By Transparency International.
Summary:
Corruption remains a substantial obstacle for Pakistan where it is still perceived to be widespread and systemic. Petty corruption in the form of bribery is prevalent in law enforcement, procurement and the provision of public services. The judiciary is not seen as independent and considered to be shielding corrupt political practices from prosecution.
Various efforts over the past years have tried to develop institutional mechanisms to address these problems. A National Anti-Corruption Strategy, which was developed in 2002, offers a comprehensive plan for tackling corruption. The executing agency, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), is endowed with comprehensive powers to investigate and prosecute cases. However, a lack of political will, coupled with the perceived co-option of the judiciary and the arbitrariness of many anti-corruption proceedings, are major obstacles in the fight against corruption.
Anti-corruption proceedings have long been suspected of being skewed. They are mainly directed against members of the political opposition and minor civil servants while leaving the conduct of military officials outside scrutiny. Moreover, the National Reconciliation Ordinance of October 2007 has granted blanket immunity for past corrupt actions, shielding many public officials and members of the government from prosecution. The dismissal of members of the Supreme Court, including Chief Justice Chaudhry, has led to violent civil unrest and further shaken the public’s trust in the judiciary to undertake anti-corruption prosecution.
Part 1: Overview of Corruption in Pakistan
Introduction: Recent political history
Political turbulence and insecurity have dominated Pakistan over the last 50 years, marked by frequent regime changes and unrest. Between 1990 and 1999, four different democratically-elected governments held power under the same two political leaders. Each administration was either dismissed or overturned, often as a result of corruption charges and allegations of power misuse. Benazir Bhutto of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) first came to power in August 1990 but later was dismissed.
Her government was replaced by Nawaz Sharif and his Islamic Democratic Alliance (IJI) party in April 1993. After the resignation of both the president and the prime minister, and an interim government, elections were held, which resulted in a second term for Bhutto and the PPP. Her government was again dismissed in November 1996. Sharif returned as prime minister but this time representing the Pakistan Muslim League party (PML).
This era of democratic government ended in October 1999 following a military coup led by General Pervez Musharraf. After declaring himself the chief executive, the Supreme Court validated Musharraf’s claim to the presidency in May 2000. In 2002 a parliamentary election returned civilian rule, yet the Musharraf presidency was extended for another five years.
During the military government, former Prime Minister Bhutto was indicted and convicted on corruption charges at home (in April 1999) and abroad (in Switzerland in July 2003). Former Prime Minister Sharif was also tried and sentenced for acts of terrorism in April 2000 although he was eventually pardoned and went into exile.
Against this backdrop, the political situation in Pakistan deteriorated. A devastating earthquake in 2005 in the Pakistan-administered Kashmir region greatly strained the government. In March 2007, further turbulence arose after the dismissal of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry for alleged misuse of office.
Violence in the northern province of Waziristan and in the province of Balochistan in the south served another blow to national unity. After a period of civil unrest, Musharraf was re-elected to the presidency in October 2007, declaring a state of emergency and suspending the constitution within a month of taking office.
Although parliamentary elections were to take place in 2007, they were first postponed because of worries of instability and later as a result of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007. When the elections finally took place in February 2008, President Musharraf was defeated by the PPP and PML. The parties formed a coalition government in March 2008 with a new prime minister in power: Yusuf Raza Gilani. The supreme court justices that Musharraf had dismissed during the country’s state of emergency in 2007 were then restored.
Currently, the fate of President Musharraf seems uncertain now that his party has been excluded from the ruling coalition. However, he has so far not given any indication that he is considering any type of voluntary resignation.
Corruption trends in Pakistan over the past 10 years
Most governance indicators show an unchanging situation in Pakistan, with corruption perceived as widespread, systemic and deeply entrenched at all levels of society and government. Based on research done for this query and consultations with TI Pakistan, corruption is viewed as being equally pervasive within federal, provincial and local governments.
Since first being included in 1995, Pakistan has consistently performed poorly on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) of Transparency International, and is among the countries with the most perceived corruption each year. According to the 2007 CPI, Pakistan scored 2,4. (Please see: http://transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2007).
The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) of the World Bank have also shown very little progress over time, with weak scores in most areas. Most troubling has been the rapid decline in indicators for political stability, which have deteriorated rapidly since 1998: 1.0 in 2007 compared to 5.8 in 2003 and 11.11 in 1998.
According to the World Bank’s WGI, governance actually seemed to improve slightly under the first military government (1999-2002) following Musharraf’s coup. In 2003, the country even performed slightly better in terms of controlling corruption, rule of law and government effectiveness. However, all the country’s indicators have since collapsed (based on 2007 results) except for those related to regulatory quality and voice and accountability.
(Please see: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi2007/sc_chart.asp).
