Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'justice'.
Found 9 results
How to Stop Corruption? Corruption is one of the most disruptive problems faced by the world and it needs to stop without further damage to the humanity so as to have a better future for the coming generation. Corruption is a disease, a cancer that eats into the cultural, political and economic fabric of society, and destroys the functioning of vital organs. In the words of Transparency International, “Corruption is one of the greatest challenges of the contemporary world. It undermines good government, fundamentally distorts public policy, leads to the misallocation of resources, harms the private sector and private sector development and particularly hurts the poor.” Corruption is found almost everywhere, but it is stubbornly entrenched in the poor countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, it is widespread in Latin America, it is deep rooted in many of the newly industrialised countries, and it is reaching alarming proportions in several of the post- Communist countries. Corruption has been the subject of a substantial amount of theorising and empirical research over the last 30 years, and this has produced a bewildering array of alternative explanations, typologies and remedies. However, as an extensively applied notion in both politics and social sciences, corruption is being used rather haphazardly. Corruption is understood as everything from the paying of bribes to civil servants in return for some favour and the theft of public purses, to a wide range of dubious economic and political practices in which politicians and bureaucrats enrich themselves and any abusive use of public power to a personal end. Besides, corruption is in itself a many-faceted phenomenon and the concept of corruption contains too many connotations to be analytically functional without a closer definition. The forms of corruption are diverse in terms of who are the actors, initiators and profiteers, how it is done, and to what extent it is practised. Also the causes and the consequences of corruption are complex and diverse, and have been sought in both individual ethics and civic cultures, in history and tradition, in the economic system, in the institutional arrangements, and in the political system. India is one of the countries which are suffering due to the existence of Corruption. Impact of corruption is very hard on public life. This is more of awkward and defaming condition than being problematic. But it appears that the corruption is ever rising and unstoppable. Further the people involved in corruption seem to be hiding themselves by blaming others. Even they are proud of themselves as they made more money in short time. Politicians and black money go hand in hand. In north Indian states likes Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Bihar, MLAs move around in a fleet of SUVs, with a host of lackeys in tow. Each minister is a parallel economy unto himself, his cronies entirely dependent on him for survival and more. Who finances their politics? Most government contracts – for roads, bridges, liquor and so on – are cornered by cartels controlled by the legislators themselves. These contracts generate cash in abundance to keep the political cycle of an average legislator lubricated. Many ministers and MLAs are strongmen – extortion, protection money, supari and other kinds of crime proceeds add to their well of black money. A large part of the black money thus generated goes to party funds. The deeper the war chest of a party, the more power and influence it has and greater are its chances of winning an election. In addition, parties are funded by contractors and corporations. Bigger the party, bigger the corporations financing it. Departments like public works, urban development and irrigation make major contribution to party funds. Contracts are awarded in government departments, but decided in party headquarters. To worsen the condition further, those involved in corruption are able to get better promotions and opportunities. Corruption is a symptom of deeper-seated factors. The causes are complex, and the means to control it are not fully understood. Corruption thrives when economic policies are poorly designed, education levels are low, civil society is underdeveloped, and the accountability of public institutions is weak—conditions that exist in many settings but are particularly prevalent in some developing countries. Corruption often has a political dimension and reflects the way power is exercised in a country. And it is constantly changing its form in response to changes in the global economy and technical innovation. Then President Nelson Mandela emphasised this in his opening address to Parliament in 1999: “Our hope for the future depends on our resolution as a nation in dealing with the scourge of Corruption. Success will require an acceptance that, in many respects, we are a sick society. It is perfectly correct to assert that all this was spawned by apartheid. No amount of self-induced Amnesia will change the reality of history. But it is also a reality of the present that among the new cadres in various levels of government you will find individuals who are as corrupt as – if not more than – those they found in government. When a leader in a provincial legislation siphons off resources meant to fund service by legislators to the people; when employees of a government institution set up to help empower those who were excluded by apartheid defraud it for their own enrichment, then we must admit that we have a sick society. This problem manifests itself in all areas of life”. If we have to reduce corruption from society then we have to: 1. Stamp out corruption at all levels in society. 2. Develop a culture of zero tolerance of corruption. 3. Visibly support and subscribe to the national integrity strategy in order to combat corruption in all sectors of civil society and Government. 