Curbing corruption : DEAL OR NO-DEAL

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa

Every media is currently occupied with the anti-corruption tamasha of the newly elected government. We, as the citizens, should be entitled to enjoy true freedom. But we are only eligible to pay out of our hard earned pennies for tax. Nevertheless, we would be even more proud, if actions by our leaders eventually result in the culprits, who plundered public assets, being brought to book sooner rather than later.

Unfortunately, we have a balance report: neither high hope nor no hope on this highly media-oriented anti-bribery and anti-corruption operation. Media merely talks without proper action and this will lead us nowhere. At least that is what we have been taught by history. We are not attempting to pull down the holy policies of honest politicians (if we have such a category), but rather need to be reminded of the history of this nation.

Here is the brief judicial history of the curbing of bribery and corruption in this country;

“Bribery was an offence punishable under the Penal Code (of Sri Lanka) as far back as 1883. It was during the British rule that bribery was introduced as a criminal offence into the Statute Book. In 1954 the Bribery Act was enacted to contain bribery in the Public Service. In 1958 the Bribery Commissioner’s Department was established by the Act No.40, under the Ministry of Justice. In 1994 the Act no.19 created the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption. The first Commission commenced activities on 15th December, 1994.” (quoted- official website of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption – www.ciaboc.gov.lk – accessed on October 30, 2015)

Bribery and corruption in public service

Just six years after we gained independence from Great Britain, we have drawn up the act to curb bribery and corruption in the public service. This could possibly be one of the oldest in the region. Apparently, Sri Lanka was one of few countries that maintained the moral authority of having a good administrative service (public service) at the time. Then, all the way down to early 1994, the country slipped backward, and anti-corrupt public service turned into the one of most corrupted failed services on the planet.

Where are the missing links? The most complicated but urgent question to be answered, perhaps. There is no point of engaging in the old game of blaming and shaming. But the hardest thing is to understand the depth of the problem and come up with a concrete political plan to establish anti-bribery and anti-corruption as the core policy of each political party, the government and non-governmental entities.

Curbing bribery and corruption is based on accountably and transparency. Accountability and transparency are personal questions which rely on the each persons’ conscience. This could lead any community to establish authentic anti-corruption mechanism. When this happens it becomes not only law but also a part of the culture.

If his assistants or stooges are corrupt, any leader dreaming to achieve a nation without corruption is a farce. Many politicians, who introduced flourishing ideas in their manifestos to curb bribery and corruption, have failed. They had to compromise with those who did not agree to their ideals. Deal or no deal is a political question which most of politicians across the globe have to engage in. Curbing bribery and corruption is an essential homework of our politicians and bureaucrats.

Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption

However, our prayers go out to the leaders who have wisdom to consolidate power and engage in an authentic mechanism to eliminate bribery and corruption in the nation. In fact there is no doubt, bribery and corruption are the core symptoms of the cunning culture of governance.

In addition to the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption, the new government has established two new entities to curb this vicious practices; the Presidential Commission of Inquiry to Investigate and Inquire into Serious Acts of Fraud, Corruption and Abuse of Power, State Resources and Privileges (PRECIFAC), and the Police Financial Crimes Investigations Division (FCID) are the new babies of the anti-corruption mechanism of this government. The people are eager to make their complaints.

Dilrukshi Dias Wickramasinghe, the Director General of the Bribery Commission, disclosed to the media that since January this year the commission received more than 3,200 complaints - over ten complaints a day.

Not only the former President Rajapaksa, his brothers, and wife but also his colleagues, from his driver to the actresses are listed for investigations. It is indeed a positive indication, but what about those corrupted varmint wolves who maintain their disguise as meek sheep in order to allign themselves with the government?

It indeed sad to learn that former President Mahinda Rajapaksa is capable of obtaining all the information gathered by those two entities mentioned above, even before they launch an investigation into any complaint. It gives us the size of the loopholes.

Who is the watchers’ watcher?

Who is protecting the elephant in the room?

Isn’t it showing the other side of the story?

So, deal or no deal?

Originally published at Daily News and Sri Lanka Guardian