by Fernando Di Lascio
Corruption is a type of pandemic that may bring worse consequences to humanity than the bubonic plague or AIDS because we are still very far from being able to control it.
There are occurrences, in greater or lesser extent, of various forms of corruption (bribery, favoritism, cronyism, etc.) in every country in the world. In fact this is an evil so common nowadays that some human beings already consider it commonplace and even reasonable.
But in the history of humanity, corruption around the world has always repulsed and revolted honest citizens until, in the past decade, the accumulation of these repulsed citizens generated a critical mass of individuals revolted against corruption that has spawned a collective international action with force and power capable of overwhelming the plague of corruption on the planet.
This collective uprising against corruption gave rise to UNCAC, acronym that in English means United Nations Convention Against Corruption, which begins with the following sentence:
“The States Parties to this Convention, concerned about the seriousness of problems and threats posed by corruption to the stability and security of societies, undermining the institutions and values of democracy, ethical values and justice and jeopardizing sustainable development and the rule of law… Have agreed…”.
Thus, the UNCAC is now the most comprehensive set of technical mechanisms and international legal rules available to the fight against corruption, with the promise of great advances both in the legal area and in the international and social areas.
In the legal area; because the 150 UNCAC Member States have agreed to turn all the terms and conditions of this Convention into domestic legislation in their countries, thereby forcing their presents and future governments to observe all that is thereby established, under risk of incurring prevarication.
In international relations, the great news is that all Member States will submit their efforts in combating corruption to a review by other member states, and the results of that review must be made known to the public.
In addition, there are also parallel evaluation reports of great reliability, such as the reports of Transparency International. And our International Coalition of Civil Organizations to promote the accelerated implementation of UNCAC will also need to carry out a constant monitoring of all countries to collect data that shall be equated and published on the Internet with unrestricted access.
This set of information will enable the interested citizen, anywhere in the world, to obtain a fairly clear picture of the situation of corruption in his/her country, or in any other country, and to have an idea of the efficiency of the strategies adopted by his/her country in relation to the results obtained in different signatory countries.
But the social aspect is perhaps the most important of all UNCAC advancements, because it was agreed by all Member States, as a fundamental condition, the direct involvement of society and citizens interested in all phases, including in the process of reviewing and publishing reports.
However, as the direct involvement of society and citizens in the process of fighting against corruption implies in the discussion of institutional issues and of the democratic imperfections, which are subjects considered critical by some governments, some cases of resistance to this social inclusion in the implementation of UNCAC were already expected.
For this reason, all legally unsustainable official attempts to postpone the inclusion of society must be immediately combated, along with arguments that attempt to conceal the legal obligation of governments, because they are the required catalysts and obligatory sponsors of this social inclusion in the global fight against corruption, in face of the clear and express commitment that the Member States took on under Article 13 of the Convention in 2003, which states:
“Each State Party shall take appropriate measures, within its means and in accordance with fundamental principles of its domestic law, to promote the active participation of individuals and groups outside the public sector, such as civil society, non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations, in the prevention of and the fight against corruption and to raise public awareness regarding the existence, causes and gravity of and the threat posed by corruption.”
Unfortunately, as it will be demonstrated, the Brazilian Government has so far been one of the governments averse to the inclusion of society in the direct fight against corruption, although it makes a great effort to try to prove otherwise.
According to data from Transparency International, Brazil is currently the 69th most corrupt country in the world, but there are those among us who think the situation is even more serious than that. Outside the country everybody knows that Brazil is one of the most corrupt countries and here, internally, experts from the ‘Getulio Vargas’ Foundation and also other institutions supportive of the fight against corruption indicate that in Brazil approximately U.S. $ 7 billion are diverted from public funds every year. But others say this thievery is actually even greater than that.
Right now we can even calculate how many apartments of 3 million you can buy with 7 billion or more; how many helicopters, yachts, fast cars. But it is much more difficult to estimate how many citizens, children and seniors are annually paying for this luxury with his lives due to lack of food, sanitation, adequate medical examinations or treatments – all obligations of a government that cannot save them because of “lack of resources”.
Like many teenagers were pushed into marginalization, thrown in jail or killed by urban violence because they did not have a profession, they were not into sports or fine arts, the government claims they could not save them due to “lack of resources”.
So it seems that every citizen in the world understands and suffers at least a little on account of disease and corruption. But it is possible to try to better understand the scenario that was established in the world to fight corruption from an analysis of the situation in Brazil and the specific actions of stakeholders, social activists, governments and businesses involved in this fight around the world – a task very greatly facilitated by the Professor Indira Carr’s excellent studies, at the University of Surrey, on NGO <http://www.qualicidade.org.br/arq-downloads/ngoworkingpapercarrandouthwaite
.pdf> ‘s Combating Corruption.
On the government’s side, in several countries official bodies charged with combating corruption in public administration were created. In Brazil, the General Controllership of the Union (CGU) was established on April 2nd 2001 with the status of Ministry, directly linked to the Presidency, with the stated purpose to combat corruption and foster the protection of public property.
With the advent of international agreements stimulating the appearance of a global fight against corruption, the CGU is also responsible for coordinating the implementation of the main commitments made by Brazil before the OAS Convention and the UN Convention, UNCAC – United Nations Convention Against Corruption in 2003.
However, in the midst of the general public the practical results of public money invested in creating and maintaining this new ministry over the period of a decade, seems not to exist, and, apparently, people are increasingly discredited in political institutions. On the media, for every news-coverage about a good CGU action against corruption, ten unpunished corruption scandals are broadcasted… and the smiling, happy faces of some of the most notorious crooks in the world of politics can be spotted hundreds of times on TV and in the social columns of our best-selling publications.
