In February, the annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for 2017 was released by Transparency International, the global civil society organisation leading the charge against corruption. Like its name implies, the CPI tracks perceptions of corruption worldwide, specifically in a country’s public sector.
From the outset, Sri Lanka appears to have made some progress. Of the total 180 countries—ranked from least to most perceived corruption—Sri Lanka has moved up four places this year, to 91st place, since its ranking of 95th in 2016. As well, Sri Lanka’s raw point score—the index uses a point scale of zero to 100, where zero is highly corrupt and 100 is very clean—has seemingly improved as well, going from 36 points in 2016 to 38 this year.
Yet at a press conference organised by Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) to announce the CPI’s release, TISL Executive Director Asoke Obeyesekere cautioned those in attendance against complacency or satisfaction with Sri Lanka’s current standing.
“The thing that I would highlight right from the outset is the fact that for any change in score to be considered significant, it requires typically a change of six points. That is a global measure. But here we have seen a two point increase, which is illustrative of the fact that while the score has improved, it has improved very slowly, and the improvement is only fair at best,” he said.
|
More than two-thirds of countries scored below 50 this year. Sri Lanka, with a score of 38, shared the 91st ranking with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Guyana, and Timor Leste. Its score fell below the international average of 43, and below the Asia-Pacific regional average of 44. And compared to other SAARC member countries, Sri Lanka ranks third with a score of 38, following Bhutan with a score of 67 and India with a score of 40.
Perception of Corruption is Stagnant
Speaking to media personnel in attendance, Obeyesekere explained that not only did Sri Lanka make no significant progress from last year to this year, but the country also failed to show any significant improvement in its CPI score over each of the past five years.
“A close analysis of Sri Lanka’s positioning in the CPI from 2012 to 2017 shows that despite institutional strengthening of anti-corruption agencies following the 19th amendment, consistent failure in implementation has led to very limited progress,” he said.
“What this highlights is the fact that the perception of public sector corruption here is stagnant.”
The reason for this stagnancy, according to Obeyesekere, is that everyday engagement with the government on every level is still an issue for so many people.
“We see that various agencies have been strengthened. But has there really been much difference in the way in which implementation occurs?”, he asked rhetorically.
“Citizens still face corruption when trying to avail of essential public services, ranging from waste collection to school enrollment. Therefore, the limited change in the perception of public sector corruption reflects the limited change experienced by people in their everyday encounters with the state.”
Pitfalls to Progress
Obeyesekere provided the yet-to-be-implemented National Audit Bill—which is intended to strengthen the capacity of Parliament to safeguard public funds and ensure their proper utilisation, as well as strengthen the Auditor General’s power to ensure the aforementioned safeguarding and utilisation—as an example. The delays in its passage, he said, are illustrative of perceived corruption in the legislative arena specifically. He added that, in its current state, the Bill leaves one asking many questions that have still gone unanswered.
“We have recently been told that the cabinet has approved the National Audit Bill. But the important thing to see above all else is, does the Auditor General still have the power of surcharge?”
He said that this will only be revealed when the Bill is tabled in Parliament, and if by that point the surcharge provisions applying to the Auditor General’s jurisdiction have been watered down, “Then that is very concerning.”
Obeyesekere also explained how the handling of the Open Government Partnership’s National Action Plan, which the Cabinet of Ministers approved in October of 2016, has led to perceptions of public sector corruption.
“More than a year ago the cabinet passed an open government plan, which included removing all of the secrecy provisions and asset declarations so that the public can access and share asset declarations,” he said.
But, he continued, in terms of rights to information, penalties still abound—from a Rs. 2,000 fine up to two years of rigorous imprisonment—for those who distribute certainly publicly-accessible government information between one and other.
“Where have the changes been on things like that, particularly given the fact that Cabinet has approved a plan to actually change that?”
Potential for Improvement?
Unfortunately, Obeyesekere of TISL is hardly optimistic that things will improve any time soon. He said that he and his organisation were hopeful that perceptions of public corruption would improve after the change of government in 2015, but that they have since been let down.
“The data from 2012 to 2017 shows that despite the new government, we’re always living in the same ballpark,” he said in a subsequent interview.
“Even after the change of government, all forms of corruption discourse have been around political agendas. There has been no citizen-driven outcome for anti-corruption.”
He reiterated that if the country wants to better the perceptions of its public sector corruption, and improve its ranking by a significant margin in the years to come, the government must ensure that issues of corruption faced by citizens in their day to day lives must be addressed.
And civil society, he said, must be the voice for those who want to air their grievances but may not have the means.
Obeyesekere pointed to the issue of expedited passport issuance as a good example of the way the public sector in the country did something to minimize corruption and ensure a citizen-driven outcome. This, he said, could be a model for other processes in the country to follow in order to lessen the perception of corruption surrounding them.
According to Obeyesekere, it used to be that if one wanted his passport issued in an expedited manner, he would be able to simply bribe someone at the Immigration Department. But now, the informal bribing has been regulated; one can simply pay a higher fee to get their passport issued in a day.
“Here, you now have a standardised process that is citizen-facing, with a citizen-driven outcome. By legitimizing the system, you’ve combated corruption in bribing and allowed the process to come out of the shadows.”
Concluding the interview, Obeyesekere emphasized that addressing perceptions of corruption in the public sector will also require a willingness to address the need to reform the public sector itself.
“If you’re not willing to reform the public sector,” he asked, “then how are you going to fix the corruption shrouding it?”
Sri Lanka ranks in the lower half of all countries in terms of public sector corruption.
Add new comment