Further surveys conducted in recent years confirm the finding that corruption in the country has worsened: The World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report (2007-08) identifies corruption as the third greatest problem for companies doing business in Pakistan, after government bureaucracy and poor infrastructure. (Please see: http://www.gcr.weforum.org/).
Roughly 40 percent of companies in Pakistan feel that corruption is one of their major concerns. Interestingly, the country is seen as a relatively better place for running a business than its neighbours. While the Doing Business Survey of the World Bank, (www.doingbusiness.org) has shown the country slipping two places to 76 out of 178 countries based on the latest results (June 2008), only the Maldives has a higher score among countries in the Asia Pacific region.
Apart from the private sector, the general public views corruption to be a stumbling block for the country. TI’s Global Corruption Barometer 2007 shows Pakistan to be one of the countries most affected by petty bribery. More than 44 percent of respondents reported that they have paid a bribe to obtain a service. Half of all those surveyed (52 percent) perceive government efforts to reform corruption as ineffective and nearly two-thirds (59 percent) think that corruption is likely to increase within the next three years. (Please see: http://transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb/2007)
The national chapter of TI in Pakistan has also organised more in-depth surveys to look at the problem. Its National Corruption Perception Survey (NCPS), conducted in 2002 and 2006, assessed perceptions of corruption under the previous governments of Bhutto, Sharif and Musharraf. The first phase of each government was rated as less corrupt than the second period that each leader was in power.
The next NCPS is being conducted for 2008, with surveys to follow annually over the coming years. (For the 2002 survey, please see: http://www.transparency.org.pk/documents/csr.pdf. For the 2006 survey, please see:
(http://www.transparency.org.pk/documents/National%20Corruption%20Perception%20Survey%202006.pdf)
Forms of corruption
Corruption manifests itself in various forms in Pakistan, including widespread financial and political corruption, nepotism, and misuse of power. Both petty and grand corruption are prevalent in the country.Citizens commonly face demands for bribes in their dealings with government institutions to access basic public services. The frequency of petty bribery is alarming and has shown little improvement over time, as evident in the national corruption surveys conducted by TIPakistan in 2002 and 2006.
Survey results for 2002 indicated that a remarkable 100 percent of the respondents who had any type of contact with the police over the previous year were confronted with corruption. In terms of basic services, 44 percent of the respondents were only able to access electricity by paying a bribe, while the rest had to rely on other forms of influence to obtain a connection.
When it came to the country’s tax authorities, nearly every respondent (99 percent had encountered corruption. According to respondents of the 2006 survey, the three most corrupt government agencies were the police, (64 percent), power sector (11 percent) and judiciary (9 percent).
The three main reasons for corruption, as viewed by the respondents, were the lack of accountability, low salaries and discretionary powers. Measures suggested for combating corruption included more adequate salaries and a speedier judicial process.
The public procurement process in Pakistan is an example of where corruption can take place. In principle, the law in Pakistan provides for open and competitive bidding in awarding government contracts. However, information on government expenditures and decisions is not always made public.
As signalled by TI-Pakistan’s survey work, public sector services — such as for power and utilities as well as infrastructure and public works — are the most affected by corruption. Public works kickbacks are estimated to constitute approximately 25 percent of the budget. (http://www.business-anticorruption.com/normal.asp?pageid=464).
With Pakistan a major recipient of grants and loans from international donor agencies, corruption in procurement has affected poverty, aid and development projects. A World Bank Country Assistance Evaluation of projects and programmes in Pakistan has confirmed the problem. The World Bank and the Auditor General of Pakistan have repeatedly cited governance problems in recruitment, site selection, absenteeism and corruption for development projects. As a result, some of the World Bank’s projects were (partly) suspended or cancelled, such as the Baluchistan Primary Education Project. In addition, the disbursement of other loans was withheld after irregularities were uncovered.
(Please see: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/63/31/36494011.pdf). In response, the World Bank and the Asia Development Bank are assisting Pakistan in establishing e-governance in order to promote transparency and reduce corruption in procurement processes and other areas of governance. The Board of Investment (BOI), for example, is now publishing tender invitations on their website.
(Please see, for example: http://info.worldbank.org/etools/BSPAN/PresentationView.asp?PID=1978&EID=911 and http://www.pakboi.gov.pk/
Corruption prone institutions
The wide consensus across surveys points to the police as being one of the most corrupt institutions in Pakistan. According to the organisation Global Integrity (http://www.globalintegrity.org/reports/2006/PAKISTAN/index.cfm), appointments in the police force are often based on political considerations.
Police officers frequently have conflicts of interest due to personal loyalties and family connections. It is also well known that in Pakistan, influential landlords decide the appointment of law enforcement officers in their area, with police officers acting on their behalf. Unlawful police methods do not solely affect poor people. Businesses also complain that they suffer from extortion by the police, for instance in the form of bogus traffic fines.
To continue reading this great report please go to: http://www.u4.no/publications/overview-of-corruption-in-pakistan/
