly paid corruptible public servants who are not acting in the people’s
interests.
In spite of Cambodia having
conducted several elections on its own after the United Nations mandated
elections in 1993, elections have not been free or fair; the power of
corruption and abuse of power continues to dominate over the will of the
people. Many political positions are still being tabled so that Party
favourites are given the better positions and, as previously mentioned, this
has created a large number of military, police and civil servants positions all
catering to serve these same politicians and placing a further burden on the
country’s budget. This situation will not change without first a change in
government. A new government must commit to what has not been achieved in
the previous years of lost opportunity. This includes the need to develop a
strong and non-politicised judiciary and adequate legislation to protect the
rights of the people. Without a doubt one of the most meaningful measures of
progress is not simply the awareness of human rights but that institutions are
able to exercise an effective mandate under which to protect people’s human
rights. The other important consideration is to ensure, through legislation,
that the government and its members are not mismanaging funds which have been
set aside to develop the country for the benefit of the Cambodian people.
In general, Cambodia’s
politicians have a tendency to subscribe to short-term profit-making schemes.
There is no transparent concrete targets for economic growth not is there in
place any internal monitoring and reporting regime to help measure progress.
Cambodia is very susceptible to market fluctuations relying as it does on an
economy that is predominately steeped in agriculture. Of this a significant
proportion is made up of peasant farmers working to production for subsistence
earnings. Therefore in view of this, the State apparatus (the government
itself), becomes the main vehicle of economic advancement and capital
accumulation. No doubt, Cambodia needs to open its doors to outside agencies
but there are those politicians who still choose to abuse their special powers
and privileges. As a result development projects proceed without any environment
impact assessment and there are many illicit commercial activities. In fact,
the timber trade, land and mining concessions are the most lucrative and
involve both illegal logging and the destruction of the environment.
Cambodia needs
sustainable development, not development for corruption, which is rapidly
destroying the natural resources of the country leaving it forever struggling
and underdeveloped and becoming more and more indebted to international
financial institutions. To make matters worse there is growing concern in the
country about the role that the International Financial Institutions are
playing in promoting loans to corruption country that they know are not
benefiting the country and which have not been, in some cases, constitutionally
endorsed by the Parliament. It is interesting to note here that while
opposition parties such as the Sam Rainsy Party, are facing immensely difficult
challenges to rid the system of its corruptible elements they are being
jeopardized by these very international institutions that claim to be promoting
legitimacy but, in effect, are themselves subverting the rule of law in
Cambodia by not lending in accordance to the statutes which have been drawn-up
with the specific purpose of preventing corruption, embezzlement and project
mismanagement!
It is very pitiful that
in this country the people still do not have access to basic needs such as
clean water, education and health. The people’s needs are still peripheral to
the power struggle and corruption of Cambodian politics. I cannot help but see
the contrast in Cambodian politics with those of developed societies where a
consensus has emerged between the various parties that the defeated parties
will relinquish control of the state apparatus and how so often politicians are
proving to their electorate that they are fit persons to govern or, in other
words, are "non-corruptible"! Cambodian people also need to feel
confident that their leaders are seriously working to improve their situation
and are not there simply to advance their own gains.
It is obvious that
Cambodian politics needs to change. Historically Cambodia’s political attitudes
and practices are not amenable to rapid change. Yet there have been some
surprising developments. In the past, I have sent a letter to both the World
Bank and the Asian Development Bank as a Member of the Cambodian Parliament,
encouraging International Financial Institutions to increase their involvement
in ensuring that loans were being used for the purpose for which they were intended.
I am hoping for a positive response. The World banks’ lending has been viewed
as a source of contention by other countries in the region as well but in spite
of these frustrations we continue to try to work together and use the valuable
work of organisations such as Transparency International to co-host meetings
and support opposition parties, such as mine, to progress the need to curb
corruption and ensure that governments such as Cambodia are held accountable
and that real reform, and not the recent example using the anti-corruption
legislation, can occur.
In summary:
It has been a nearly 2 decades since the first elections in 1993 and still
Cambodia has achieved very little. There is a growing popular awareness in
Cambodia today that direct action can lead to political change yet it is clear
that for political change to be meaningful and sustainable a simple change in
government is not enough. Cambodia needs to change a whole system of
governance that has been dictated to-date by the politics of corruption.
However, if this is to successfully occur that the international community
needs to also take responsibility. For example by ensuring that aid and loans
are first constitutionally endorsed and second are made accountable, that is,
with the purpose of benefiting the people of Cambodia and not usurped by
corrupt government members.