4. Educate all persons to work together towards a higher moral purpose. Corruption is a serious problem and social ethics has a significant impact on all societies. It is a phenomenon which is globally widespread and can be generally defined as the use of public power to benefit a private interest. It is a complex and multifaceted concept with several and heavy complications for the economy and environmental sustainability. Despite the existing theorizations and descriptions of the political economy concerning environment/society interactions and widespread evidence of bribery and illegal exchange in natural resources management, nowadays, fighting corruption goes on widely ineffective, with serious consequences for environmental quality. The main focus of this study is the different forms of corruption and its consequences and costs to the Environment, especially in resource-rich developing countries. It explores a few practical examples taken from these countries due to the linkages between corruption and weak environmental governance. The institutional set-up of the country such as the characteristics of the political and judicial system determines the extent of corruption. In such a context, transparency has been described as a cure for corruption. Good governance including a broad commitment to the rule of law is crucial for environmental sustainability and is a way to put a stop to the devastating impact corruption has had on the environment. The sustained reduction of systemic corruption requires committed leadership and support from citizens and civil society. Corruption is a universal problem. It is present in all societies, political systems and cultures. It is a cross-cultural reality and it is not only detected in democratic systems which are by definition more open and therefore more exposed to the watchful eyes of pluralistic, interventionist media. It is also a centuries-old phenomenon, and allusions to this type of improper behaviour can already be found in several holy texts and in the codes of ancient civilizations. However, it was not until the Modern state was established that corruption took the proportions we know today. Corruption has real political, economic and social costs. Its costs are often difficult to quantify, since corruption by its nature is difficult to measure. Yet corruption leaves people in worse condition and impedes development all over the world. First, it is an obstacle to democracy and the rule of law. Second, it distorts the allocation of resources, reduces the productivity of public expenditures, lowers investment, and slows down economic growth. Moreover, it constitutes a severe obstacle to entrepreneurship and innovation. Third, perhaps most insidiously, corruption leads to frustration and apathy among the citizens of corrupt states. Corruption is a complex phenomenon. Its root lie deep in bureaucratic and political institutions and its effect on development varies with country conditions. But while costs may vary and systemic corruption may coexist is bad for development. It leads governments to intervene where they need not, and it undermines their ability to enact and implement policies in areas in which government intervention is clearly needed—whether environmental regulation, health and safety regulation, social safety nets, macroeconomic stabilization, or contract enforcement. The term corruption covers a broad range of human actions. To understand its effect on an economy or a political system, it helps to unbundle the term by identifying specific types of activities or transactions that might fall within it. We settled on a straightforward definition—the abuse of public office for private gain. Public office is abused for private gain when an official accepts, solicits, or extorts a bribe. It is also abused when private agents actively offer bribes to circumvent public policies and processes for competitive advantage and profit. Public office can also be abused for personal benefit even if no bribery occurs through patronage and nepotism, the theft of state assets, or the diversion of state revenues. This definition is both simple and sufficiently broad to cover most of the corruption that the we encounters, and it is widely used in the literature. Bribery. Bribes are one of the main tools of corruption. They can be used by private parties to “buy” many things provided by central or local governments, or officials may seek bribes in supplying those things. • Government contracts. Bribes can influence the government’s choice of firms to supply goods, services, and works, as well as the terms of their contracts. Firms may bribe to win a contract or to ensure that contractual breaches are tolerated. • Government benefits. Bribes can influence the allocation of government benefits, whether monetary benefits (such as subsidies to enterprises or individuals or access to pensions or unemployment insurance) or in-kind benefits (such as access to certain schools, medical care, or stakes in enterprises being privatized). • Lower taxes. Bribes can be used to reduce the amount of taxes or other fees collected by the government from private parties. Such bribes may be proposed by the tax collector or the taxpayer. In many countries the tax bill is negotiable. • Licenses. Bribes may be demanded or offered for the issuance of a license that conveys an exclusive right, such as a land development concession or the exploitation of a natural resource. Sometimes politicians and bureaucrats deliberately put in place policies that create control rights which they profit from by selling. • Time. Bribes may be offered to speed up the government’s granting of permission to carry out legal activities, such as company registration or construction permits. Bribes can also be extorted by the threat of inaction or delay. • Legal outcomes. Bribes can