• Commonwealth:
• Documents:
• Speeches:
• Malaysian Institute of Integrity

Malaysian Institute of Integrity

Date: 23 Apr 2007
Speaker: Commonwealth Secretary-General Don McKinnon
Location: Kuala Lumpur

Download:

Speech at the Malaysian Institute of Integrity by Secretary-General Don McKinnon

Selamat pagi, Tuan-Tuan dan Puan-Puan,

I say a sincere ‘thank you’ to Tan Sri Mohammed Sidek,

to my former Commonwealth colleague Mohammed Tap,

and to all of you at the Malaysian Institute of Integrity, for the kind invitation to join you today.

I am honoured to be with you, and to have the opportunity to be alongside Tan Sri Razali Ismail and Datuk Seri Mohammed Nazri Tan Sri Abdul Aziz in this workshop – as well as to hear Deputy Prime Minister Dato Sri Najib Tun Razak later this morning.

I am pleased to join this event marking the third anniversary of Malaysia’s National Integrity Plan, for two reasons. One is that Malaysia is one of our oldest members: you joined our organisation 50 years ago. And the other is that the Commonwealth is unique because it is an international organization not based on raw political and intergovernmental interest, like almost all others, but on values. And integrity is one of our core values.

First, then, some thoughts about ‘corruption’, ‘integrity’, ‘accountability’, ‘transparency’.

Not surprisingly, those who use them can sound as if they talk with moral zeal. They talk of family values and the values of faith.

And therein lies a danger – of a tone that can be seen as ‘holier than thou’, that appears patronizing or hypocritical, depending of course on who is speaking.

The fact is, that nobody is perfect. Precisely all of us are journeying: we have not arrived. It is the case with our systems of democracy, our economies, our societies. I often repeat my belief that all of these are ‘works in progress’.

Universal truths apply: that outsiders may advise but they can’t impose; and that the will to succeed can come only from within. If Malaysia or any other Commonwealth country is to be rid of corruption, then each and every one of its citizens must know, deep within, that corruption is wrong. And they must know that however hard it is to overcome it, and however imperfect the results, it’s still the only goal.

It’s worth asking for a moment what corruption is. Here in Malaysia, you use words like Rasuah, a bribe, or Minum Kopi, coffee money. Mauritius uses the expression Du Thé, some tea. Corruption does indeed signify the means by which people get the money for a cup of tea or coffee. But my concern is that it implies that it doesn’t really matter, it’s only small change, no one gets hurt…. But corruption is much more…. Amongst other things, it is bribery, nepotism, kickbacks, shady dealings, cartels, rigged elections.

Whether it’s the first customs officer you meet at an airport demanding a bribe to let you through customs, or a government minister hiving off millions, corruption tears at the very fabric of any society. It was former World Bank President Jim Wolfensohn who was the first to say clearly that corruption is nothing less than a cancer, and cancer is a deadly thing. My own country, New Zealand, once jailed its own Auditor-General, the person who should be above questioning, for corruption, and now some senior police officers are under a different investigation.

Corruption is Public Enemy Number One to the two things we hold dearest in the Commonwealth: Democracy and Development. It tends to be the poor who suffer most: it leads to children without adequate schooling, and to people of all ages without adequate healthcare. It distorts competition and investment; it’s an impediment to free and fair trade. It puts up the price of everything. It undermines the democratic and moral standards which underpin the way in which we conduct our lives.

I remind you of the awful feeling we all get when a pop-up box on our computer screen says ‘this disk is corrupted’. We sense something sinister, and contagious, that could bring calamitous results. Corruption is like a virus – it is lethal for it threatens development efforts, including loss of investor confidence and national pride.

Corruption can be everywhere….It adds to the cost of living and the cost of doing business. It erodes competitiveness.

Every morning, I read of corruption in the daily papers. On the one hand the UN estimates that corruption costs Africa $150 billion a year; on the other, it quotes reports that more than 30% of households in Paraguay, Cambodia and Mexico had paid a bribe in the last year.

I applaud the role played by Transparency International and all those working within that organisation. It is Transparency International’s indices of corruption where I can’t helping noticing that in the Commonwealth, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Pakistan and Kenya sit dangerously near the bottom. Nor can I overlook the way that the Index shows obvious links between poverty and corruption. But at the same time I see the imperfections of an index that can’t compare like with like, or year with year.

The fact is that corruption happens precisely everywhere. It is always wrong, it always hurts, it always undermines corrupter and corruptee, its ill effects are felt by the poorest in our societies - indeed, by our societies at large. It is indeed a cancer.

But today, it is three years of a Malaysian National Integrity Plan that we are celebrating, not just three years of anti-corruption. Integrity is about service and trustworthiness. It’s about well-trained, properly paid and respected civil servants carrying out their missions of service. It’s about businesses being measured not just financially but socially and even environmentally. It’s about civil society organisations faithfully voicing society’s concerns. It’s about faith and family. It’s about a responsible media.

