FILSAFAT KORUPSI - Direktori File UPI

espect of the moral weight to be attached to the adjustment, transformation or even
survival of one or other (or both) of these two institutions in conflict. Compliance with
the dictates and processes of a local and traditional system of justice based on the
village panchayat in India might be inconsistent with the requirements of a western-
style national judicial system of the sort now established in India. Again, compliance
with the processes, roles and purposes of a multi-national may collide with the implicit
and/or explicit requirements or needs of local economic institutions. As a consequence,
the local economic institutions may simply be overpowered and collapse or suffer
substantial corrosion.
We need now to distinguish various species of corrupt actions and activities in respect
of their seriousness, extent and degree of collaboration. Firstly, there is individual
corruption. This essentially involves individuals working on their own. For example, a
motorist might pass money to a traffic police officer to avoid a fine for speeding.
Secondly, there is organised corruption in the sense of corrupt activities carried out by
an organisation which organisation exists for the purpose of undertaking that corrupt
activity. For example, a criminal organisation such as the Mafia, or the Chinese Triads
or the Yakuza might have a concerted and ongoing practice of bribing politicians to
ensure that their drug trafficking activities were not unduly interfered with.
Third, there is organisational corruption. This is pervasive and interdependent
corruption within an organisation. However, the organisation does not exist for the
purposes of engaging in corrupt activities.
Further, there is systemic corruption, and there is also grand corruption. The use of the
term „systemic‟ indicates that the corruption is pervasive and interconnected across
many organisations and institutions. Systemic corruption consists of the erosion of
social norms, and as such is widely dispersed across organisations, institutions, social
groups and societies.
Grand corruption involves large-scale corruption of a very serious kind, and it exists at
the highest levels of one or more fundamental institutions.
Trans-cultural institutional corruption can take any of the above forms. It can be
individual, organised, organisational, systemic and/or grand in character. Obviously, as
with non trans-cultural corruption, trans-cultural corruption constitutes a larger
problem
if it is, say, grand corruption than if it is individual corruption.
More important for my purposes here, by virtue of a number of features of trans-cultural
interaction, trans-cultural corruption is especially problematic, whether it be individual,
organised, systemic or grand corruption that is in question. This is in part because if
71
Page 11
Paper given at the international conference, Civil Society, Religion & Global Governance:
Paradigms of Power & Persuasion, 1–2 September 2005, Canberra Australia
11
offers a number of attractive rationalisations and socio-psychological drivers not
necessarily available to those engaging in non trans-cultural corruption.
Conditions Conducive to Trans-cultural Corruption
The proposition to be advanced in this final section is that in trans-cultural contexts,
including trans-cultural institutional contexts, there are often a variety of conditions that