Systemic corruption
So deeply entrenched is corruption that its eradication requires radical and not topical remedies, writes Osama El-Ghazali Harb*
Is it not time we turn our sights inwards, stop obsessing with the outside world and focus more intently on what is happening at home? Indeed, why not be a little more frank and admit that if we were to perceive the outside from the perspective of the role Egypt should play in the regional and international arenas, which is as an active agent rather than a passive object, then the efficacy of that role, we would be forced to admit, is a reflection of our economic, cultural and political strength.
We have many reasons for introspection, reasons that are growing more numerous and compelling by the day. Nor is it necessary to enumerate them for almost all of us are fully aware of them.
Many phenomena occur and reoccur without attracting much notice. Yet, at a certain point, within a certain year, an incident takes place that arouses great distress and alarm and causes us to sit up and take note. Take, for example, the collapse of the building in Nasr City on 26 January (and simultaneously note the coincidence that precisely 52 years ago to the day another major incident occurred -- the Cairo fire, illuminating many of the flaws that had prevailed in Egyptian society at that time). The tragic collapse of the apartment block in Nasr City brought numerous concerns to the fore, most revolving around the question of corruption, not only in municipal government but in many aspects of our national life.
Corruption is a universal phenomenon; all countries suffer from it to some extent or other. Egypt, moreover ranks somewhere in the middle on the scale of the spread of corruption (In a study on transparency and fighting corruption conducted by the Berlin-based International Transparency Organisation Egypt came in at 62 out of the 102 countries in the study). However, this should not keep us from subjecting the corruption that does exist in Egypt to scrutiny and diagnosis. After all, the question is not one of quantity, regardless of how flagrant. We must face the fact that corruption is not a superficial or marginal symptom that can be remedied directly, but rather something that is woven into the fabric of our social and economic lives, determining the behaviour of every individual, whether they are ordinary citizens or members of the privileged elite.
The simplest definition of corruption involves engaging in illicit behaviour, such as bribery, blackmail or the abuse of confidential information for the purpose of personal gain. Although the World Bank restricts the concept to the abuse of power by public officials, a definition that most scholars maintain extends to include the realms of business and other private activities, I intend it here in a much broader sense. By corruption I mean the violation of legal, moral or professional standards and rules of conduct for the purpose of personal advancement or gain. Thus, bribery is corruption; the violation of professional ethics is corruption; deliberate negligence of the proper specifications for the construction of a building or the paving of a road is corruption; and complicity, and even turning a blind eye to this, is corruption. All forms of violating or circumventing the law in order to evade obligations and responsibilities are acts of corruption. This more comprehensive meaning better approximates the sense of corruption as defined by Arab linguists: "the dishonest appropriation of moneys" and "wickedness perpetrated against the common welfare". It is also closer to the sense in which the word is used in the Qur'an, which is as an antonym of probity and righteous conduct.
What should concern us here is that many forms of corruption, especially the violation and circumvention of laws, regulations and occupational ethics, have become acceptable forms of behaviour and justified as part of the rules of the current social order. As blunt and disturbing as this might seem, it is still the bitter truth. Moreover, one of the most shocking facts is that corruption in certain activities has virtually become a bedrock of social, economic and political stability. I will give a very simple example, yet very telling.
Everyone knows that the taxi metre fell into disuse ages ago. Anyone travelling by taxi, in Cairo or in any other Egyptian city, pays a fare that is mutually acceptable to both parties. This practice is nothing less than a form of corruption -- ie a form of lawbreaking and complicity in breaking the law. That this practice is so routine does not make it any less disgraceful. Imagine a foreign tourist hailing down a taxi only to find that everything he understands about the principles of fares in this mode of transport collapses before his eyes. Suddenly, he finds himself embroiled in a hopeless bargaining process in which the driver is certain to obtain whatever his negotiating skills can drive the fare up to. (I need hardly point out that this occurs in a country that is famed as a unique tourist destination.)
This form of corruption has advantages all around. Drivers like it because they have the leeway to try to extract the largest fares possible from their customers, and even if one fare is too low the next one that comes along will compensate. Passengers tolerate it because the practice reduces the likelihood that the driver will refuse to convey them to their destination, since, after all, it is subject to the laws of supply and demand. Moreover, they can always avail themselves of that last resort, especially if the negotiating process takes place at the end of the journey, of insisting on paying the fare on the metre and getting out of the taxi in a hurry. To the police the practice is a boon. The unused metre is an ever ready sword to brandish against the driver. Not only can police avail themselves of the right -- at any time -- of fining drivers, they can also use it as a pretext for procuring free rides.