change the outcome of the legal process as it applies to private parties, by inducing the government either to ignore illegal activities (such as drug dealing or pollution) or to favour one party over another in court cases or other legal proceedings. The government benefits purchased with bribes vary by type and size. Contracts and other benefits can be enormous (grand or wholesale corruption) or very small (petty or retail corruption), and the impact of misinterpretation of laws can be dramatic or minor. Grand corruption is often associated with international business transactions and usually involves politicians as well as bureaucrats. The bribery transaction may take place entirely outside the country. Petty corruption may be pervasive throughout the public sector if firms and individuals regularly experience it when they seek a license or a service from government. The bribes may be retained by individual recipients or pooled in an elaborate sharing arrangement. The sums involved in grand corruption may make newspaper headlines around the world, but the aggregate costs of petty corruption, in terms of both money and economic distortions, may be as great if not greater. Theft. Theft of state assets by officials charged with their stewardship is also corruption. An extreme form is the large-scale “spontaneous” privatization of state assets by enterprise managers and other officials in some transition economies. At the other end of the scale is petty theft of items such as office equipment and stationery, vehicles, and fuel. The perpetrators of petty theft are usually middle- and lower-level officials, compensating, in some cases, for inadequate salaries. Asset control systems are typically weak or non-existent, as is the institutional capacity to identify and punish wrongdoers. Theft of government financial resources is another form of corruption. Officials may pocket tax revenues or fees (often with the collusion of the payer, in effect combining theft with bribery), steal cash from treasuries, extend advances to themselves that are never repaid, or draw pay for fictitious “ghost” workers, a pattern well documented in the reports of audit authorities. In such cases financial control systems typically have broken down or are neglected by managers. Political and bureaucratic corruption. Corruption within government can take place at both the political and the bureaucratic levels. The first may be independent of the second, or there may be collusion. At one level, controlling political corruption involves election laws, campaign finance regulations, and conflict of interest rules for parliamentarians. At another level corruption may be intrinsic to the way power is exercised and may be impossible to reduce through law-making alone. In the extreme case state institutions may be infiltrated by criminal elements and turned into instruments of individual enrichment. Isolated and systemic corruption. Corruption in a society can be rare or widespread. If it is rare, consisting of a few individual acts, it is straightforward (though seldom easy) to detect and punish. In such cases noncorrupt behaviour is the norm, and institutions in both the public and private sectors support integrity in public life. Such institutions, both formal and informal, are sufficiently strong to return the system to a noncorrupt equilibrium. In contrast, corruption is systemic (pervasive or entrenched) where bribery, on a large or small scale, is routine in dealings between the public sector and firms or individuals. Where systemic corruption exists, formal and informal rules are at odds with one another; bribery may be illegal but is understood by everyone to be routine in transactions with the government. Another kind of equilibrium prevails, a systemic corruption “trap” in which the incentives are strong for firms, individuals, and officials to comply with and not fight the system. And there may be different degrees of coordination between those taking bribes, ranging from uncontrolled extortion by multiple officials to highly organized bribe collection and distribution systems. AntiBribery laws notwithstanding, there are many countries in which bribery characterizes the rules of the game in private-public interactions. Systemic corruption may occur uniformly across the public sector, or it may be confined to certain agencies—such as customs or tax authorities, public works or other ministries, or particular levels of government. Corruption in the private sector. Fraud and bribery can and do take place in the private sector, often with costly results. Unregulated financial systems permeated with fraud can undermine savings and deter foreign investment. They also make a country vulnerable to financial crises and macroeconomic instability. Entire banks or savings and loan institutions may be taken over by criminals for the purpose of wholesale fraud. Popular support for privatization or the deepening of financial markets can be eroded if poor regulation leads to small shareholders or savers withdrawing when confronted by insider dealings and the enrichment of managers. And a strong corporate focus on profitability may not prevent individual employees soliciting bribes from suppliers. Furthermore, when corruption is systemic in the public sector, firms that do business with government agencies can seldom escape participating in bribery. While noting the existence of fraud and corruption in the private sector and the importance of controlling it, this report is concerned with corruption in the public sector. Public sector corruption is arguably a more serious problem in developing countries, and controlling it may be a prerequisite for controlling private sector corruption. Still, Bank activities can also promote the control of bribery and fraud in the private sector by helping countries strengthen the legal framework to support a market economy and by encouraging