The Concept Of Corruption In A Democratic State
Political Science scholars use theories and concepts that help them make sense of a certain phenomenon. These theories and concepts go back to the time of the classical Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Thucydides. Although more of these concepts and theories were developed during the medieval ages, through the minds, there is a substantial amount of these theories and concepts. The focus of this paper, however, is the concept of corruption in a democratic state; that is how corruption was defined, and how the concept of corruption grew through decades of studies done on this matter. From the time of Aristotle, corruption has been a concern of philosophers, social scientists, and policy makers [1].
There are different views and different ideas that came out. Some of which might still be hanging and remain unconcluded. There are times that this was given high importance, and times that it is simply normal and, worse, ignored. It could have been ignored, in the sense that, it could not really affect the life of the people, in general. So, it’s very important to go back to the classics, where Greek philosophers were the first ones to discover, observe and write about this phenomenon. There are theories that are still prevalent and applicable, but some ideas sound obsolete and are not fit to the real situations being looked at and analyzed. Starting with the Ancient Greek Period, plethora is a term given by Aristotle that is the opposite of the ideal state, ‘destruction’. Aristotle defined the corruption as pthora, a term meaning the opposite of the ideal state, or the rise of destruction [2]. The term is different from the usual understanding of corruption, that is taking the resources of public and divert or use for personal advantage. The word was, however, later defined as the use of power for personal benefits. Corruption is most likely affiliated within the works of the state or refers to the misuse of power for private gain [3].
Aristotle gave a definition of a pure government, a non-corrupt government. These states are governed by honest rulers. Honest, in a way, that they do only what is favorable for the majority, or actions that will be for the common good; rulers that will never choose their own interest over those who they rule over. In the present world, it will be very difficult to believe that there is a pure government, as defined by Aristotle above. The developments that we see in daily news and daily discussions on government activities and processes reflect too much of the real situation.
The idea of the of this non-corrupt society is rather too idealistic, in a way, that there is no state no matter what time or era has achieved this utopian ideology. The author agrees with Aristotle, in that no existing administration, no matter how young or old achieved a non-corrupt society. The author, though, still believes, that there are clean and honest officials or rulers. However, there are systems, processes and culture, established or have evolved through time, that lead to conducive environment for corruption. The temptations for corruption or getting more (or taking more from the state coffers) than what could be prescribed are too strong. While it is really ideal that there will be no corruption at all, there are a lot of requirements before an official gets into power. This may be through appointment, or designation or getting to power from the electoral process. The latter, that is getting into government office by election by the constituents is too costly. The voting people are getting used to be pampered by the benefits provided by the officials wanting to be elected.
The big question is, how do these officials get the costs in return? The basic prescribed salaries are not sufficient to cover for those, so the officials resort to do some extra-ordinary, tantamount or equivalent to corruption. Demands from appointing or designating official are also factors that are considered. These have the notion that the appointing officer will also get something in return, in exchange for the appointments. Given all of these factors and the premises mentioned above, the measure of corruption now will boil down to which has less or which has more corruption. From the author. however, the existing or current administrations are not equally corrupt; some administrations are more corrupt than the other. Therefore, the author sees the perfect state as a state that is the least corrupt compared to other states in the world [6].
The types of government given by aristotle can be divided into two the 1st group being the pure form of government which includes kingship, aristocracy and democracy and the 2nd the corrupt or unpure type of government despotism, oligarchy and mob-rule. Kautilya, a Brahmin, minister to the Indian king, Chandragupta Maurya, wrote a book about government that was entitled ‘Arthashastra’, translated to “Instructions on Material property”. In Kautilya’s book, it was implied that it would be difficult for someone to witness corruption of a public official and it would be impossible for a disciple of the king not to take a part of the king’s income [4]. Privilegium canonis Regarding a crime where a man who hurts a ecclesiastical man will receive excommunication2 Privilegium fori a special group in the case of crimes wherein a man is presented before an ecclesiastical judge3 Privilegium immunitatis tax exemption4 Privilegium competentiae. SustenanceDuring the late 5th century A.D, St. Augustine with his work, unlike other philosophers and thinkers before him, views politics as unnecessary. He is concerned only on preserving peace of only the exterior and is not at all helping in the preservation of morality and character of the people [2].
Throughout the Medieval Period, the church and the state were always against eachother, fighting against the idea of the other and most importantly fighting over power; the state with their machines and army, and the church with their influence. Now during this age, religious interventions are seen as corruption, due to the notion that two different acts of man should not interfere each other. This was, also, the era when people paid for ecclesiastical privileges such as Privilegium canonis1, Privilegium fori2, Privilegium immunitatis3, and Privilegium competentiae 4[5].Machiavelli on corruption, corruption was generally defined back then as the designation of prohibited relations or negotiations between the private interests of an individual and that of the public [5]. That corruption is the the opposite of virtue, therefore corrupt people are people who lives for their own, those who use their power for their personal interests and neglects the needs of their people. Machiavelli sees them as a hindrance for political development, he argues that the reason why corrupt states instead of growing becomes worse is that no matter how many good people there are in the state and no matter how many good people want to change the status of their state, they do not have the chance to change it because of the corrupt people or the corrupt culture of the state itself.
A society such as this only grows worse, the longer this goes on the more corrupt it gets therefore it would get harder and harder to shift administrations. Corruption during the 18th century is defined as the the disturbance of the political field that is crucial to the rights, freedom and the virtues of the people governed by the year 1776. The term corruption was seen as the breakdown of the balance in the constitution of its government. Though corruption is inevitable in any constitution, political philosophy strives to answer the question, if there could possibly be a political constitution that is corruption-free. There are numerous arguments on corruption and this, in fact has been the topic of debates in many fora and conferences. The question on how serious or aggravated the situation is, and if there are still ways on how to eradicate it in government.
Though corruption has ever been present since the greek period, it only recently gained a lot of attention during the 1990’s. Not far from that, the fight against it rose into fame and has been blamed for the slow development of countries, states and even the economic growth of the world. The fight against corruption or anti corruption has been the focus of attention of many states, from the progressive down to the poorest countries. There had been a lot of statements made by the officials prior to elections. There are promises and pseudo commitments. Some officials did their best, as they are pronounced from the start. In the end, officials admit that it is difficult and some even say, it is not possible to really eradicate and solve them. Some writers sees the anti corruption as a ruin to democracy thus the effect of corruption is worse compared to other states with other type of government. The Lumen Learning website on the boundaries of political science described democracy as a government under the direct or representative rule of the people of its jurisdiction. This means that the people or constituents plays a major role in the government as they are always consulted. The structure of the government requires that the top officials in government, executive and legislative are representative of the people, and the appointment of the top officials in the other government branch, the judiciary, are also appointed by the elected officials. In effect, the power emanates from the people.
Why democratic state? A democratic state is the one that resembles an area where there is proper and effective representation. It can reflect the will of people or constituents in the decision making process. It can be asked, how is the corruption come into play in this kind of state or environment. This is where the political factor and influence come in. Political corruption involves not only those high officials in the government but also those people who are not in office, businessmen, contractors and the like 3. Lobbyist, influence peddlers and related groups, entities and individuals get into the picture in the disguise of representing constituents, sectoral groups or organizations that are affected by changes in personalities in government. Changes in policies in government are also feared by some of these groups to have impact on them. This compels these lobbyist, or organizations to reach government officials soliciting support to fight for the groups’s cause. There is where corruption comes in, when officials are tempted to accept gifts, bribes, personal favors, in exchange for the support. This is usually in the case of groups or entities that are affected by some policy changes or rulings and decisions where government officials, (executive, judiciary or legislative) have a major influence or role.
As the democratic environment also allows strong power from the people, the officials of the government also tend to pamper the constituents or the voting public with the gifts, and the officials need to keep the trust and the support of the people for elective purpose. The election becomes costly and the assurance to get elected is becoming to be very expensive. Huge amount of resources in the election process are required by the elective government official. The campaigns and the organization of communication bridges with the people or constituents turned to be very competitive. After all of these, and similar to business investments, the return should be significant enough and worth the efforts and resources spent. Many articles and writeups say that recovery of these are made once the officials are put in position. 20160882383polThe comparison of democratic as against other forms of government vis-a-vis corruption is still debatable. While the authoritarian rule allows one ruler to govern, and the powers rest with him, he can decide whether to tolerate or to control corruption. More often, the authoritarian ruler is attracted and have an easier tendency to be corrupt. However, the democratic form of government, as discussed and stated above also leads to corruption, with the factor of individual greed and also with the influence of the system and culture that the state or government is into.
References:
[1] Uslaner, E. M. & Rosthein, B. (2017, September 20). The Historical Roots of CorruptionState Building, Economic Inequality, and Mass Education. Cambridge: University Press.
[2] Barcham, M. (2012). Corruption: Expanding the Focus. Australia: ANU E Press.
[3] Department for International Development (2015, February 25). Why corruption matters: understanding causes, effects and how to address them. United Kingdom: UK Government Publishing Service.
[4] Satlow, M. (2013). The Gift in Antiquity. United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.
[5] Ménissier, T. (2013). Corruption, Virtue and Republic in Machiavelli’s Work. South-East European Journal of Political Science, 1, 51-60.
[6] Mulgan, R. (2013). Aristotle on Legality and Corruption. Corruption: Expanding the Focus (pp. 25-35). Australia: ANU E Press.
[7] Lumen Learning (n.d.) Forms of Government (Ita.). Retrieved October 1, 2018 from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-politicalscience/chapter/forms-of-government/
[8]Sägmüller, J.B. (1911). Ecclesiastical Privileges. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved October 1, 2018 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12437a.htm