Integrity is the good blood that pumps from our heart, and keeps our societies running. It is the counterbalance to corruption. The more weight we can add to efforts aimed at integrity and accountability, the less room there is for corruption to take root.

Let me now set aside the principle for the practice, and look at how we are rising to the challenge of stamping out corruption – and inculcating that culture of integrity.

We now have a global framework for effective action to combat corruption: the UN Convention against Corruption, or UNCAC.

It was three years in the making. Its trans-national element reflects a newly globalised world, where the bad things - like crime, disease and environmental ruin - cross borders as easily as the good things like people, trade, and culture.

UNCAC builds upon earlier work, like that of the African Union, the Organisation of American States and the OECD, especially the latter’s 1999 Convention on the Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions.

UNCAC is also a response to the fact that it is proving hard to prosecute corruption, and to monitor that process. It also breaks new ground in offering a comprehensive, step-by-step guide to countries on dealing with corruption.

Some of its provisions are mandatory – for instance that a specialised anti-corruption body be set up, whether within or independent of government. The debate about such bodies is very much alive – by no means all have been successful).

Other aspects are discretionary, but they involve setting up anti-corruption strategies which are in some senses formulaic. Is there an anti-corruption strategy in place? Are there specialised people and bodies in charge of anti-corruption? Is there training for some of the ‘lieutenants’ who will actually manage and administer the strategy? Is there a programme of public awareness and education?

140 countries have signed since UNCAC was launched in Mexico in 2003 – and to date some 91 have ratified.

UNCAC is a decidedly Good Thing. To sign on is easy: to ratify is more difficult: to implement and make it work, quite another.

So how have individual countries fared in implementing UNCAC? Let me look very quickly at three countries….

… starting here in Malaysia, where you have done very well both with UNCAC and with the Asian Development Bank’s regional anti-corruption initiative developed with the OECD.

Your National Integrity Plan responds to a global call from UNCAC. So does the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Agency, the ACA, founded as long ago as 1967, with its strategies of both prevention and education. The ACA is effectively devolved through regional ACA offices in each state. Datuk Zulkipli, as its head has enough of a good reputation to export his good services outside Malaysia, for instance in helping African states including Kenya.

I note that the public perception is that health and education have become largely cleansed of corruption, and that efforts are being made to tackle what are seen as the ‘problem’ industries of building and construction. I see, too, that you are up against the common challenge of keeping the ACA politically immune, and also of marrying best international practice with some of the conflicts of interest and cultural practices (not least of giving gifts) which are inherent to individual societies.

I turn second to one of the highest profile countries fighting corruption: Nigeria. Saturday’s election was fought as much as anything on standards in public life, particularly the management of elections.

Many of you will be familiar with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission set up in 2002, which has achieved more than 150 convictions and recovered over $5 billion of stolen public funds. Some of the convictions have been spectacular – Commission Head Nuhu Ribadu has convicted his ex-boss the chief of police; he is investigating a number of state governors, and has ensured cooperation with the UK authorities when one of them had his ill-gotten gains seized in the UK. A large part of the Commission’s success lies in that it both investigates and prosecutes.

But the EFCC has been accused of both collusion with the government, and being set on a collision course against it. For the latter reason, it has struggled to get funding – for the training, equipment and exposure that its staff readily admit that they need. Its relationship with the judiciary and the police has not been easy. So its much-vaunted independence can easily unravel.

But I believe it is in good hands and doing good things: I quote Ribadu, talking about the 80-odd million people in his country who live on a dollar-a-day: ‘if you want to make poverty history, then you have to make corruption and bad leadership history’.

It was the previous World Bank president James Wolfensohn who said the answer to the 3 most important things that a country with corruption should achieve is that it should: one, fight corruption, two, fight corruption; and three, fight corruption.

My third sketch is of Botswana, which has achieved the distinction of being the only African country in the top 50 of the Transparency International corruption index which I mentioned – with caveats – earlier.

Botswana is a model, in that it’s good on theory and good on practice.

The theory is watertight: the anchor for good governance in Botswana is the Constitution – guaranteeing rights and liberties and establishing the three branches of government. And from the constitution follows the Public Service Charter.

The fight against corruption is enshrined in law: the Corruption and Economic Crime Act of 1994, and with it a new implementation body, the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime. The Directorate has a three-pronged strategy of investigation, prevention and education. So the theory and the tools are good. In fact, with computerized case management systems, they are state-of-the-art. But what of its results?

The new Directorate recognizes its short-comings, those from both within and without. It still lacks skills and training. The Act itself has loopholes – above all in targeting private rather than public sector malpractice.