the growth of professional bodies that set standards in areas like accounting and auditing. In the long run, controlling corruption in the private sector may require improvements in business culture and ethics. People also have developed an opinion that it is the only way to get their work done. If not, the work will be pending for long or even might not be done. Corruption—an important problem imposing political, economic, and environmental costs to societies around the world. Corruption is a phenomenon involving many different aspects, and it is therefore hard to give a precise and comprehensive definition. However, at the core of most definitions of corruption is the idea that a corrupt act implies the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Classic examples Include bribery, clientelism, and embezzlement. Other, often more subtle and sometimes even legal examples of corruption includes lobbying and patronage. While long-run data on corruption is very limited, historical examples suggest that corruption has been a persistent feature of human societies over time and space. Two such examples are the sale of parliamentary seats in ‘rotten boroughs’ in England before the Reform Act of 1832, and ‘machine politics’ in the US at the turn of the 19th century (Aidt 2003). The unethical and often illegal nature of corruption makes measurement particularly complicated. Corruption data usually comes from either direct observation (e.g. law enforcement records and audit reports), or perception surveys (e.g. public opinion surveys, or expert assessments). In this entry we discuss data from both sources, and discuss their underlying limitations. As we show, although precise corruption measurement is difficult, there is a clear correlation between perception and behaviour; so available corruption data does provide valuable information that, when interpreted carefully, can both tell us something important about our world as well as contribute to the development of effective policies. For example, the data from perception surveys suggests that corruption correlates with human development, and a number of studies exploiting rich data from law enforcement records have shown that education is an important element explaining this relationship. Specifically, the data provides support for the idea that voters with more education tend to be more willing and able to monitor public employees and to take action when these employees violate the law. Corruption is sometimes hard to tackle precisely because it is common, so people perceive it to be a natural economic transaction: it is easier to act corruptly if there are many other individuals who think it is fine to be corrupt. This is the rationale behind 'big-push' policies that aim to shift norms and perceptions. For those without money and connections, paying even small bribes to access basic public services such as public health or police can have important consequences. In fact, petty corruption in the form of bribes often acts as a regressive tax, since the burden typically falls disproportionately on the poor. Corruption is not something that only affects low income countries—and in fact, many high income countries have become increasingly aware of this in recent years. There are many factors that simultaneously drive corruption and development. Education is an important case in point. A strong positive relationship: countries where people are more educated tend to have better scores in the Corruption Perception Index. One of the most widely accepted mechanisms of controlling corruption is to ensure that those entrusted with power are held responsible for reporting their activities. This is the idea behind so-called 'accountability' measures against corruption. As we can see, people are less likely to pay bribes in countries where there are stronger institutions to support accountability. A common policy prescription to fight corruption is to increase monitoring and punishments. The logic supporting such policies is straightforward: better monitoring and harsher punishments increase the expected cost of acting corruptly, so people rationally choose not to break the rules. To test the extent to which monitoring and punishments effectively reduce corruption, economists often rely on 'policy experiments', where they administer these policies to 'treatment groups'. Olken (2007) follows this approach, increasing the probability of central government audits from 4 percent to 100 percent (the 'policy treatment'), in the context of Indonesian village road projects. Olken (2007) compares the outcomes for villages that received this intervention with those that did not, and finds that audits significantly reduced missing expenditures, as measured by discrepancies between official project costs and an independent engineers’ estimates. The following visualization summarizes these results. The height of the bars shows the percent of expenditures that engineers found to be missing. As we can see, missing expenditures were much lower in villages where audits were certain. Olken (2007) provides further evidence of the extent to which officials in charge of road projects responded to private incentives: he finds that (i) audits were most effective when officials faced elections soon, and (ii) village elites shifted to nepotism (the practice of hiring family members), which is a form of corruption that was harder for audits to detect. Corruption affects us all Corruption affects us all. It threatens sustainable economic development, ethical values and justice; it destabilises our society and endangers the rule of law. It undermines the institutions and values of our democracy. But because public policies and public resources are largely beneficial to poor people, it is they who suffer the harmful effects of corruption most grievously. To be dependent on the government for housing, healthcare, education, security