Oped»
Second honours
NOV 21 - The coalition government headed by Madhav Kumar Nepal is straining to maintain its existence and moral legitimacy. The government is under attack both internally and externally. Internally, it has failed to discipline its ministers who are known for throwing tantrums periodically. Externally, the Maoists are hell-bent on bringing it down. The prime minister must be facing hard times after the UN Secretary-General spoke in favour of a government of national unity.
The moral legitimacy of the government has once again been put to a severe test by the recent publication (Nov. 17) of the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) by Berlin-based Transparency International (TI), an INGO dedicated to fighting corruption on a global scale. In its annual listing of corrupt countries, TI has ranked Nepal in the 143rd position in a list of 180 countries. Earlier in 2008, Nepal was at number 121 in a list of 180 countries. In South Asia, Afghanistan is the worst offender. In fact, it is second from the bottom which is occupied by Somalia. The situation in Nepal is not comparable to the situation in Afghanistan. However, Nepal may have to confront an Afghanistan-like situation sooner or later — donors putting anti-corruption conditionalities for aid money.
The report released by TI states that Malaysia, Nepal, the Maldives and Afghanistan have a perceptible decline in CPI scores, representing worsening levels of perceived corruption, among countries in the Asia-Pacific region. The report says, “Despite the fact that Nepal replaced its centuries-old monarchy with a federal republic, drafted a constitution and held elections in the past year — all relatively peacefully — corruption is still perceived to be a major concern. Its poor legal framework and weak law enforcement mechanism create huge opportunities for corruption to flourish.”
Since the enlisting of Nepal in 2004, this year’s result puts Nepal at the bottom of the scale. The CPI, scored on a scale from zero to 10, is designed to measure the extent of corruption in the public sector as perceived by experts. The lower the score, the higher the degree of corruption in that country and vice versa. Nepal’s score for 2009 has been computed at 2.3. Countries scoring less than 3 out of 10 are regarded as corruption rampant countries. This is the lowest score for Nepal since it got listed in 2004 (see table). The fall in the CPI score from 2.7 in 2008 to 2.3 in 2009, or by 0.4, is taken as a significant drop, implying an increased level of corruption in Nepal. As a rule of thumb, a change in the CPI score by ± 0.3 is enough to predict significant changes in the level of corruption perception in a country.
Nepal’s score is not only low, the sharp dive reflects a crisis of governance and mismanagement in Nepal. News reports of “all-party corruption” or “corruption by consensus” are being published — an indication of how corruption has been institutionalized at the political level in a debilitating manner. The news must have come as a shock to the government of Madhav Kumar Nepal whose fate is now hanging on the health condition of G.P. Koirala who is undergoing treatment in Singapore.
When there was some marginal improvement in the CPI score from 2.5 in 2007 to 2.7 in 2008, Nepal’s anti-corruption agency, the CIAA, was quick to blow its own trumpet. The CIAA claimed that the improvement was due to its activeness. Now, with the index plunging by 0.4, there is no one to take the blame except the beleaguered prime minister.
For a government that is teetering on the brink, it may not matter much what Nepal’s CPI score is. But it does project the image of Prime Minister Nepal to the outside community. It will have a direct impact on foreign trade, foreign investment and the economy in general. The government may defend itself by saying that the survey was done before the present administration came to power, and that it cannot be held responsible for the disastrous score. However, the score reflects the image of Nepal as of Nov. 17, 2009. Corruption perception is basically a snapshot of the country for that particular year under review.
Although the CPI methodology mentions that the CPI scores for one year are not comparable with another year, unless the data sources are consistent, it has been conventional for the people to compare the CPI scores at various points of time. The accompanying table lists the CPI scores for Nepal and neighbouring countries. Some interesting trends do emerge from the table. Albeit declining, Bhutan with a score of 5 is the cleanest country in South Asia. Actually, it is amazing to see how Bhutan, in spite of a near autocratic monarchy, is able to project itself as a clean country.
It is interesting to observe how China and India are in a kind of neck-to-neck competition in relation to the corruption problem. Our giant neighbours both have similar economic growth rates and are vying for foreign investment. Obviously, Afghanistan is at the bottom of the scale due to its political instability and conflict situation. Corruption in Afghanistan is linked with the opium trade, warlordism and donor money. Bangladesh, which once used to be at the bottom of the scale, is now gradually improving its image. Sri Lanka is in a downward trend due to its internal conflict. By and large, except for Bhutan, the corruption situation in South Asia is virtually comparable. After all, we are neighbours.
nama@wlink.com.np
Headlines
Advertisements
