Corruption is
a serious problem. Nowadays
corruption can be seen everywhere. It is like cancer in public life, which has
not become so rampant and perpetuated overnight, but in course of time.The main cause of corruption is due to greed. Do you agree?
The content is by former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad . It deals more with how to prevent corruption.
1. We need
laws to punish corrupt people and to deter others from accepting bribes. But
actually it is very difficult to catch corrupt personnel in Government or in
business. It is even more difficult to prove corruption in a court of law. Most
corrupt people escape unpunished.
2. Perhaps it
is better to try and prevent corruption from taking place rather than to try to
catch them after the fact. Actually the best way to prevent corruption is to
instil in everyone the belief that corruption is wrong, that it is a crime and
a sin. Most of us do not steal not because we are afraid or being caught and
punished but because we know it is wrong. Similarly we will reject bribes if it
is instilled in us that it is wrong. Unfortunately today it is difficult to instil
good values in our children because, for most of us, less quality time is spent
with them. And so many would accept bribes or offer bribes because we do not
see it as wrong, as being a sin in our religion. We think and we believe that
everyone is doing it and we would lose if we don’t do it. Self-restrain and
self-discipline cannot be relied upon to curb corruption.
3. But it is
possible to make corruption very difficult by removing temptations and
opportunities.
4.
Opportunities for corruption arise because of the need for interaction between
those with authority and the public. The authorities need to process and
approve all kinds of requests or proposals from the public. It is a kind of
power and as we know power corrupts. If the authorised person reject or delay,
the applicants may want to offer bribes to expedite or to approve.
5. Although
we believe that the conditions or reasons for approval or disapproval have been
determined and fixed for every kind of request or proposal, actually they are
not. Where they are, they are quite vague and not precise. This gives rise to
discretion on the part of those with authority. They may reject or at least
delay as they like. The applicants may then offer bribes. If the reasons for
approval or rejections are clear and precise there will be no room for
discretion. It will either be approved or rejected. Should the authority reject
or disapprove when it is clear that the conditions or requirements have all
been fulfilled, then it would be easily detected.
6. The applicants
generally would not dispute the decision made by the authority or complain
because of delay. If rejected or delayed he would be tempted to bribe. This
holds less danger for him than challenging the authority. He may need to deal
with the same authority again or with his colleagues. They can create all kinds
of trouble for him. But when the conditions for approval are simple and made
known to the public, the authority will be exposing himself to his seniors who
will go through all the processed application to ensure that the officer has
made the right decision. But maybe the supervisor is working with his officer
for a share of the bribe. But should there be an investigation the failure of
the supervisor to act would be discovered immediately and he would have to bear
the consequence. This would be a strong deterrence.
7. It is
important that the top man show tangible interest in the work of the officers.
Every month reports must be made to him with clear indications of the number
rejected and the reasons why. The report must be made public, including actions
taken when there is corruption.
8. To reduce
further the opportunities for corruption, forms of application must be made as
simple as possible. Long explanations and descriptions on how to fill the forms
should be avoided. Instead Yes/No answers in boxed areas should be filled by
applicants. The officer will need only to tick or cross in the box provided for
each answer by the applicant.
9. Each
officer should be required to examine, approve or reject only a small number of
required conditions. There should be a work-flow chart. It should take only a
few minutes to tick-off or to put a cross in the required box before passing
the application to the next officer. The whole process including the decision
of all the officers should not take more than three days. The applicant must be
required by law to present himself at the office after three days had elapsed
to enquire whether his application has been approved or not. All these meetings
between officers and the applicant must be taped and recorded in a diary.
10. The
authority of the particular officer must be spelt out. This includes which part
of the application is he in charge of. If other parts have not been ticked off
properly by other officers, he must ignore them. He must just give his yes or
no only with regard to the areas of his responsibility. The application will
then go to the other officers for them to decide regardless as to whether
earlier officers had already found that the approval cannot be given.
11. There
must be enough officers to deal with the expected number of applications. When
necessary more officers should be appointed.
12. All the
applications which have been scrutinized by the designated officers must be
handed to the senior officer who will scrutinise the forms and if there is no
disapproval, the senior officer will approve the application. If there is, he
must call up the officer concerned to explain. If he is satisfied with the
explanation, the application will not be approved.
13. The
senior officer will then see the applicant and explain. The applicant can then
correct his application for resubmission. If he cannot correct them for
whatever reason the application would be rejected.
14. Time is
of the essence. It is important that the processing of the application take a
fixed time. For all the officers to approve or disapprove should not take more
than three days. If they take more time they should be called up to explain. If
this happens three times the officer concerned should be blacklisted. He should
not be promoted and he should be transferred to another job.
15. These are
rough suggestions. The people in the government can improve on them and design
the forms so as to make approval and disapproval easy. The forms must be
updated from time to time when found to be confusing or not workable.
16. The
public should be consulted, privately or publicly, to hear their suggestions or
objections over the procedures and forms. In all cases the consultation and the
new forms must be made public. Complaints should be studied and changes made
when necessary. Openness and transparency must be maintained.
17. Doctors
like to say prevention is better than cure. What is being suggested is a
transformation from cure to prevention.
18. Why did I
not do it when I had the authority? To a certain extent I did. If anyone cares
to examine, he will discover that the rapid growth of Kuala Lumpur for example
took place from the early eighties because it was made easier for people to get
approvals.
In short, I would say that even though the ways to control corruption is very difficult but it is not impossible. It is not only
the responsibility of the government but ours too. We can eliminate corruption
if there will be joint effort. We must have some high good value principles to being
follow so that we become a role model for the coming generation. Let us take a view
to create an atmosphere free from corruption. That will be our highest
achievement as human beings.