On the entrepreneurial side, pressured by the growth of green wave resulting from the demand for a posture of global environmental sustainability, many companies now include in their business plans to organize groups of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) to address policies and issues related to sustainable development. Some of these groups have evolved and are also involved in combating corruption, creating their own strategies to work on this issue.
The greatest example of these organizations in Brazil is the Ethos Institute of Corporate Responsibility, now with an annual budget of approximately 10 million Reais, and sponsored by, among others, large banks, and by national and multinational contractors, whose activities greatly encompass the promotion and maintenance of networks of social institutions in São Paulo, through the ‘Nossa São Paulo’ Initiative, and, nationally, through ABRACCI, the Brazilian Articulation for Combating Corruption and Impunity.
It is important to observe that everywhere in the world the posture of these organizations and RSC networks, as far as we can perceive, is to try to collaborate with their respective governments. So their actions always have aim to come to a compromise or an agreement with governments or legislators, as evidenced by analysis of the Brazilian case.
frontation is not part of the scope of performance possibilities of the RSC networks, and that is explicit, for example, in the ABRACCI Charter of Principles, which states: “Governments are partners / interlocutors”.
Therefore, always trying to avoid situations that can produce impasses or lead to conflicts between society and members of the executive or legislative powers, we can expect that these RSC networks always format their work proposals based on partnerships with the government, distancing themselves from the interests of society with regard to all cases considered most critical or delicate by the politicians in power.
However, in for NGOs seeking to play a relevant social role in the fight against corruption, the posture of confrontation is a fundamental democratic requirement. In fact, everyone knows that confrontation is often more productive than the settlement of interests, especially those dealing with political interests. Furthermore, in some cases confrontation is essential to maintaining the dignity and the rights of common citizens.
With what we have we know that to implement a participatory democracy, dissociated from demagoguery and associated with an improved representative democracy, which is what we seek, we must allow society to participate in discussions of matters of public interest like the issue of corruption. But that is not all. Discussion may lead to conflict and conflicts can lead to impasses that, in turn, will need to be resolved.
And to solve impasses between society and governments, someone has to have the last word. This unilateralism destroys the principle of “partnership” and brings out the principle of force; those in power are the ones who decide. But then who has greater power in a democracy than the majority of the citizens united by an idea?
That is the impasse faced by many civil societies and astonished NGOs today.
If on the one hand its programmatic objectives may lead them to an inevitable confrontation against all who oppose or obstruct the implementation of their objectives, on the other hand there is the siren’s song of government funded projects and RSC networks forever seeking to seduce social organizations for the composition of dialogue and partnership with the government, forcing them to abandon their combative character, thereby neutralizing their fighting power to reach their democratic goals.
Thus the fighters against corruption in some countries will need to revise their strategy to promote greater efficiency in their fight and this path leads to a clear definition of the role that each of the stakeholders acting in this combat should have – i.e.: who is who and what is one’s role?
CSR organizations, civil societies, and NGOs must to have their roles and responsibilities clearly defined and transparent to society. In the global fight against corruption there must not be room for articulating rascals.
In Brazil, the strategy adopted by the Government to try to keep people away and simulate a society participation in implementing UNCAC is clear in the covenants that the CGU has made with the mentioned RSC network, bringing together various organizations and NGOs, some already under the spell of that siren song mentioned. Together they will promote several seminars and conferences for men in suits and well-dressed ladies, resulting in endless preparations of reports, and nothing more.
However, as a result of this reckless strategy adopted by the Brazilian government, we can see on the streets the ever increasing discredit of the population in politicians and democratic institutions as a result of an endless succession of scandals and frauds going unpunished, which constantly afflict the entire population.
A recent survey we conducted with about 500 organizations supports this fact. Through this survey we found that among the respondents, 94% of them never even heard of UNCAC, and also that 85% of them have never heard of the Conference on Transparency and Social Participation that begins next month in Brazil.
Therefore the legal obligation of the Brazilian government is to promote the inclusion of the society and citizens in the process of implementing UNCAC, but this has been grossly neglected since 2005, the year of Brazil’s accession to the Convention. And we know that the same is happening in various countries around the world.
The startling conclusion is that some governments are joining CSR networks with the objective to neutralize social forces; the same networks that, either by themselves or with the aid of other groups, would have a more combative action, equally necessary to the development of democracy and the fight against corruption.
But there is in Brazil, as there certainly are in many other countries where our coalition operates, well-structured and combative civil associations and NGOs, with clear and defined objectives and ready to confront whoever it is, within the law, to assert their purpose of fighting corruption and promoting democratic development.
For these reasons, to make the corruption-fighting weapons of UNCAC its Article 13 more effective, it will be necessary for our Coalition to have a Coordination Committee composed of men and women willing to foster the development of democratic and social mechanisms which will enable people to carry out their surveillance and increase their monitoring power through this and other similar mechanisms capable of also exercise the power of the majority in cases of impasse between society representatives and public authorities.
We hope that our Coalition will promote and increase the number and power of influence of these organizations and people willing to truly fight against corruption, since compromise and dialogue with governments and businessmen should always be the first attempt of a serious NGO, but never the last.
________________________________
Fernando Di Lascio is Chairman of the Qualicidade Institute, advocated and activist, author of numerous articles and essays on democracy and corruption, co-author of the book “Our Twenty-First Century”, editor of the Journal and Blog of the Independent Citizen, member of the UNCAC-COALITION International Coalition of Civil Society Organizations and candidate to a seat in the Coordination Committee.