The most
obvious conclusion is that there is a great deal of corruption in Cambodia and
that most of it is not reported, investigated or punished. There are numerous
reasons for this. Many Cambodians do not report corruption because they do not
believe the government will do anything about it and because they are afraid
that they will be retaliated against for reporting it. In addition, the
patronage system within the civil service makes it very difficult for
government officials to report corruption without risking their careers. In
fact, many civil servants salaries are still too low to support a family, which
results in a system where many government employees supplement their income
through low-level corruption. Another problem is that the government’s position
appears to be rhetorical rather than realistic. Corruption may be investigated
if it is brought to the attention of the government and if the government sees
it is attached to a political gain. Finally, perhaps the biggest problem is
that too many people profit from corruption and too few are punished—the ratio
of risk to reward is weighted too heavily in favor of the people who profit
from corruption. While a study of anti-corruption mechanisms should look into
aspects such as the institutional mechanisms, a rough overview of the legal
mechanisms and real actions taken, as above, may be enough to suggest that the
problem is more one of a lack of seriousness and real political will rather
than the mechanisms themselves.
Even
without the Anti-Corruption Law, the existing legislation plus other
sector-based legislation such as the Tax Law, Land Law, Education Law, Forestry
Law, Fishery Law, and Labor Law, all of which criminalize acts of corruption,
can be used to address corruption at least to some extent. But the absence of
real prosecution and punishment amid rampant corruption in the country makes
the government’s political will highly questionable and hence it will never go
further without being pressured by serious and sustained demand.
Out of
this conclusion Pact has been working hard over the years with its local
partners on public awareness-raising on the costs of corruption and their
impact on people’s daily lives, generating more and more public demand for the
passage of the long-awaited Anti-Corruption Law, as in the case of the
so-called Million Signature Campaign in 2008, just before the general election
taking place. The draft Anti-Corruption Law is likely to be passed by the
National Assembly by the end of the first half of this year. However, as nobody
has had access to the draft so far, nobody knows what the law will be. Anyway,
having the law enacted will at least strengthen the message that corruption
must be addressed and it should not be tolerated anymore. It is likely that the
legislation may be used at the beginning to catch just small fish. But the
scope of its enforcement could be expanded over time, since fighting corruption
is definitely a long-term. In the meantime, for the law to be considerably
useful, the issue of conflict of interest must also be seriously and widely
addressed.
Civil
society, political parties, the private sector and donors could help with
long-term campaigning. The government’s current reactive approach to corruption
appears to be driven by several factors, including: 1) lack of proven political
will but strong political rhetoric; 2) lack of staff; 3) lack of training; and,
4) lack of funding. While the donor and civil society community probably cannot
help with the lack of political will, it could help alleviate the other
limiting factors. Assistance might include: 1) training to prosecutors and
investigating judges on the prosecution of existing corruption-related crimes;
2) training to police on investigating corruption-related crimes; 3) financial
support for corruption investigations, like paying for transportation expenses,
office equipment, etc.; 4) providing sub-grants and technical assistance to
local organizations that work on corruption at the national and local levels;
5) establishing a coalition that has a strong voice to demand more action be
taken by government to address corruption; 6) supporting political parties to
make anti-corruption a major political issue; 7) providing education with the
private sector on corporate social responsibility; 8) demanding further
progress on administrative reform; and last but not least, 9) establishing a
freedom of information law. Of course, to be successful, support will have to
be accompanied by evidence of commitment to address corruption.
As
citizens of the Kingdom of Cambodia,
we are concerned about the threat that corruption poses to the stability and
future of our country.
We acknowledge
that corruption:
· Is one of the biggest challenges
facing the future development of Cambodia
· Affects every individual in Cambodia
· Hurts the economy by preventing the
growth of businesses and creating obstacles for potential investors
· Endangers basic democratic values
· Is a transnational
phenomenon that affects all societies and economies
· Cannot be blamed on any one person or
thing
Reducing corruption is a battle that can be won over time,
and we feel that is the responsibility of every Cambodian to fight for a cleaner and more prosperous country. A comprehensive
and non-partisan approach is required to prevent and combat corruption
effectively.
We welcome the RGC’s commitment in the Rectangular Strategy
for Development to fighting corruption and passing an international standard
anti-corruption law. We also welcome the RGC’s commitment to increased
transparency and administrative reforms within the public sector.
We give our
support to the following ways of reducing corruption:
· An anti-corruption law that contains
penalties for corrupt activities and clear definitions
· The establishment of an independent
body to investigate and prosecute acts of corruption
· Public involvement in the prevention
and enforcement efforts
· Provide protection for people who
provide information in good faith to authorities about an act of corruption
As
a citizen of Cambodia we commit to do our part in fighting
corruption so that our country will prosper and the children of Cambodia will have a brighter future.
Abstract: Corruption undermines the legitimacy of political institutions and
Cambodia is a clear example where this has occurred. Particularly prior to
1993, as a result of its corrupt policies the government was less able to rely
on the cooperation and the support of the public. This led the government to
use force and coercive tactics to maintain order. The resulting violence and
political instability hindered political development; the consequences of which
were clearly visible today in the malaise afflicting Cambodian society and the
failed economics of the country.
