Bureaucratic corruption is often referred to as “administrative corruption” and, by some analysts, “conventional corruption”. It implies the involvement of public funds and interests and occurs when public officials abuse their power for personal gain, typically through illicit practices like bribery, embezzlement, nepotism, and favoritism.
Bureaucratic corruption is particularly detrimental to Sri Lanka due to its widespread nature and the significant negative impact it has on governance, economic development, and social welfare.
In Sri Lanka, most often, politicians are blamed for corruption. The lead in corruption is with politicians, without doubt. Yet, almost every time, in a corrupt act, bureaucratic influence also exists, although customarily and conveniently, the officials get away from the public wrath and media badgering.
In Sri Lanka, only in an isolated incident is a politician or a civil official penalised in a court of law. However, typically, the politician is dragged into the limelight, but the bureaucrat goes scot-free when an unscrupulous act is revealed by the media.
Bureaucratic corruption occurs when Government officials, whether higher or lower ranking, illegitimately receive or accumulate an undue advantage for their personal gains or use, disregarding public interest. There is an element of reciprocity within conventional corruption; both the solicitation and the acceptance of bribes (supply and demand bribery) are therefore considered forms of corruption.
Reducing bureaucratic corruption in developing countries, including Sri Lanka, is a complex and serious challenge that deters socio-economic progress, erodes trust in public institutions, and diverts resources away from essential public services.
Addressing this issue requires a comprehensive and sustained effort from the Government, civil society, and sometimes the international community.
Corruption has been a long-standing and prevalent issue in Sri Lanka, with serious consequences for the country’s growth, Government, and general socioeconomic well-being. Although a segment of the general populace also occasionally engages in corrupt behaviour, politicians and public workers have been recognised as the primary perpetrators.
Allegations
However, allegations have also been directed against individuals with high incomes in professional fraternities such as civil administrators, law, medicine, and private tutoring that they escape paying taxes, losing the Government billions in tax revenue, which can also be considered a corrupt act.
No matter how, where, when, or who, corruption is an intolerable burden to the country because it not only undermines the foundation of democracy, governance, and social justice but is also one of the major causes of the destruction of an already damaged economy.
Corruption has many consequences. One of them is that it increases poverty by diverting public funds from programs such as healthcare or education to pay for the lavish lifestyles of corrupt officials.
Another consequence is that it undermines public trust, an essential ingredient in good governance.
In addition, corruption discourages investment and slows economic growth by increasing uncertainty about the fairness of Government actions. More importantly, it can lead to social animosity when people are unable to meet their basic needs due to high levels of inequality brought on by widespread corruption.
There are causes of bureaucratic corruption. To effectively combat bureaucratic corruption, it is essential to understand its root causes. There are several factors contributing to the prevalence of corruption in the bureaucratic system in Sri Lanka.
Ethically, morally, and obligatorily, civil service positions should not be used as rewards for political support, swapped for bribes, or used to meet obligations for one’s own personal gains.
In this context, corrupt and unprofessional civil servants contribute significantly to common failures. The seemingly weak institutional framework and obsolete laws in the country create an environment where corrupt practices can flourish without fear of repercussions.
It is a known fact that complex regulations and red tape can create opportunities for corruption. Intricate rules of the administrative machinery provide an opening for corrupt public servants to implant fear in the public mind and demand bribes to loosen up such stiff situations.
In this context, deregulation may reduce such opportunities, and the practical way to fight is to simply derestrict wherever possible by introducing new laws.
Similarly, bureaucratic red tape produces information that can be administered by corrupt bureaucrats. The bureaucrat may extort bribes from a citizen in exchange for reducing the amount of red tape. Likewise, the bureaucrat may take bribes to conceal the information produced through red tape.
Citizens can lose trust in their Government when elected officials or bureaucrats are not held accountable for their wrongdoings. Audits are independent investigations that seek to uncover misconduct, such as fraud, negligence, or noncompliance with laws and regulations.
Currently, through the media, the general public observes the parliamentary committees such as COPE and COPA questioning top-level bureaucrats of various government institutions.
The public perception is that the intention of the panels of these committees is to gain cheap political mileage. However, it is evident that the prevailing gross lack of accountability mechanisms allows corrupt officials to act without fear and carry on unheeded.
Patronage system
Historically, “political patronage” has been an intolerable jeopardy in Sri Lanka that has created immensely damaging repercussions.
Wikipedia describes the patronage system as a practice in which a political party, after winning an election, gives government jobs to its supporters, friends (cronyism), and relatives (nepotism) as a reward for working towards victory. Since independence, the country has seen the rise of this inexcusable malpractice.
Political appointments provide bureaucrats with “upward embeddedness,” that is, social and political connections with politicians, which facilitate bureaucratic accountability and effectiveness. This means that political patronage gives bureaucrats access to material and nonmaterial resources, facilitates monitoring by politicians, enables the application of sanctions and rewards, aligns priorities and incentives, and increases mutual trust.
Political patronage can thus make corrupt and immoral bureaucrats more susceptible to corrupt acts. This is a curse to the socio-economic development of the country and must be eliminated from the entire system.
Lack of adequate transparency in Government transactions promotes bureaucratic corruption.
Transparency in access to information and resources can have a substantial effect on corruption. There is certainly a correlation between a lack of transparency and high levels of corruption in public institutions.
Moreover, a lack of transparency provides imperceptible help to political corruption. Currently, in Sri Lanka, insufficient transparency in Government transactions, budget allocations, and procurement processes allows corruption to thrive in the shadows.
In Sri Lanka, intolerance for corruption is enormously high currently. People have become sick of avarice on a scale that flies in the face of reason.
For the law to be effective in scaring corrupt bureaucrats, the legal system must be made stronger, and enforcement must be swifter and decisive so that verdicts are visible and reached in a reasonable timeframe.
While enforcement is extremely vital, the new anti-corruption laws enacted were a worthy and commendable move by the Government. The new Act seems to envisage the establishment of an independent commission to exercise and carry out the Act’s powers and functions, as well as to act on the obligations imposed.
The recently published IMF report “The Sri Lanka’s Governance Diagnostic Assessment” says that the anti-corruption legal frameworks and institutional arrangements are in flux due to the very recent passage of the Anticorruption Act (“ACA”).
The act substantially improved the legal environment for addressing corruption. Gaining full benefit of the improved legal framework hinges on the creation of a transparent and merit-based process.
Bureaucratic corruption in Sri Lanka is a deeply rooted and multifaceted problem with severe consequences for the country’s economic, social, and political well-being.
Addressing this issue requires a comprehensive approach. The road to combating corruption may be long and hard. However, the benefits of a corruption-free Sri Lanka, where public resources are allocated efficiently and fairly, are well worth the effort.