Suppose, now, that the government moved to put an end to this long established practice and "apply the law" strictly and uniformly. Most likely the result would be complete and utter turmoil as taxi traffic ground to a halt amidst, at best, an undeclared strike and, at worst, rioting by that segment of the population that earns its living from taxis. Thus, we find ourselves before a very curious irony, which appears to be that we have to continue to condone or overlook corruption in order to maintain law and order. Indeed, more flagrant and more complex examples come to mind.
Other forms of corruption strike one as though they were a form of redistribution of wealth, an unwritten contract for the realisation of social justice, one might say.
Bribery, in particular, is widespread in workplaces which bring together individuals of vastly disparate wealth and social status. (In municipal bureaucracies or in customs zones, for example, petty functionaries deal on a daily basis with wealthy landlords, contractors, shop owners, investors, exporters, importers and other businessmen whose sole concern is to complete the paperwork necessary to obtain the licences, clearances and other permits required to get their business done.)
As a general rule, the official salaries civil servants in these agencies receive are not even sufficient to ensure the minimum acceptable standard of living. Yet many are willing to take these jobs and accept their salaries without demur (The prime minister recently announced that the state hires 170,000 new employees per year). That is because they know from day one that their real salary is much larger than the one they officially receive. In a culture that does not draw very distinct lines between the "gift" and the "bribe", the custom has caught on like wildfire. Not only do both sides stand to gain, they posit moral justifications for their actions. The briber who greases the wheels in order to get his business done believes he is helping out those miserably underpaid functionaries; those who accept the bribes believe, at best, that they are receiving some philanthropic munificence and, at worst, that those doing the bribing are thieves and conmen anyway and deserve to be ripped off.
Against this backdrop bureaucratic red tape and the ambiguity of rules and regulations, which are such a nightmare for the public and businessmen, are a treasure trove for bribe seekers who resist tooth and nail any attempts to change the system, even those that have been instituted by law. Given this situation, can we imagine a serious attempt to end corruption and institute reform and respect for the law? At the very least the machinery of bureaucracy will clog up and the various concerns of the public will be put on hold. However, of greater tion, unable to make ends meet with their paltry official salaries. Contemplate, too, for a moment, what would happen when Egypt enters the age of e-government, putting an end to direct contact between civil service functionaries and the public and, simultaneously, to that wretched and capricious means for the redistribution of wealth.
As investigations into the Nasr City incident confirmed, fining lawbreakers has become an important source of revenue for both municipal and central government alike. Again, such fines and penalties are one of the sources of public revenue in any country. However, here, we find that wink we give to corruption is being indirectly encouraged in order to augment public revenues, as though suddenly the government is in the business of "selling" fines so that citizens can "pay" to break the law. (Has any true benefit accrued from legislation compelling the wearing of seatbelts other than that the fines for not wearing them have become another source of government revenue?)
The danger of the widespread acceptance of this practice is not only that it diminishes the reverence for the law but also that it encourages the types of violations which should not be forgivable, let alone purchasable, such as the violation of standards and technical specifications in construction, leading to tragedies of catastrophic proportions. However, as the beneficiary from this form of corruption is the government or the various municipal agencies, it is difficult to imagine how it can be stopped since to do so would curtail an important source of revenue.
If these examples of various forms of corruption in our country tell us anything it is that they are not isolated cases of unchecked greed, but rather that they are structurally engrained in our society and practiced routinely by vast numbers of people. This explains why the outrage and calls for immediate reform that surface after every disaster that illuminates our flaws subside so quickly and life resumes its normal course.
This is not a case of an individual or a handful of individuals, but rather an entire society. Altering this condition will require sweeping political, legislative, economic and social reforms; certainly far more than penalising a group of individuals. For example, reforming the taxi fare situation should begin with legislation that sets fare rates at a level that is just both to the drivers and to passengers. Ending bribery within government bureaucracies requires, first and foremost, the reform of the entire public sector wage structure, not to mention an overhaul of production structures in order to stimulate the economy. Putting an end to the sale of fines and irresponsible accommodations of that nature must go in tandem with the search for other more viable revenues for the government machinery.
In short, fighting a problem as entrenched, widespread and complex as corruption entails a comprehensive political, social and economic campaign however smug and complacent we may feel when a few of the more flagrantly corrupt are brought to account.
* The writer is editor-in-chief of the quarterly Al- Siyassa Al-Dawlia (International Politics), issued by Al-Ahram, and member of the Shura Council.
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 678 (Issue No. 26 February - 3 March)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/679/op11.htm