'What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs'

TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL AUSTRALIAAffiliate of Transparency International, the Coalition against Corruption‘What works and why incommunity-basedanti-corruption programs’

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsResearched and written byKathy RichardsAustraliaPh: +61 2 6257 0753Email: kathrichau@yahoo.com.auDecember 2006Completed on behalf ofTransparency International AustraliaPO Box 41Blackburn South Vic 3130AUSTRALIAPh/Fax: +61 2 9389 5930Email: tioz@transparency.org.auwww.transparency.org.auViews and opinions expressed have been put forward by the author and do notnecessarily reflect those of Transparency International Australia or the organisationsmentioned in this report.- 2 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs- 4 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs1: Executive SummaryThis report documents 15 community-based anti-corruption initiatives, examining what hasworked in anti-corruption programs and investigating why have these particular programsbeen successful. Given Australian aid programs have a significant interest in supporting anticorruptionprograms in the Pacific region, this research also considered how lessons learntcould be applied in a Pacific context.Community-based anti-corruption programs are initiatives that are physically and conceptually locatedin a community to fight and counter corruption. They are programs in direct contact with communities,actively involving citizens in the design, implementation and evaluation of the anti-corruption activities.The 15 case studies of community programs for this report were drawn from TransparencyInternational Chapters and other anti-corruption groups, networks and organisations in Asia, thePacific and Europe. All programs had direct contact with citizens, by providing information andeducation on corruption, offering citizens legal advice regarding corruption, or bringing people togetherfor collective action, such as public meetings to discuss local corruption issues or communitymonitoring against corruption.The programs are discussed in five groupings for a simple comparative assessment of what worksand why within each group, as well as across all the programs. The groups are:1. Community-led programs empowering communities to fight corruptionPrograms include Committees of Concerned Citizens working on local corruption issuesacross 36 locations in Bangladesh, and the MKSS in India assisting workers in Rajasthan tomonitor the disbursement of public funds.2. Community programs monitoring against corruptionPrograms include Report Card Surveys in Bangladesh, and communities counting textbookdeliveries to schools across the Philippines.3. Community programs providing information and advice servicesPrograms include national Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres in Europe and Central Asia,and local Advice and Information Desks in Bangladesh.4. Community programs and anti-corruption educationPrograms include Civic Clubs in high schools in India, and the establishment of anti-corruptiongroups in Indonesian Islamic schools.5. Anti-corruption coalitionsPrograms include national coalitions between business, government and community in Korea,local coalitions bringing together major religious communities in Indonesia, and a new nationalcoalition against corruption in Papua New Guinea.The influences on the success of each program are analysed in two categories: internal factors; theattributes and processes of the implementing organisations, and the external factors; the widerenvironmental dynamics that affected the program. Internal factors are under the control of thesponsoring or implementing organisation. They are the endemic features of the organisation as well ashow the organisation designs its anti-corruption program and with whom the organisation establishesrelationships. External factors are the outside social, political, cultural and economic dynamics ofsociety and state. Organisations have limited to no control over these external factors.Identifying what has enabled or positively influenced the achievements of anti-corruption programs iscrucial when considering the programs’ transferability to a new location or context. Once requiredfactors for a program to succeed are understood, a different location or environment can be evaluatedfor the presence (or absence) of these factors. This will offer some indication as to whether asuccessful program in one setting is viable in a new and different location.Across the case studies, internal factors appear to be more influential over the success of theprograms than the external factors. The processes adopted when designing and implementing theprogram, the people employed and engaged by the implementing organisation or group, and the- 5 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsability of the implementing organisation or group to engage with other stakeholders, especiallygovernment authorities, was critical to the success of most programs. It is not surprising that theorganisations running successful programs against corruption optimised their internal factors beforetheir program was launched.External conditions were important, even highly influential, but appear to have less of an impact on thesuccess of the programs than the internal factors. For most organisations, external factors were akinto dynamics or limitations that their programs needed to work within. However it was certainlyimportant that organisations understood and considered carefully the possible impact of the externalenvironment on their community programs. Successful programs were therefore situated in a positionthat gave the implementing organisation room to manoeuvre within the local social, political andcultural context.Two external factors were important for a majority of programs: ‘different stakeholders recognisingcorruption as a problem’ and ‘community members discussing or talking about corruption’ were eachessential for nearly two thirds of the case studies. Only two programs did not depend on either one ofthese factors, namely Ethics and Sport and Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness. Interestingly,both these programs did depend on the factor of ‘external supporter publicly endorsing the program’.There were also unanticipated catalysts, external factors that were difficult to predict and had beenrealised as facilitating success only in hindsight. This was an external supporter offering unexpectedpublic endorsement of a program, or a crisis event that jolted people’s consciousness aboutcorruption. Catalysts are difficult to cultivate and predict, so it is helpful to note that in no case studywas an unexpected catalyst the sole reason for a program’s success.Overall only three factors appear to be universal and essential to the