And yet it records its successes – I read recently of a government official given 4 years in jail for taking a $15,000 dollar bribe to award a new roads project. The Botswana example is instructive for all Commonwealth countries in that it combines leadership, funds, theory and practice in its fight against corruption.

Let me now turn, finally, to the Commonwealth and its own contribution to its members’ good governance – a huge enterprise within the Secretariat, involving both our legal and our governance training teams.

I have always viewed democracy and its components – like building governance and integrity, and fighting corruption – as a journey and a ‘work-in-progress’. The Commonwealth doesn’t impose itself – instead, it walks alongside its members as they make that journey.

In doing so, we make best use of all our comparative advantages – above all those of a common language, a common legal heritage, common constitutional principles and legal challenges. We use our contacts and networks.

In 1991, we convened the first Commonwealth Expert Group on good governance and the fight against corruption. It led to the so-called Framework Principles on ethics and integrity in public life and in economic and fiscal policies, on the management of public services, on the judiciary and the legal system, and on civil society.

Then in 2003, we set up a Working Group to draft model laws and help individual countries to implement UNCAC.

In 2005, our Heads of Government repeated our commitment to root out corruption everywhere, and all the things - including extortion and bribery - which undermine good governance, respect for human rights and economic development. We welcomed the-then imminent entry into force of the UNCAC, and urged member states which had not already done so to become parties to it. So far, only 16 have: we have more work to do.

In 2005, we also launched recommendations on the Recovery and Repatriation of Assets of Illicit Origin. These were as strong as they were new: that no Commonwealth Head of State or Government, nor their ministers or officials, should be immune from prosecution; and that confiscation can in principle happen without an actual conviction on the basis of proof.

Our activities, though, go further, especially in support of UNCAC.

We have worked with the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, UNODC, to fill gaps in national legislations, in areas like bribery and extortion, and I am happy to announce that by June 2007, we will have completed a full legislative and technical guide for Commonwealth states implementing UNCAC.

For our individual members, we believe that adequate human resources must match adequate legislation. Hence our focus on creating a specialist cadre of prosecutors and investigators. We are running highly practical training workshops for prosecutors and investigators, and - we hope, soon - judges.

And where there are gaps, we try to fill them. We have drafted laws, for instance, allowing Uganda to request criminal evidence from other countries, and to receive it from others. In Kenya, we have set up a training programme for the Anti-Corruption Commission. In Botswana we have drafted whistle-blowing legislation.

The bulk of the training the Commonwealth offers in relation to integrity and corruption lies in three areas: government procurement, infrastructure services, and customs.

I was pleased to see the article written by Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim, Director of the Institute of Public Ethics, in your New Sunday Times yesterday highlighting the huge cost of corruption and how it has affected decisions for years within the World Bank.

Estimates say that each year $400 billion is lost worldwide to corruption in government procurement. Corruption can seriously undermine all the potential positive effects of a government’s capital spending, taking money out of poor people’s lives and putting it into rich peoples’ pockets. So we have trained procurement officers in Africa and the Caribbean region. This work is closely linked to separate but extensive programmes in public accounts and the reform of financial management. The Commonwealth has published Guidelines for Public Financial Management Reform, and I urge you to read them.

Meanwhile our member countries report countless bribes over access to things such as water supply, sanitation and solid waste management, drainage, access roads, highways and paving. Think what that means in holding back health and education from children. Costs go up, and the service – especially to the poorest – goes down. That’s why the Commonwealth has developed a toolkit and a pilot course on the issue. Again - and for obvious reasons - this work is closely linked to separate Commonwealth programmes on the public-private partnerships which so often deliver these infrastructure services like water supply and sewage disposal. We also run related programmes in local governance and decentralisation.

Third, customs, which are traditionally ripe for abuse. The potent mixture of administrative monopoly coupled with the exercise of widespread discretion, particularly in an environment that may lack proper systems of control and accountability, can easily lead to corruption in an area which is of course a major source of government revenue. So we have run special programmes in East and Southern Africa, and will be running a ‘train-the-trainers’ workshop on customs integrity for the Asia/Pacific region in May, right here in Malaysia, and where the World Customs Organisation has a Regional Training Centre.

Ladies and gentlemen, I promised you some philosophy and some practicality.

So I conclude…

That the cancer of corruption is indeed a death-sentence for a society that wants to grow for the good of all, unless it is rooted out. No one can anywhere can genuinely say that corruption is a good thing.

That it is the 800 million Commonwealth citizens, who eke out a living on just one dollar a day, who suffer most from the greed of a few.

That anti-corruption strategies need to be coordinated, multi-faceted, targeted, and supported by demonstrable political will.

I believe that the Malaysia National Integrity Plan exhibits all of those qualities. I congratulate you on what you have achieved, and I urge you to do more.

Corruption can be eradicated – through leadership and a culture of integrity.

You can do it, Malaysia.

Malaysia….boleh!

Terima kasih.