29 September 2022 12:55 am Views - 690
The focus on the politicization of corruption or the corruptionization of political-administrative, external regulation is a useful framework for analyzing this issue in the country today
It is noteworthy that the most popular definition is the one promoted by Transparency International and the World Bank which states that corruption is “the abuse of entrusted power for private benefits or gains” (transparency international) This definition is influenced by non-moralistic classic concepts such as well as by the historical endeavour of philosophy to search for the causes and origins of corruption. Even though the efforts to define corruption from general to specific settings are diverse, one may argue that those definitions have little to do with current anti-corruption efforts since at the end of the day.
And government mechanisms should be included, regulative measures to increase government transparency; initiatives to strengthen the working with government institutions, and public awareness campaigns to inform, and encourage the public to see and prove corruption as a major political issue in the country
According to those definitions, damage caused by corrupt practices in Sri Lanka is well known, as well as corruption has eroded the rule of law and the stability of democratic institutions in the country last couple of decades, breaching fundamental rights and freedoms and understanding the trust and confidence of citizens in the fairness and impartiality of public administration, also, it has undermined the business climate, damaged domestic and foreign investment, wasted economic resources and hampered economic growth, thus threatening the very objectives of peace, democracy and property in the country last a few decades.
It seems that the catch-all capacity of corruption is to be blamed for every problematic aspect of social, economic and political life, which has made the issue central to the politics in the country. There is unfortunately no space available here to undertake a broader critique of the methodological approaches that international institutions engaged in state-building, have taken towards corruption. The lack of proof or analysis needed to substantiate international institutional assertions that combating corruption must be the central focus of their policy-making and capacity-building role reflects the fact that the issue seems to be one of the common senses.
One other consequence of the anti-corruption campaign and holding country politicians to the highest standards of good governess is held to be cleansing of the political system in the country. And there is another reason why holding to this principle, however difficult, is so important to Sri Lanka’s future
Over the last ten years, a high international profile has been given to the development and implementation of an internationally coordinated anti-corruption strategy in the country. This experience allows anti-corruption strategy, the good governance agenda informing it, and international community responses to the problem of corruption, especially in relation to public awareness and institution-building, and the question arising from this experience.
One other consequence of the anti-corruption campaign and holding country politicians to the highest standards of good governess is held to be cleansing of the political system in the country. And there is another reason why holding to this principle, however difficult, is so important to Sri Lanka’s future. After every election the winning political parties had considered whom, they choose for high government positions. Perhaps the fact that politician’s immunity is now severely limited and that we have held to the principle of resignation in the case of criminal indictment will cause political parties to think twice about putting forward for high office individuals who have a questionable past or close connection with the criminal group in the country.
The discussion of corruption in Sri Lanka has been highlighted as a political question of good governess through the assertion of a link between the nationalist political leadership and criminal elements involved in tax and customs circumvention. Though there were many cases reported, where corruption claims have been investigated, yet, there has been relatively little evidence of the involvement of leading political parties.
From the available evidence, the political ties to corruption, assumed by the international community such as IMF, policymakers developing large-scale anti-corruption initiatives, are yet to be conclusively established, as well as an anti-corruption strategy would be useful in terms of legitimizing international regulatory power and reposting this power in the depoliticized administrative system for a long-lasting disaster of the country.
It would seem that there are undoubtedly cases of political representatives acting corruptly, there is not much evidence in the country in this regard, and it’s different from any other western nation, the problem is any way exceptional, especially since detailed investigative evidence is scarce, and disturbingly so, for a policy issue which is held to assume such central importance to the country future. Also, the anti-corruption strategy in the country under the mechanisms of good governance has meant that the international focus of resources needs to be centred on dealing with corruption as part of the drive against major cases.
And government mechanisms should be included, regulative measures to increase government transparency; initiatives to strengthen the working with government institutions, and public awareness campaigns to inform, and encourage the public to see and prove corruption as a major political issue in the country.
The focus on the politicization of corruption or the corruptionization of political-administrative, external regulation is a useful framework for analyzing this issue in the country today.