When confronted with the big question what is the one thing that is keeping Pakistan from prospering, the most common responses are likely to be terrorism and power outages. But what drives terrorism? Is bad governance partly to blame? Are power breakdowns merely due to genuine shortage of supply? More than six billion people live in countries where deep public sector corruption is fuelling poverty, exclusion and inequality. Unfortunately, Pakistan ranks high amongst those countries. While terrorism, poor growth, energy shortage and falling revenues are critical in explaining slow progress it is systematic corruption that lies at the root of these challenges. Corruption is undeniably the biggest obstacle to development in Pakistan. But corruption is a global issue as it exists almost everywhere. What is so unique about corruption in Pakistan that makes it such a great concern for development? In the case of Pakistan, it is not simply the alarmingly high level of public sector corruption that is deeply worrying; it is the entrenched nature of the phenomenon. Corruption in Pakistan is structural, endemic and deeply embedded.
Corruption is broadly classified into three categories; grand, petty and political. Grand corruption consists of acts committed at a high level of government that distort policies or the functioning of the state, enabling leaders to benefit at the expense of the public good. On the other hand, petty corruption refers to everyday abuse of power by low and mid-level public officials in their interactions with ordinary citizens. Finally, political corruption is a manipulation of policies, institutions and rules of procedures by politicians to keep their power, status and wealth unchallenged. While all three categories pervade public life in Pakistan, political corruption is exceptionally rife.
Since Pakistan’s inception, personal interests have invariably gained precedence at the expense of public welfare in Pakistan. Policies have been motivated by selfish interests rather than ideals of collective good and social security. Institutions have been paralysed by the tradition of political patronage and nepotism. The case of PIA and Pakistan Steel Mills is the clear evidence in this aspect. Appropriation of public assets for private gain and embezzlement of public funds by politicians have deprived the citizens of basic necessities. Winters once anticipated by many are now dreaded in the wake of excruciating gas shortage. Industry has been brought to a grinding halt due to frequent power breakdowns. What turnaround are we talking about?
Here are the big questions: what has made this exploitation possible and unchallenged? Why does it persist? Can we ever get rid of this historical trend of looting and extraction?
The scourge of corruption in Pakistan has been simply made possible by the excessive abuse of power fuelled by lack of accountability. The ruling groups have crippled laws and institutions of accountability for personal gain. Politicians have exploited their authority to bend rules and regulations to their own advantage at the expense of public good. Evidence? Take the case of Sindh; Karachi, once known as the ‘city of lights’ has descended into abyss of darkness and fear. In the wake of the ongoing cleanup operation, we have seen how the ruling groups attempted to pass a legislation demanding Rangers to seek permission from the chief minister before raiding any government offices. There’s more; the Sindh Assembly passed a law on January 15, which allows prosecutors to withdraw cases against any suspect at any stage of the proceedings so long as it is with the court’s consent. Such is the extent of power abuse in this country.
A similar reaction has been noted in Punjab as the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has freshly embarked on an anti-corruption drive. NAB’s resolve to crack down on political corruption has drawn immediate and heavy opposition from some politicians who have accused the institution of overreach, and going beyond its mandate. The prime minister even warned of clipping its wings if the scrutiny continued unabated.
Given the deeply entrenched power abuse, is eliminating corruption an impossible task? Can we ever get rid of systematic corruption? If tackling acute corruption is possible, where do we start?
Build more commissions and anti-corruption watchdogs? Set up a new security force? Or fix the original ones?
A common thread throughout literature on corruption supports the idea that the quality of institutions is fundamental. Good institutions promote rule of law, protect citizens against expropriation and provide a stable business environment. Nothing exemplifies the strength of good institutions like the model case of Singapore where the government, led by Lee Kuan Yew, built effective institutions that fostered the rule of law and contract enforcement. Today, it is one of the most developed and least corrupt countries in the world. While expecting to have Singapore-like institutions in Pakistan seems deeply unrealistic, it is not unattainable. We must at least start by strengthening the basic institutions of accountability. Anticorruption watchdogs like NAB are also important. They are credited with progress against corruption in countries including Hong Kong, Botswana and Chile. But the anti-corruption and accountability bodies are likely to be effective when they operate in a strong institutional environment with honest leadership, and insulation from political influence. Otherwise, bodies such as NAB could be easily rendered useless or misused for political gain.
Therefore, it is important to build the institutional framework first. Are we on it? Access to information, independent judiciary and free press would not only be fundamental in eradicating corruption but, more importantly, for achieving an improved quality of life. But who will start the process? Wouldn’t it be against the interests of the ruling groups? Institutional reform will disrupt the structure that has bred current patterns of abuse and exploitation. Will the politicians let that happen? Civil society and empowered citizens can certainly play a key role in the process.
The writer holds a postgraduate degree in Anthropology and Development from the London School of Economics & Political Science. He is a lecturer of International Development for the University of London International Programme