FILSAFAT KORUPSI - Direktori File UPI

165
corrupt acts in society. Globalization has definitely lead to increased transparency, which is a relatively
new aspect that has grown immensely over the last decade, especially with the arrival of the Internet. Up
until recently, there was little or no transparency in most countries. It was easier to hide and censor things
when there was no one monitoring the government. Nowadays, there are people from the entire world who
come together and discuss governance, peace, stability etc. over the Internet. The Internet has become an
effective weapon in the fight against corruption. Nowadays many aid-organizations demand some kind of
corruption reduction plan from the government they work with. This is of course to make the subsidies
more effective and minimize wastage. In other words: to reduce corruption.
Comparison: Sweden – Zambia
There are vast differences between Sweden and Zambia in all sorts of ways. In terms of corruption it
appears as though Sweden does not have any compared to Zambia. This, however, is not the actual case
since corruption occurs in every nation of the world. Although Sweden has a very low corruption rate,
and almost no corruption within the public sector, compared to Zambia, Sweden is ranked as the 6 th least
corrupted country in the world, whereas Zambia is ranked 107 th
8
. The ranking used is Transparency International‟s (TI) Corr uption Perceptions Index (CPI). The total
amount of countries ranked by TI was 156 during the year 2005.
8
Transparency International,
Corruption Perceptions Index 2005, (Transparency International Secretariat, 2005)
Page 7
There are of course many reasons to why Sweden is less corrupt than Zambia. To begin with, Sweden is a
more developed country, which means that according to the historic theory the nation has reached a certain
degree of development where corruption is not accepted by the
society, where there is tough legislation on corruption and where people who commit corrupt
acts are punished by e.g. losing their jobs. Furthermore, Sweden has a long tradition of
freedom of speech; there is, and has been for a very long time, an open and free press that
discusses questions and criticizes the government and its policies - there is transparency.
But, not to forget, Sweden is by tradition a social democratic society and one of the main
policies for the last century has been to reduce the gaps between the rich and the poor. This
struggle for economic equality has lead to higher salaries among the poor. In Sweden the tax
rates are high, among the highest in the world; this allows the Swedish government to spend a
lot of money on e.g. welfare. It is clear that an equal society has a dampening effect on
corruption.
In Zambia, on the other hand, there is officially freedom of speech but one has to be watchful
of what one says. As an example, there was a crackdown on The Post, the biggest independent
newspaper in Zambia, in 1999 after an article on the insufficient Zambian army compared to
the threat from Angola.
9
This shows that there is still a long way to go until the society is
completely free. In a report on human rights practices in Zambia made by the United States
Ministry of Foreign Affairs one reads:
“The law provides for freedom of speech and of the press; however, the government at times
restricted these rights in practice. The law includes provisions that may be interpreted broadly
to restrict these freedoms. Journalists in the government-owned media generally practiced
self-censorship; the private print media routinely criticized the government.”
10
And in an annual report on the year 2004 published by Reporters Sans Frontières one reads
the following about freedom of press in Sweden :
“Sweden very liberal laws include the right of journalists to information, which is written into
the national constitution, and the protection of journalistic sources, which is recognised as an
absolute right. The authorities are not allowed to formally investigate the origin of published
material and journalists are legally obliged to respect a source‟s wish for anonymity.” 11