and welfare, makes the poor most vulnerable to corruption since it stalls service delivery. Delays in infrastructure development, poor building quality and layers of additional costs are all consequences of corruption. Many acts of corruption deprive our citizens of their constitutional and their human rights. Economic implications Corruption and international perceptions of corruption in South Africa has been damaging to the country’s reputation and has created obstacles to local and foreign direct investment, flows to the stock market, global competitiveness, economic growth and has ultimately distorted the development and upliftment of our people. Public money is for government services and projects. Taxes collected, bonds issued, income from government investments and other means of financing government expenditure are meant for social grants, education, hospitals, roads, and the supply of power and water and to ensure the personal security of our citizens. Corruption and bad management practices eat into the nation’s wealth, channelling money away from such projects and the very people most dependent on government for support. Countless studies around the world show how corruption can interrupt investment, restrict trade, reduce economic growth and distort the facts and figures associated with government expenditure. But the most alarming studies are the ones directly linking corruption in certain countries to increasing levels of poverty and income inequality. Because corruption creates fiscal distortions and redirects money allocated to income grants, eligibility for housing or pensions and weakens service delivery, it is usually the poor who suffer most. Income inequality has increased in most countries experiencing high levels of corruption. The need for good governance Adherence to good governance creates an environment where corruption struggles to flourish. Failure to adhere to the practices of good governance means stakeholders increasingly demand accountability. Mass action and strikes are organised in protest as citizens begin to lose faith in the ability or willingness of their elected officials. Political instability increases. Investment declines. The sale of shares by investors decreases the value and rating of companies. Their regulators can deny them licences, a stock exchange listing or the ability to sell products and services. Other organisations refuse to do business with them. And donors or economic organisations grant fewer loans or aid to nations whose governance is murky. Key principles of good governance include: Honesty – Organisations are the sum of their parts. Employees and managers who operate in good faith, with integrity and no conflicts of interest, will underpin the governance cornerstone of honesty and elicit trust from stakeholders. Transparency – Decisions made, action taken and how it is reported to stakeholders must be communicated clearly and made easily available for those affected by the organisation. Responsiveness – Listening to stakeholders, taking action or reporting transparently should be done within a reasonable time of a request, complaint or concern. Management independent of governing bodies – There must be a separation of powers and chain of accountability. Friends and family members, or suspected conflicts of interests cannot overlap between layers of management and directors, boards or senior politicians. Independence ensures better judgement, assessment of risk and optimum performance. Rule of law – Institutions must comply with the laws, codes, guidelines and regulations of the nations in which they operate. Effectiveness and efficiency – Good governance is also delivering to mandates, meeting the needs of stakeholders, curtailing expenditure, streamlining decision-making and action, and making the best use of available resources. Fairness – Good governance entrenches the principle of fairness, and treating stakeholders equally. Just – Justice and governance concerns the moral responsibility and integrity of individuals within an organisation and the behaviour of the organisation itself. Accountability – Ensuring that public and private institutions, corporations and individuals entrusted with public resources and civil society are held to account, means they are answerable to their stakeholders. Life is full of ripples; our actions affect each other, whether for good or ill. When one person acts selfishly, there is always a ripple effect. It gets paid forward. The ripple effect of government corruption can be far reaching. A government officer stealing millions of dollars affects countless individuals, budgets, programs, and more. Corruption’s far-reaching consequences are significant. For decades, it has caused severe poverty, with millions of citizens fleeing the nations to pursue the hope of a better tomorrow in other countries. Nine Reasons why Corruption is a Destroyer of Human Prosperity We noted that the presence of dysfunctional and onerous regulations and poorly formulated policies, often created incentives for individuals and businesses to short-circuit them through the paying of bribes. We now turn to the consequences of corruption, to better understand why it is a destroyer of human prosperity. First, corruption undermines government revenue and, therefore, limits the ability of the government to invest in productivity-enhancing areas. Where corruption is endemic, individuals will view paying taxes as a questionable business proposition. There is a delicate tension between the government in its role as tax collector and the business community and individuals as tax payers. The system works reasonably well when those who pay taxes feel that there is a good chance that they will see a future payoff, such as improvements in the country’s infrastructure, better schools and a better-trained and healthier workforce. Corruption sabotages this implicit