- Why the Transparency International report hurt the PTI so much
AT PENPOINT
The Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf’s anger at Transparency International for reporting that Pakistan has gone down three places on its Corruption Index is understandable. After its first year in office, a third party was saying that it had not achieved any fulfilment of its signature slogan, the ending of corruption. It is true that the TI report is based on the collating of survey data, and thus may not be necessarily true, but it is also true that if there had been an actual decrease in corruption, it would have been reflected in perceptions. True, Pakistan will be perceived as more corrupt than it is for some time to come, but if corruption had come down, it would get noticed.
Actually, the TI Report bears out the PTI thesis, that reducing corruption would mean improving governance. Governance has not improved, and in fact, may well have worsened. Inflation, joblessness, devaluation of currency, low growth, tariff hikes, are all evils to which the common man has become inured by habit, but shortages of first wheat, then sugar and other goods, are new or have been forgotten. Add to this a rash of breakdowns in law and order, and the PTI’s impression has been poor. The impression of incompetence carries the sneaking implication that corruption is actually a good thing, and that the PML(N) and the PPP were right to allow it. However, Transparency International is saying that corruption is worse, if anything, and the PTI’s poor governance is not the result of an absence of corruption, but as it is corrupt, a truly non-corrupt government would improve governance.
It might be take longer for all its wonderful measures to take effect, but the PTI is bound by the five-year election cycle. If it cannot show progress and honesty of purpose on corruption by the next election, it will be on a sticky wicket indeed
The basic problem is thus not so much corruption, as poor governance. The PTI has made two transitions, the latter proving to be a trap. The first was to identify itself with the fight against corruption. The second was to blame this corruption (which had not been proven) on past rulers. That they had not done a good job of governance was evident enough, but that their corruption was responsible for this was perhaps a step too far. This became clear when the previous rulers were nabbed by the National Accountability Bureau, the PTI’s political opponents were being arrested. In many cases, the proverbial key was also thrown away, with the result that many are still behind bars.
The PTI is bound to rebut both that corruption is conducive to good governance, and that it is corrupt. If it was to argue that its poor governance was proof of its honesty, its admission of poor governance would sink it. If it is merely more of the same, what is its point, apart from its leader’s ambition to find a career after cricket?
The Transparency International report mentions one problem that has been solved nowhere, and which the PTI seems to have carried over from its engagement in electoral politics, that of campaign finance. Campaign finance is multiply insidious, for it means that decision-makers are surrounded by funny money. The funny part comes when campaign contributors realise that their man has won. They assume that they have got the keys to the kingdom. The problem is further enhanced because the executive power can also make the laws. Once money begins to float around, then politicians also try to siphon off some for themselves. The next step is to raise money for themselves directly, with the campaign only being an excuse.
Politicians are thus corrupted by the need to fight elections. The USA has set a two-term limit for Presidents, but none for legislators. However, they don’t necessarily work. The institution of presidential libraries means that presidents have a motive to raise money during their final term. Similarly, if a senator or representative has any money left over from his previous campaign, he can either push it forward to his next campaign, or keep it for himself if he announces he is retiring.
Campaign finance is the chink in the armour of democracy, and almost no model solves the problems it poses. It has given rise to a new breed of ‘investors’ who put up the money for an election, and if their party wins, recoup their investment with a handsome profit.
This brings up the means of profiting by corruption, which involves ensuring bureaucrats’ obedience by allowing them to extract bribes from the common man. The PTI has gone after a limited number of bureaucrats, to a chorus of squawks of protest from all. As a result, the NAB law has been amended by Ordinance, to remove blame from anyone who was merely involved procedurally. No one mentions that all instances of corruption involve a bureaucrat signing off. Also, bureaucrats who sign off on something improper on a politicians’ say-so are also ready to sign off if an interested party pays up. Then there is the use of having officials know that you will determine whether they will remain in office. It has extended to getting criminals released. Of course, the police official doing the releasing does not expect to be asked why egregious recidivists are released. They paid up, naturally, but questions can only be asked by those who get no one released.
One of the objections elected representatives make is that bureaucrats do each other favours. PTI legislators do not ask that this stop; but that they be allowed the join the gravy train. Of course, the motive is not entirely ignoble. It is important for one’s future election prospects to ensure that friends are not arrested, but that enemies are. Of course, some legislators then take money from the police to let them stay in office. The PTI seems to be following in the path of preceding parties in wishing to exercise local control.
Apart from bureaucrats, businessmen have an important role in corruption, for they are the ones who are the accomplices of federal taxmen. Whether it is the trader who pays a bribe so that he can declare a lower income or an importer who pays a bribe to get a consignment released, they are the ones who place temptation in the way. It will be impossible to prosecute taxation officials if businessmen do not have their taxation matters subject to NAB.
The PTI has presided over the corrupting of NAB. If the government uses NAB to pick off political opponents, NAB officials will begin to engage in private enterprise. That may have already occurred in the case of businessmen: not the ones being prosecuted, but the ones who have bought immunity from prosecution.
Transparency International Pakistan has offered a clarification saying that it had no role in preparing the report, which was done by headquarters, and the report did not say corruption had increased. At the same time, it did not say that corruption had decreased, which the PTI must have really wanted. It might take longer for all its wonderful measures to take effect, but the PTI is bound by the five-year election cycle. If it cannot show progress and honesty of purpose on corruption by the next election, it will be on a sticky wicket indeed.
