We had thought that democracy will make leaders accountable to the people and lead to less corruption but the opposite is taking place.However we can not straightaway dismiss democracy of this count. Many studies indicates that there is less corruption in democratic regimes. Wyne Sandholtz and William Koetzle of Princeton University ,in a study of corruption in fifty countries found that levels of corruption are higher where democratic norms and institutions are weak. But this does not fit with our live experience hence there is a need to relook into such studies.
It is clear that the rich countries have low level of corruption today and many have also embraced democracy .There exist the correlation between prosperity and democracy. But this does not mean that democracy leads to prosperity .An example will clarify the issue.
A Statistical study of fair and dark persons in a village is likely to conclude that fair colour is cause of large land ownership. Landed persons generally have fair skin. But such conclusion is obviously untenable. The true explanation is that the skin of the land- owners is exposed less to the sun hence fairer. Distribution of land is the cause of colour of skin, not vice versa. But a statistical analysis would show that colour of the skin is the cause of prosperity.
The situation of democracy is similar. Let us dived the countries into two blocks or categories those having advanced technologies and those without.Technogically advanced countries are extracting the resources of the the backward courtiers Their companies are extracting resources from this poor nations by using their advanced cannons; the US did the same in Iraq by using advanced patriot missiles; and Microsoft is doing the same by selling Windows software at monopolistic prices.
The rich countries use part of this income to support democracy within their borders. They provide facilities to their people such as free healthcare and food stamps to the unemployed. The money for these expenditures is obtained, in parts from the taxes paid by Microsoft out of profits extracted from the poor countries. The American people ‘believes’ in democracy because such system is delivering comfort to them .
The same formula does not work in technologically backward countries like Kenya .They have to purchase Windows software at exorbitant prices. The government do not have the money to provide free healthcare and food stamps. The ordinary people have to pay the bribes to the government doctors for getting treatment because facilities available are limited. Ministers have to make the money from corruption because they have the fulfill peoples expectations of free packets of salts and liquor pouches and not forgetting real money. The same democracy produces opposite results in the poor countries. It appears that democracy is merely the flag post of prosperity. The same butter eaten by healthy person gives strength but when taken by a sick person creates indigestion; similarly the same democracy adopted in prosperous countries leads to less corruption but when adopted in poor countries leads to more corruption.
Worse ,democracy becomes a cause of poverty of technologically backward countries.Carloss A Ball, Editor of AIPE, a Spanish-language news organization based in Florida, says in article titled “Dictator or Democracy?” and I quote: “Most Latin American says in all sorts of corruption of my generation were born under non democratic regimes. In the 60s and 70s new democratic regimes surged all over the continent .The real outcome of democratic wave was that the people had the chance to elect virtual dictators to rule for the period of four, five or even six years.Strengly enough ,the dictators of the past ,despite of their usual personal corruption, in many cases showed far more respect for rule of law and sound currencies than their successors, the democratically elected Presidents.
“Latin politicians soon learned that the easiest way to steal is by inflating the currency and the poor suffered the most since what little they have is in cash or savings accounts, not in real estate or Swiss Bank accounts. On December 3,2001,the Argentine ‘democratic’ government of president Fenando de Rua confiscated the bank accounts of all the Argentines, perhaps the largest bureaucratic robbery in modern times. Under the law people were allowed to withdraw only 250 pesos per week from their accounts, and their dollar deposits were converted into devalued pesos. No military dictators of 30sor 40s or 50s managed to do so much harm to so many of their own with one stroke of the pen. Perhaps they couldn’t do it because they did not have the protection of ‘democratic’ mantles. Latin democracies have sadly turn out to be much worse than the old dictatorships.”
Kenya’s experience is somewhat similar. The former Rain Ball Alliance government pursued faceless economic growth under the slogans of BANANAS and ORANGES while the current ODM-PNU- lead coalition has replaced it with welfare a programme that benefits the bureaucracy more than the people. Issues such as creation of employment and land reforms are missing from their agenda of both parties.
One argument in favour of democracy is that it provides an opportunity to resist corruption. In an article titled ‘The Flip side’ Robert A Paster defends democracy saying that “corruption is as rarely as bad under the new democracy as it was under the previous dictatorship. The big difference is that the old dictatorship controlled the press and concealed its corruption, and the new democracy allows the press free reins.”
The point is well taken. But such freedom may not lead to less corruption. The reason as Carlos A Ball pointed out ,is that the commitment of the elected leaders to the people is limited to a few years .They have the tendency of fulfill their personal interests in the shortest time possible available. People do get an opportunity to resist this corruption but there is a higher incentive to corruption among the elected leaders .
There is less corruption in a dictatorial system because the leaders have the long term commitment towards the people ;it is less in democratic system because people are free to resist the high lever of corruption .In the end democracy does not beget less corruption. Corruptions of the current ruling ODM-PNU-lead coalition government will continue to occur till we sit smugly assuming that democracy is the guarantee to good governance. Democracy encourages leaders to become corrupt especially in poor country like ours. We need to give more attention to the motivation of the leaders than to preventing their higher level of corruption.
Thanks!!
No comments:
Post a Comment