Joint UN-IPU Parliamentary Hearing

on Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding

AM Meeting

‘GOOD GOVERNANCE AND THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION’ THEME

 

OF UNITED NATIONS, INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION PANEL

 

“Accountability is us, the parliamentarians”, John Williams, Chairman of the Global Organization of Parliamentarians against Corruption, told participants in this morning’s session of the joint United Nations and Inter-Parliamentary Union hearings, stressing that only through accountability could good governance be established and corruption fought.

Speaking as a panellist on the theme “Good governance and the fight against corruption -– key tools in peacebuilding and conflict prevention”, he said that, if leaders thought they could get away with stealing a billion dollars, they would do it.  The only way to establish good governance was through accountability and by making the price for failure too high, he said, admitting that corruption could never be completely eliminated.

He said it was the task of parliamentarians to oversee Governments.  In 2002, in the Canadian House of Commons, 170 parliamentarians from all over the world had decided to form an organization on integrity and honesty:  Global Organization of Parliamentarians against Corruption, or GOPAC.  GOPAC was based on three pillars:  peer support for parliamentarians; education for parliamentarians; leadership for results.  The time had come for parliamentarians to become actively engaged in the fight against corruption.  GOPAC believed in honesty, ethics, integrity, accountability and oversight.

Other speakers in this morning’s panel -- moderated by the International Parliamentary Union’s President Pier Ferdinando Casini -- were Rosario Green Macias, Senator from Mexico; Susan Rose-Ackerman, Professor at Yale University and Board Member, Transparency International USA; Pippa Norris, Director, Democratic Governance Group, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); and Rolando Alvarenga Argueta, Vice-President, Legislative Assembly of El Salvador.

Ms. Rose-Ackerman warned that, in many States with weak institutions, corruption held the system together and warded off violence.  Reform efforts in such countries could lead to a period of violence, as those benefiting from corruption would struggle to keep their position.  In order to prevent violence as a result of reform efforts, she counselled participants to start simple with practical measures and “pick your fights carefully”.  Try to achieve early victories in such areas as reviewing training and integrity of Government and military personnel; involving ordinary people in oversight; providing safe haven for whistle-blowers; and creating independent bodies for auditing and freedom of information.  Outside institutions, such as the United Nations, could help through incorporating anti-corruption measures in peace agreements; providing technical assistance in creating systems of internal control; and by providing funds with checks on their usage.

Ms. Norris, Director, Democratic Governance Group, UNDP, asked delegates to share experiences in fighting corruption, in particular the practical steps taken to strengthen democratic governance and reducing conflict.  According to the UNDP experience, one of the best remedies after a civil conflict, such as in Nepal, was designing a constitution that provided for power-sharing and for decentralization of power.  A broad coalition of parties guaranteed the best checks and balances and provided for accountability.  Federalism or decentralized Governments were most effective in peacebuilding and in implementing sustainable development.

Ms. Macias, Senator from Mexico, said the fight against corruption was a complex issue.  As corruption took place in every country, no all-encompassing recipe existed to combat the phenomenon, but parliamentarians, as the institutional voice of society, had a major responsibility in monitoring and supervising and making sure that transparency was a real, daily practice, in order to create a culture to fight corruption.  Corruption was dysfunctional, as it cost money to Governments and tax payers and damaged the country’s international image.

She said that parliamentarians in her country had worked hard to sensitize the population on the harm brought about by corruption.  The process of fighting corruption in Mexico faced additional problems, such as the fact that the lengthy electoral campaigns offered a tremendous potential for corruption.  As a consequence of globalization, her country had become a producer and transit country of narcotic drugs.  The fact that there was such an enormous demand for narcotic drugs meant that countries, such as Mexico, had to build special machineries to fight corruption.

Mr. Argueta, Vice-President, Legislative Assembly of El Salvador, said corruption was a complex issue, entailing socio-cultural, political and economic factors.  Both developing and developed countries suffered from the phenomenon and everybody paid for it.  Every year, more than 1 billion dollars was wasted on bribes, thus, stealing the possibility of a better future from generations to come.   Corruption was also a danger to democracy, because the people, frustrated with their corrupt Governments, might elect authoritarian regimes.

Referring to the history of his country and describing the fight against corruption after 14 years of internal conflict, he said fighting corruption required national, as well as international efforts.  Collective awareness should be promoted, among other things through education.  Parliamentarians had the responsibility to establish that collective awareness.

Many delegates shared their country’s experience in combating corruption, emphasizing that the scourge affected everybody in all countries, undermined the rule of law, threatened democracy and impeded development.  They stressed that important weapons in the fight against corruption, “a lethal cancer of politics”, were democracy, transparency, free media, a strong, independent audit system placed under the supervision of parliament, as well as an independent and well remunerated judiciary system.  They underlined the importance of not only ratifying the United Nations Convention against Corruption, but implementing its provisions.

Delegates from developing countries drew attention to the fact that there were “corrupters” and “corruptees”.  Where they were trying to address the issue of corrupt officials in their country, they asked that the corrupters, mostly international corporations, be prosecuted as well.  In that regard, cooperation at the regional and international level was important.  Also, donors must supervise and monitor the resources they were making available.  Most delegates agreed that corruption had no quick fix solution and required sustained commitments, because “corruption fights back”.  Education could be an important factor and could serve to prevent corruption.

The representative of Jordan drew attention to the fact that one of the causes of corruption was monopoly.  The United Nations and the Inter-Parliamentary Union must find mechanisms to end the oil monopoly that had caused a rise in oil prices not justified by costs.  The increased price for a substance that was essential for all had impeded development processes, caused unjust distribution of income at the international level, and led to corruption and violence.

Addressing the issue of corruption among parliamentarians, some emphasized the importance of immunity.  Others, however, stressed that immunity should not come down to impunity.  Parliamentarians were either part of the problem or part of the solution.  A “code of conduct” for parliamentarians was, therefore, fundamental.

Speakers this morning were delegates from Pakistan, Italy, Belarus, Hungary, Sweden, Ireland, Indonesia, Belgium, Brazil, Viet Nam, Algeria, Kenya, Spain, Finland, El Salvador, Turkey and Namibia.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record