contract. When corruption is allowed to flourish taxpayers will feel justified in finding creative ways to avoid paying taxes or, worse, become bribers themselves. To the extent that corruption undermines revenue, it adversely affects government efforts to reduce poverty. Money that leaks out of the budget because of corruption will not be available to lighten the burden of the poor. Of course, corruption also undermines the case of those who argue that foreign aid can be an important element of the fight against global poverty—why should taxpayers in the richer countries be asked to support the lavish lifestyles of the kleptocrats in corrupt states? Second, corruption distorts the decision-making connected with public investment projects (Tanzi and Davoodi, 1997). Large capital projects provide tempting opportunities for corruption. Governments will often undertake projects of a larger scope or complexity than warranted by the needs of the country. Public investment will thus be higher—the world is littered with the skeletons of white elephants, often built with external credits, and representing a heavy burden on meagre budgets. In the context of scarce resources, governments will find it necessary to cut spending elsewhere, sometimes in socially vital areas, or in operations and maintenance. Tanzi (1998) plausibly argues that corruption will also reduce expenditure on health and education because these are areas where it may be more difficult to collect bribes, though some have argued that provider absenteeism, a serious problem in the educational and health sectors of many countries, is itself a form of “quiet/silent corruption.” Third, there is solid empirical evidence that the higher the level of corruption in a country, the larger the share of its economic activity that will go underground, beyond the reach of the tax authorities. Not surprisingly, studies have shown that corruption also undermines foreign direct investment since it acts in ways that are indistinguishable from a tax; other things being equal, investors will always prefer to establish themselves in less corrupt countries. Wei (2000) reviewed FDI data from 14 source countries to 45 host countries, and concluded that: “an increase in the corruption level from that of Singapore to that of Mexico is equivalent to raising the tax rate by 21-24 percentage points.” Fourth, corruption discourages private-sector development and innovation and encourages inefficiency. Budding entrepreneurs with bright ideas will be intimidated by the bureaucratic obstacles, financial costs and psychological burdens of starting new business ventures and will either opt for taking their ideas to some other less corrupt country or, more likely, desist altogether. In either case, economic growth is adversely affected. The high incidence of corruption will mean an additional financial burden on businesses, undermining their international competitiveness. Unlike a tax, which is known and predictable and can be built into the cost structure of the enterprise in an orderly fashion, bribes are unpredictable and will complicate cost control, reduce profits and undermine the efficiency of those who must pay them to stay in business. Mauro (1995) used some indices of corruption and institutional efficiency to show that corruption lowers investment and, hence, economic growth. Fifth, corruption contributes to a misallocation of human resources. To sustain a system of corruption, officials and those who pay them will have to invest time and effort in the development of certain skills, nurture certain relationships, and build up a range of supporting institutions and opaque systems, such as off-the-books transactions, secret bank accounts, and the like. Surveys have shown that the greater the incidence of corruption in the country, the greater the share of time that management has to allocate to dealing with ensuring compliance with regulations, avoiding penalties, and dealing with the bribery system that underpins them, activities that draw attention and resources away from production, strategic planning, and so on. Sixth, corruption has disturbing distributional implications. Empirical work shows that corruption actually contributes to worsening income distribution. Gupta, Davoodi and Alonso-Terme (1998) have shown that corruption, by lowering economic growth, perceptibly pushes up income inequality. It also distorts the tax system because the wealthy and powerful are able to use their connections to make sure that the tax system works in their favour. It leads to inefficient targeting of social programs, many of which will acquire regressive features, with benefits disproportionately allocated to the higher income brackets; e.g., gasoline subsidies to the car-owning middle classes in India. Seventh, corruption creates uncertainty. There are no enforceable property rights emanating from a transaction involving bribery. The firm that obtains a concession from a bureaucrat as a result of bribery cannot know with certainty how long the benefit will last. The terms of the “contract” may have to be constantly renegotiated to extend the life of the benefit or to prevent its collapse. Indeed, the briber, having flouted the law, may fall prey to extortion from which it may prove difficult to extricate himself. In an uncertain environment with insecure property rights, the firm will be less willing to invest and to plan for the longer-term. A short-term focus to maximize short-term profits will be the optimal strategy, even if this leads to deforestation, say, or the rapid exhaustion of non-renewable resources. This uncertainty is partly responsible for a perversion in the sorts of incentives that prompt individuals to want to seek public office. Where corruption is rife, politicians will want to remain in office as long as possible, not because they are even remotely serving the public good, but merely