After the democratic
elections were held under the mandate of United Nation in 1993 in Cambodia, it
was clear that there was going to be a great deal of work necessary if the
objectives agreed on were going to be achieved. It was, in particular, an
important time for the international community to work seriously together to
help put in place a governing system based on democratic principles and where
the issues with corruption and weak institutions, such as the parliament, the
justice system and so forth, would be addressed.
After seventeen years of
discussion and politically motivated procrastination from the time when the
first draft of the anti-corruption law was proposed by myself, with the support
of some colleague’s members of Parliament in 1994, Cambodia’s Parliament under
domination of the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) finally passed their own
version of the anti-corruption law on Thursday March 11, 2010. Defying many
national and international voices demanding an open consultation and debate on
the draft, the National Assembly voted hastily in favour of this bill, which
was drafted in secret. The manner in which the ruling party drafted and pushed
the bill through the parliament now raises legitimate concerns regarding how it
will be used. But also the very drafting of the anti-corruption law gives
enough reason to voice concern. The new anti-corruption law has produced an
instrument which is weak and dangerous simultaneously: Weak as an instrument to
fight against corruption and provide for a predictable and consistent rule of
law; and dangerous, as a political tool which can serve the narcissistic
individual interests of those who concentrate power in their hands.
The damage caused by
corruption in Cambodia has been immense. According to a US 2004 AID study,
corruption costs Cambodia between US $300 million and $500 million in revenue
every year. On the other hand a survey by the Economic Institute of Cambodia of
2005 made clear, that the private sector paid bribes to public officials in 2005
amounting to US $330 million, an amount which was “2.5 times higher than that
of official payment” and “represented also about 50percent of the total
government budget revenue in 2005.”
The Cambodian people
themselves are absolutely aware of the situation and demanded action as also
did the international donors themselves. In May 2006, a petition of over 1
million Cambodian citizens was presented to the National Assembly calling on
the assembly to urgently enact the anti-corruption law. According to Transparency
International, 72 percent of the Cambodians reported in 2007 paying a bribe to
obtain a public service position with government which made the situation worst
in the sense that it affected the whole Asia-Pacific region. Yet to-date there
have been few, if any, suspected state official punished over corruption
allegations.
It was into this turmoil
that the Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) felt it had to speak out and express its
serious concern about the manner in which the recent anti-corruption bill was drafted.
Like a number of numerous other examples, the law making procedure in Cambodia
does not meet even the minimum expectations of what would be considered
acceptable parliamentarian work standards. Five days ahead of the debate on the
new anti-corruption bill, the SRP Parliamentarians received a fundamentally
changed, new draft, the contents of which remained a closely guarded secret. In
the final debate all proposals of the opposition were simply ignored. The lack
of adherence to strict protocol procedures meant that not only elected
representatives of the people of Cambodia had been, in effect, excluded from
the law–making process, but also the public debate.
IV Conclusions
Corruption is
perceived, above all, as abuse of power. Respondents saw it as pervasive, a
permanent part of Cambodian life; it implies giver/taker co-operation; it has
some social utility. Teachers are perceived as the most corrupt (with the
effects one can imagine), closely followed by local officials and police.
The
main two perceived causes are officials’ low salaries and high officials’ greed
for power and its trappings: they work as a dual mechanism, top-to-bottom and
back. But people’s ignorance of corruption’s damages and their readiness to
give officials “a little gift” are important too.
There
is no civil service culture for fighting against corruption: very few check the
costs of Government services. Even less ask for written receipts from
officials. Perception of human rights is rather vague. Most Cambodians just think
about their own lives, and do not care or want to help people around them.
All
recognize the damage corruption does to Cambodian society; but the great
majority thinks corruption will always exist. However, interviewees also seem
to have some hope for the future, resting mostly on a rather unlikely
combination of vast raises of officials’ salaries, a strongly enforced
anticorruption law, and foreign pressures.
Nearly
half the sample feels they should do something against corruption. And about a
quarter feel the same, but say it is a difficult activity. And, somehow
contradictorily, two thirds of the sample don’t want to have anything to do
with politics. Moreover, most are palpably afraid.
Any
viable anti-corruption initiative must address those conflicting feelings and
motivations. Obviously, it will take a long time, it will have to proceed very
gradually, and it cannot ignore the two main socio-cultural obstacles: lack of
solidarity, and fear.
The
only activity a limited majority feels they could do is phone to a radio show.
Even exhorting friends and family is considered dangerous by a majority. But
these are both activities that should be encouraged – if possible, focusing on
specific cases which show some promise of results. The other focus should be
citizens’ rights.
A positive note is that
awareness of corruption-related matters is growing. It could be developed –
through appropriate campaigns - into an awareness of what are the right costs
of the most common Govt services, and into a more widespread habit of asking
for receipt when asked for money.
