Relation between Corruption and abuse of authority (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Changing Face of Corruption in the Asia Pacific, 2017
The history of corruption in Indonesia is marked by reforms in handling corruption cases. However, these reforms will not succeed if the culture that drives corruption is still maintained. A low level of trust can increase corruption, because it does not encourage good cooperation between the community and the government. Geographical and historical aspects correlate with the level of corruption. Therefore, certain former colonies also correlate with the level of corruption. Personality is a character owned by a person and is integrated in a unique unit, so that the person can modify and determine the adjustment. This can be seen from the high number of officials in developed countries who resigned after being suspected of being involved in corruption cases. Corruption reduces the performance of institutions in the democratic order, suppresses economic growth, exacerbates the income gap, and causes government instability. Therefore, aspects of culture, personality, and public-private relationship are directly proportional to the occurrence of corruption in Indonesia.
Political Studies, 2005
Discussion of the definition of corruption has progressed little since Heidenheimer's groundbreaking distinction between definitions centred on public opinion, public office and public interest. All these definitions have been severely criticised. I suggest that underneath these traditional concepts of corruption lurks a much older one based on distributive justice – namely the ‘impartiality principle’, whereby a state ought to treat equally those who deserve equally. This principle provides a much more plausible reason for why the public condemns corruption than alternative approaches, and, moreover, it is recognised fairly universally: the implicit distinction between ‘public’ and ‘private’ is certainly neither as ‘modern’ nor as ‘Western’ as many have claimed. The universality of the principle of impartiality does not imply universality of its content: who deserves equally, or, alternatively, on which grounds discrimination is ruled out, will be answered differently at different periods in time and will vary from society to society. The impartiality principle provides a starting point for the discussion of both corruption in ‘traditional’ societies and contemporary political corruption – corruption involving violations of specific non-discrimination norms governing the access to the political process and the allocation of rights and resources. The impartiality principle calls for rule-bound administration and thus underpins the public office definition of corruption. A central element of the analysis of corruption is the study of specific non-discrimination norms and their comparison across time and place. This approach leads to a significant enrichment of the concept of corruption.
Corruption: Political and Public Aspects
Although there is fairly general agreement that corruption is a trans-systemic phenomenon endemic to all societies, regimes, and countries, and salient in different periods of the history of mankind, the study of corruption reveals a weaker consensus as to its definition, measurement, and explanation. Empirical studies constantly are faced with three major issues that may hinder further comparative understanding of the phenomenon. First, corruption lacks a precise definition or agreement upon its meaning. Like many other concepts in social sciences, corruption is volatile and subject to historical, social, and cultural connotations. Second, corruption is susceptible to variations across time and space. Its measurement, both in terms of volume as well as the standards qualifying that form of behavior, is prior to any attempt at explaining how the phenomenon expands, grows and mutates contextually. Third, without clearing the first two methodological steps, the empirical testing of a derived hypothesis is bound to show rather limited or disputed results.
Corruption: An Alternative Approach to Its Definition and Measurement
2005
Discussion of the definition of corruption has progressed little since Heidenheimer's groundbreaking distinction between definitions centred on public opinion, public office and public interest. All these definitions have been severely criticised. I suggest that underneath these traditional concepts of corruption lurks a much older one based on distributive justice – namely the ‘impartiality principle’, whereby a state ought to treat equally those who deserve equally. This principle provides a much more plausible reason for why the public condemns corruption than alternative approaches, and, moreover, it is recognised fairly universally: the implicit distinction between ‘public’ and ‘private’ is certainly neither as ‘modern’ nor as ‘Western’ as many have claimed. The universality of the principle of impartiality does not imply universality of its content: who deserves equally, or, alternatively, on which grounds discrimination is ruled out, will be answered differently at different periods in time and will vary from society to society. The impartiality principle provides a starting point for the discussion of both corruption in ‘traditional’ societies and contemporary political corruption – corruption involving violations of specific non-discrimination norms governing the access to the political process and the allocation of rights and resources. The impartiality principle calls for rule-bound administration and thus underpins the public office definition of corruption. A central element of the analysis of corruption is the study of specific non-discrimination norms and their comparison across time and place. This approach leads to a significant enrichment of the concept of corruption.
The Phenomenon of Corruption in Public Administration
2017
The phenomenon of corruption has more or less taken place in all periods of history in human life. Bribery, which is the most concrete version of corruption, is being increasingly debated in human society. Before nations were born, corruption took place in people’s personal affairs, mostly in trading. After the birth of world nations, corruption has widened its dimensions and developed in the purpose of using the power of public authorities; which then later become a fact, which affected the relations between the government and the public. It has now become an important issue within the system of relations in public administration. The term “good governance” is an important factor in the fight against corruption and has been voiced often in recent years by international organizations. According to The World Bank, which use this term very often, state that “good governance” is epitomized by predictable, open, and enlightened policy making (that is, transparent processes); a bureaucra...