because they will not want to yield to others the pecuniary benefits of high office. Where long stays in office are no longer an option, then the new government will want to steal as much as possible as quickly as possible, given a relatively short window of opportunity. Eighth, because corruption is a betrayal of trust, it diminishes the legitimacy of the state and moral stature of the bureaucracy in the eyes of the population. While efforts will be made to shroud such corrupt transactions in secrecy, particularly when the opportunities for bribery are linked to some government-inspired initiative, the relevant details will leak out and will tarnish the reputation of the government, thereby damaging its credibility and limiting its ability to become a constructive agent of change. Corrupt governments will have a tougher time being credible enforcers of contracts and protectors of property rights. Ninth, bribery and corruption lead to other forms of crime. Because corruption breeds corruption, it tends soon enough to lead to the creation of mafias and organized criminal groups who use their financial power to infiltrate legal businesses, to intimidate, to create protection rackets and a climate of fear and uncertainty. In states with weak institutions, the police may be overwhelmed, reducing the probability that criminals will be caught. This, in turn, encourages more people to become corrupt, further impairing the efficiency of law enforcement, a vicious cycle that will affect the investment climate in noxious ways, further undermining economic growth. In many countries, as corruption gives rise to mafias and organized crime, the police and other organs of the state may themselves become criminalized. By then, businesses will not only have to deal with corruption-ridden bureaucracies, but they will also be vulnerable to attacks from competitors who will pay the police or tax inspectors to harass and intimidate. There is really no limit to the extent to which corruption, once it is unleashed, can undermine the stability of the state and organized society. Tax inspectors will extort businesses; the police will kidnap innocents and demand ransom; the prime minister will demand payoffs to make himself available for meetings; aid money will disappear into the private offshore bank accounts of senior officials; the head of state will demand that particular taxes be credited directly to his personal account. Investment will come to a standstill, or, worse, capital flight will lead to disinvestment. In countries where corruption becomes intertwined with domestic politics, separate centres of power will emerge to rival the power of the state. At that point, the chances that the government will actually be able to do anything to control corruption will disappear and the state will mutate into a kleptocracy, the eighth circle of hell in Dante’s Divine Comedy. Alternatively, the state, to preserve its power, may opt for warfare, engulfing the country in a cycle of violence. In any case, corrupt failed, or failing, states become a security threat for the whole international community, “because they are incubators of terrorism, the narcotics trade, money laundering, human trafficking, and other global crime—raising issues far beyond corruption itself” (Heineman and Heimann 2006). Corruption will not do any good to anyone in the long term basis, either to the giver or the receiver of the corrupted money. Corruption harms everybody because it is based on injustice! EVIL EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION Merited but Poor People are Denied: Merited & qualified people who are poor & honest, not wanting to bribe, will remain unemployed thus depriving the expertise & knowledge of the good individuals to effective applications for the advancement of the individuals & society. Bad Consequences of Selecting Unfit People: Demerited & disqualified people when given in-charge of the posts they don't deserve; they will start malfunctioning resulting in unwanted outputs. If in administration, it will be mismanaged; if in engineering, structures won't last long; if in medical line, people will die of wrong prescriptions or wrong surgery; if in manufacturing, only substandard products will come out; if in education, substandard students will be the products; if in politics, faulty policies & mismanagement of public funds will happen... No Hope for Educated Poor Poor people who managed hard to get higher education when they completed their studies; they are given the popular 'Unemployed!' title to cap on all their certificates/diplomas/degrees/masters/PhDs and to start any self-employed venture also needs capital and to get loan for it again they need money to bribe here & there! Those who are poor or educated poor and want to live honest but progressive life without bribery/corruption see no hope for development in life in the corrupted society. So, it is of no surprise that some/many of these unemployed youths are turning to insurgency as the alternative way of life. Corruption Widening the Rich-Poor Gap: People in power who have the advantage of accumulating bribed money will become richer & richer and the poor people who try to pay huge amounts as bribes will remain in debt thus creating a huge rift between the rich & the poor. The consequence of this extreme inequality in the society will brew disunity, envy, hatred & enmity between the people of the haves and the have-nots. Corrupted People Degrades Self & Society: People who became materially rich through corruption will degrade morally and start misusing the ill-accumulated money in higher criminal activities like maintaining criminal gangs to support his nefarious activities; himself or his children may become drug addicts or alcoholics or gambling or in prostitutes etc. thus further tearing down the moral fabrics individually and socially. When Poor People are looked down by Rich: