8/17/2019 Individual Security

1/3

THE SAFETY OF A PERSON IN A SOCIETY RULED BY CORRUPT

PEOPLE

We are all familiar with the wrong impact of corruption in distorting markets andcompetition, corroding the integrity of the private sector, ruining the investment

climate, eroding the effectiveness of development, breeding cynicism among citizens,

damaging governmental legitimacy and generally undermining the quality of 

governance.

In this essay I shall focus on the devastating impact of corruption through another set

of lenses, those of peace and security. To the extent that by security! we mean

human security! " everything that goes to ensuring the basic safety and well#being of 

individuals in our societies " we know how much this is tied up with the quality of 

 basic governance, including respect for the rule of law, and with the effective

operation of a state!s economy.

$ocieties made lawless by corruption are not safe for most people to live in%

transnational criminal organizations, bribing their way across borders, generate

despair by their trafficking in drugs, weapons and people% economies made hopelessly

inefficient by corruption are those where continued poverty is guaranteed for all those

who can!t manipulate the system% diversion of government funds away from

expenditure on social sectors like education and health is a direct and ma&or 

contributor to poverty and human misery% and the diversion of development funds to

corrupt individuals, and their systematic misappropriation by kleptocratic

governments, also shamefully reinforce poverty and human insecurity generally.

'ut what I want to focus in my essey is a security dimension that is less often

discussed( the impact of corruption on human security in the broad sense, on  state

security in the traditional, narrower sense " what is necessary to stop sovereign states

disintegrating through internal conflict, to stop them being torn apart by external

attack, or to enable them to recover from catastrophic violence.

There are a number of things that can I think usefully be said about the direct

contribution of corruption to undermining peace " to making not &ust individuals but

whole states insecure, or much less secure than they would otherwise be. )et me take

some areas in particular( the role of corruption in contributing to civil conflict andcorruption in the &ustice system. *ll of them I will try to highlight further, in much

more detail as follows(

Corruption and Civil Conflict

The causes of violent internal conflict are as many and varied as the conflicts

themselves, and generalizations here are always dangerous. +overty by itself rarely

generates violent reaction, and for economic or political grievance " including

discontent with systematic stealing and misappropriation of state funds by corrupt

governments " to become explosive, this usually has to be linked to strong

identification with a group that has suffered longstanding discrimination or marginalisation. 'ut it is difficult to believe that the corrupt and inequitable

8/17/2019 Individual Security

2/3

distribution of wealth and welfare has not played a part in stimulating many of the

civil conflicts " driven by grievance, greed or both " that have had erupted over the

decades, not least in resource#rich countries.

*n easier &udgement to make than any about motivation is that corruption has

undoubtedly  facilitated much of the most savage civil conflict that we have seen.

What makes most such wars both possible, and really lethal, is the huge and stilllargely unchecked worldwide spread of small arms and light weapons( and corrupt

transactions, involving border smuggling and diversions of material, are the norm in

this areal, massively compounding the negative impact of irresponsible trading and

weak export controls.

The money to buy such weapons, or to initiate and sustain violent conflict in other 

ways, often comes from the theft or misuse of natural resources, West and entral

*frican blood diamonds being the best known example. *nd financing ma&or civil

conflict from the proceeds of drug, contraband or human trafficking has long been a

 phenomenon in countries from olombia to the 'alkans, the former $oviet -nion and

 beyond.

Corruption in t! "u#tic! #$#t!%

This is a well#known sub&ect by all of us. omanians/ confidence in public institutions

is low, and corruption is viewed as an endemic phenomenon. oncerning the &udicial

system, its integrity sustains its credibility which, in turn, fuels people/s confidence in

the &udiciary.

onfidence in public institutions is primarily built on the  perceived fairness of 

services and integrity of personnel. In forming this perception, people rely on their 

own experiences related to corruption or on outside reports on corruption.

There is a ma&or discrepancy between the perceived scope of corruption in the &udicial

system and people/s experience in this respect. $ometimes money was offered from

lawyers to magistrates, but without proof that it was actually accepted. 0ore often

than not, bribes were offered in exchange for speeding up procedures and for the

assignment of certain cases to certain magistrates. 0ost of those who knew about

corruption misdeeds by &udicial personnel did not report them because of the

complicated procedures that would ensue or due to the belief that nothing would

happen 1people distrust the criminal prosecution bodies2. *part from corruption,

 people were dissatisfied with the quality and length of proceedings, characterised by

magistrate incompatibility cases and instances of procedural abuse. The typology of 

complaints prompts us to believe that the general public often mistakes proceduralerrors and negligence for corruption misdeeds.

*nother example, is that the general public perceives the phrase 3corruption in the

 &udicial system3 to refer exclusively to bribes taken by &udges and, possibly, by

 prosecutors. The purpose of my essey4namely the identification of vulnerable areas

which affect the organisation and functioning of a system designed precisely to

 protect citizens/ rights and to formulate suggestions for an adequate &udicial anti#

corruption policy4requires a comprehensive analysis of corruption in this system.

This is why on the one hand, we cannot overlook other categories of personnel

working in the system, and on the other hand we must also examine bribe cases

initiated by citizens 1because the very act of offering money is an act of corruption in

itself, regardless of whether the public agent accepts it or not2.

5

8/17/2019 Individual Security

3/3

Corruption is a threat to democracy, the rule of law and human rights. It undermines

the principles of good governance, social equity and &ustice. It distorts competition,

 prevents economic development and the stability of democratic institutions and the

moral foundation of society. The social costs of corruption manifest in the amounts of 

money spent perpetrating the misdeeds, the expenses incurred through its

investigation, the undermining of public confidence and the additional corruptiongenerated thereby 1the formation of corruption chains2.

'y breaking rules, duties and morality, corruption causes societal and community

disintegration in that it negatively affects responsibility and social transparency, and

wears away social trust. It leads to the loss of the integrity of individuals, who must in

turn lie and apply double standards.

 Judicial corruption affects not only the integrity of &udicial professionals, but also the

system as a whole. It encroaches on the impartiality that ought to define magistrate

duties and, in general, on responsibility at all levels. The high costs and severe effects

entailed by &udicial corruption, both directly and indirectly, may be grouped as

follows(

 For the judicial system, corruption affects the very independence of the system(it affects the functioning capacity: &ustice becomes private 1preferential2, or inefficient

1which is tantamount to in&ustice2. The overall system becomes unpredictable and

insecure%

 political agents find self-protection mechanisms: in high#level corruption cases, there

will be attempts to bribe magistrates, to meddle with their work or to interfere with

their career%

the quality of services decreases: once the personnel derive extra benefits from giving

 preferential services, they no longer remain interested in improving the quality of 

their services%

the number of corruption cases pending in courts increases:  the extent to which

 professional bodies combat corruption will cause investigations to be more frequent.

 For judicial personnel,  corruption affects their integrity, professionalism and

accountability and may cause(

a decrease in professionalism and quality of work: &udicial personnel will no longer 

interested in improving their professional skills as long as the services they have

already been providing ensure additional incomes%

corruption among co-workers:  the illegal, yet lucrative conduct will be replicated

unless policies are created to prevent it. It causes &ustice to become subdued%

 perpetuation of unfair practices over time: unpunished corruption misdeeds are an

incentive for &udicial personnel to continue to carry on this type of conduct%

a decline in courage:  failure to punish corruption and the perpetuation of suchmisdeeds weaken &udicial personnel/s confidence in reforming the system, discourage

employees from reporting them and invite pessimism.

In conclu#ion, this essey show us the gravity of corruption acts in a society ruled by

unprepared persons who struggle to obtain their own advantages.

If each of us will have the sense of responsability for their actions, the society where

we live will be more evolved, more structureted.

6