Accountable governance

The creation of an enabling environment for a merit-oriented, realistically paid bureaucracy to perform and deliver social good is an important dimension of institution building.

The public services cannot resist the pressures of powerful groups in society unless they are fortified with a sense of security of service.

But, given the low threshold of moral, financial and professional integrity in our society and wide-spread prevalence of corruption, an effective and objective system of restraint is essential to check the arbitrary exercise of power and misuse of public office for personal gain.

All those who exercise power must be held accountable for their actions. Wrongdoers must be punished but the damage to society will have been done: the mechanisms of restraint must also operate while they are in the act of doing wrong. It is, therefore, important to supplement punitive accountability with prevention of misuse of power.

Punitive accountability is a delicate and difficult process. As powerful groups are likely to come within its mischief, it is essential that the process enjoys a high degree of credibility in the public eye and is not misused as a means of a political witch-hunt.

The bare minimum and irreducible principles of credible accountability are as follows. First and foremost, nobody should be above the law. There should be no sacred cows. The second principle is that of fair-play: the same set of rules should apply to all, without any discrimination whatsoever. The third principle is that it should not be selective and directed but universal and across-the-board; it should look at the offence and not the offender. And last but not the least, it should follow the due process of law.

A multi-pronged strategy is required to prevent corrupt practices and abuse of authority. First, a new governance paradigm is taking shape under the impact of powerful forces such as economic integration, technological advances and diffusion of democratic ideas. Governments all over the world are withdrawing from direct provision of goods and services and increasingly playing the role of enabler, facilitator, and regulator.

In sync with the changing role of the state, wide-ranging reforms based upon the principles of deregulation, liberalisation and privatisation should be undertaken. Structural reforms in the areas of trade, taxation, financial sector and corporate governance should be deepened to promote the ease of doing business and to minimize intervention by government agencies.

Second, like other countries, Pakistan needs to focus its attention on revamping rules, processes and institutions so as to replace control mechanisms by market forces but at the same time provide effective and transparent regulation to cope with issues stemming from market failure.

Third, it is important to dismantle cumbersome regulations that clog economic transactions and breed corruption, especially in the areas of taxation, trade regime and regulatory requirements. This will reduce opportunities for rent seeking.

Fourth, simplification of rules and transparency of process should be accompanied by measures to tighten supervisory controls, reduce incentives for corrupt behaviour, and make disciplinary proceedings against defaulting officials an effective tool of internal accountability.

Fifth, decentralisation, participation, and competition are some of the means through which preventive accountability can be operationalized. The public can express their views about the quality of a service or determine its quantity by shifting their demand. Participatory approaches in public sector projects incorporating voice mechanisms such as involvement of civil society organizations and exit mechanisms such as competition in service delivery can weed out corrupt practices.

Last but not the least, transparency and accountability go hand in hand. Secret and opaque processes give rise to corruption. Conversely, access to information will reduce the chances of exploitation by officials. Transparency helps facilitate public participation in programme design and implementation. A free but responsible media can also play a constructive role.

The menace of corruption is not confined to a particular society but has assumed global proportions. It is evident from the fact that the issue of corruption is being debated throughout the world. The malaise of corruption has infected all societies, developed as well as developing, although its incidence may vary from place to place.

The level of corruption in a particular society depends upon the quality of governance, which in turn is determined by a host of factors, prominent among which are transparency and accountability, public tolerance and oversight, and rule of law.

The fight against corruption requires concerted action by all stakeholders within countries on the one hand, and active international cooperation on the other. Denying safe havens to corrupt elements, proactive support and assistance in investigation, repatriation of illegal money, extradition of criminals, and above all, linkages between drug trafficking, money laundering and terrorist activities are some of the issues that require concerted action by the world community.

A lot of work has been done to evolve multilateral anti-corruption frameworks such as the Recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, the ADB-OECD Anti-Corruption Action Plan, and the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), to mention a few.

There is, however, a need for greater coordination among anti-corruption agencies, accountability bodies and all governance institutions at the national and international level. Similarly, bilateral cooperation against corruption can also be a powerful tool for dealing with unlawful practices. Pakistan has always extended full cooperation and support to all multilateral and bilateral initiatives for fighting the menace of corruption.

The menace of corruption can only be effectively tackled through overall governance reform and institutional strengthening. All stakeholders – elected representatives, government officials and civil society – should create a synergy of thought and action to achieve tangible results. Similarly, countries through bilateral and multilateral mechanisms must coordinate their efforts to check unlawful trans-border flows and activities.

To sum up, the criteria of merit, adequate compensation and security of service on the one hand, and rules and institutions of restraint to check corruption and abuse of authority on the other are the fundamental requirements of institution building. These vital aspects of good governance reinforce one another. If any of these elements is missing, there will be loss of institutional capacity, resulting in eventual decay.

The acid test, however, is the ability of the state to avoid capture by prominent economic and political interests and to formulate and implement public policy independently in public interest.

The author is a former cabinet secretary.

Email: samisaeed7@hotmail.com