success of all programs. First isthe internal factor of determining a clear and defined focus and strategy for the program with in-builtflexibility, and second is the human resources component – having a skilled, competent team toimplement the program. Third, the trust of communities was also a universal reason for success. Thisis a special factor, as it is perhaps both an internal and external factor. Organisations and groups needto look inwards and structure their processes for maximum participation with community members.However, trust must come from the external community towards the program and the programimplementers.The most significant result of this research was that there was no single factor or catalyst thatunderpinned the success of a community anti-corruption program. Every program was successfulbecause of a combination of factors, sometimes only a few, but often up to six or seven significantreasons.Given the Australian aid program has a significant interest in supporting anti-corruption programs inthe Pacific region, this research also considered how lessons learnt could be applied in a Pacificcontext. Six case studies are recommended for further research and consideration for piloting in thePacific:a. Committees of Concerned Citizens (Case Study One, page 13)b. Textbook Count (Case Study Six, page 20)c. Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres (Case Study Seven, page 22)d. Ethics and Sport (Case Study Nine, page 25)e. Civic Clubs, Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness (Case Study 10, page 26)f. Anti-corruption coalitions (Case Studies 12-15), page 28)These short listed programs could be adapted for small, rural and isolated Pacific communities, aswell as small urban populations. Predominately these are programs that do not depend on political willfor reform in order to achieve short-term progress. They are also activities that do not require thecondition that communities are vocal about or are discussing corruption, appropriate for Pacificcommunities where corruption often remains a social taboo. These programs can build awareness andbreak down taboos about corruption in a non-confronting, non-threatening manner, such as thepositive angle of Ethics and Sport. Committees of Concerned Citizens can be established throughnetworks that are important in Pacific communities, such as through churches or with the endorsementof traditional leaders. Transparency International’s successful Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres- 6 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsparticularly deserve further investigation for their possible relevance for Pacific communities becauseof their capacity to confront corruption on many fronts: through education, support for individual victimsof corruption, empowering communities and capacity building of state accountability mechanisms.In concluding, this research should be considered a first step towards understanding why certaincommunity based anti-corruption programs have been successful, and investigating what might beappropriate for community anti-corruption programs for the Pacific. The following arerecommendations for Transparency International Australia’s next steps:• Field-based in-country research for six short-listed programs• Consultation with Transparency International Chapters in Pacific• Repeat or follow-up of NISPAC studies• Research into role of Pacific Island traditional governance systems in fighting corruption• Careful consideration of what Transparency International cannot do- 7 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs1.1 Definitions• Corruption is operationally defined as the misuse of entrusted power for private gain. Thisreport adopts the Transparency International definition that further differentiates between"according to rule" corruption and "against the rule" corruption. Facilitation payments, where abribe is paid to receive preferential treatment for something that the bribe receiver is requiredto do by law, constitute the former. The latter, on the other hand, is a bribe paid to obtainservices the bribe receiver is prohibited from providing.It is important to recognise that understanding of corruption will vary in and between differentcommunities. As noted in the National Integrity Systems reports of the Pacific IslandCountries, perception of corruption varied within and between Pacific states, with ambiguityand disagreement about what might be considered as corruption.• Community is an aggregation of people for common interests. Community can be geographic(territory or location of people), economic (people linked through work and markets), or social(people linked by social interactions and relationships). What is a ‘community’ is socially,politically and culturally influenced.• Demand-led anti-corruption programs foster the capacity of communities to holdgovernments and institutions accountable for delivery of basic services and protection ofrights. Demand-led programs work from the ground up, to break down the barriers that placecitizens at risk of corruption.• Supply-side anti-corruption programs develop or support institutions, processes and lawsto protect against corruption. These programs are more likely to be top-down programs, at anational level working with personnel in national bureaucracy or in government.• Community-based anti-corruption programs are initiatives that are physically andconceptually located in a community to fight and counter corruption. They are programs indirect contact with communities, actively involving citizens in the design, implementation andevaluation of the anti-corruption activities. Examples of community based anti-corruptionprograms include campaigns to build people’s interest and raise awareness of corruptionissues, civic education programs, programs that provide citizens with resources or servicessuch as advice centres, and programs working on local monitoring activities.• Community-led programs give community members direct control and responsibility over allaspects of decision-making within the program. This means the community controls thestrategy and implementation of the activities at all stages, most commonly through aconsultation and decision-making process that works towards consensus.• Enabling environment factors are the positive influences on the program without which theprogram would not succeed:ooInternal factors are the attributes and processes of the implementing organizations.Internal factors include how the organisation is functioning before it commences acommunity-based anti-corruption program, how the program is designed and who isinvolved in the program. It also includes endemic features of the organisation, such assize, location and relationships with key stakeholders.External factors are the wider social, political, cultural and economic dynamics of thesociety and state. Organisations have limited to no control or influence over thesefactors. Yet these may be the crucial factors that create an enabling environment for acommunity anti-corruption program to succeed.- 8 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs2. Context and framework2.1 Purpose of researchThis project aimed to identify and document community based anti-corruption initiatives with anassessment of the factors that positively influenced their successes.Using the results of the 12 National Integrity Systems of Pacific Island Countries (NISPAC) and takinginto account the new Australian Government AusAID anti-corruption strategy, the project alsorecommends a range of mechanisms that could be employed by local civil society organisations in afuture Transparency International Pacific Program.2.2 BackgroundWhat are community based anti-corruption programs?Effective support for communities and local populations to demand an end to corruption relies on twocomponents of a multi-pronged approach. The first component is to put in place the institutions,processes and laws to protect against corruption. This is commonly identified as the ‘supply-side’method. But citizens and communities need to speak up to demand transparency and an end tocorruption. The ‘demand-side’ or bottom-up approach fosters, nurtures and encourages communitiesto demand greater accountability and better standards of their society’s existing institutions andrepresentatives. This is usually through community-based programs, which in a holistic strategy tofighting anti-corruption, complement supply-side initiatives.Broadly speaking, community-based anti-corruption programs are initiatives that are physically andconceptually located in a community to fight and counter corruption. They are programs in directcontact with communities, actively involving citizens in the design, implementation and evaluation ofthe anti-corruption activities. Examples of community based anti-corruption programs includecampaigns to build people’s interest and raise awareness of corruption issues, civic educationprograms, programs that provide citizens with resources or services such as advice centres, andprograms working on local monitoring activities.Community-based programs are important not only for balancing top-down strategies to combatcorruption. Community-based programs also bring together a variety of stakeholders who are in daily,intimate contact with people and communities. This is important for a number of reasons. Communityorganisations, local interest groups, non government organisations, local churches, local servicegroups and other community groups can bring an acute awareness of the problems that corruptioncauses people, particularly for marginalised and people living in poverty. They witness the daily affectsof corruption as it institutionalises inequities and impoverishes and disempowers the poor (Holloway,2006). In addition, citizens often view community groups and local organisations as representative andknowledgeable about their community concerns, and therefore trust them as voices speaking for thecommunity’s interests. By working with groups or organisations that have the trust and sanction of thecommunity, community-based programs offer a means to identify and respond to the priority issues forlocal people. In turn, when trust and good relationships exits between communities and localorganisations, citizens are reportedly more prepared to respond to a locally organised anti-corruptioncampaign, rather than a national initiative that is perceived as arising from an outsider’s agenda(Holloway, 2006).However community-based programs should not be seen as the only solution to addressingcorruption. There is an essential role that ‘supply-side’ initiatives also play in preventing andaddressing corruption.Factors for success in community-based anti-corruption programsThis report is not only documenting what has worked in community-based anti-corruption programs,but also asks why have these particular programs been successful. What, if any, were the reasons for- 9 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsthese programs’ ability to meet their goals? What were the positive influences on the variousprograms? Are these influences repeated across different programs, or is a program’s success builtentirely on a local context?Identifying what has enabled or positively influenced the achievements of a particular anti-corruptionprogram is crucial when considering the program’s transferability to a new location or context. Oncethe required ‘factors’ for a program to work – the positive influences on the program without which theprogram would not succeed – are understood, a different location or environment can be evaluated forthe presence (or absence) of these factors. This will offer some indication as to whether a successfulprogram in one setting is viable in a new and different location. As every community and society isdifferent, the presence and degree of enabling factors for an anti-corruption program will vary from onelocation to another. Understanding a local setting and determining which factors for program successare present will greatly assist in adapting anti-corruption programs to suit a prevailing environment.One analysis that explores specific enabling factors for success in anti-corruption programs is theindependent evaluation of Transparency International’s Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres(McCarthy 2005). McCarthy’s report noted that for the advice centres to be successful, certainconditions needed to ‘ripe’. McCarthy carefully considered what these optimum conditions might be,looking inwards to the attributes of the organisations operating the centres (in this case the localTransparency International Chapter), and looking out towards the external political, social and culturalenvironment. McCarthy referred to these as ‘internal’ and ‘external’ factors, and suggested that acombination of internal and external factors were critical to creating an enabling environment for theanti-corruption program.This research expands on McCarthy’s framework of internal and external factors, and examines whatwere the enabling factors for success across a range of different community-based anti-corruptionprograms. This analysis also asks if any factors for success are repeated across numerous programs.This will assist in determining what (if any) enabling factors should be considered critical and essentialfor all of the community-based anti-corruption programs investigated.AusAID Anti-corruption strategyThe Australian Government AusAID 2006 White Paper 1 announced the preparation of a new strategyto guide Australian aid programs countering corruption. The strategy will include law and justice, andeconomic and fiscal management programs, both complemented through a raft of programs fosteringbottom-up demand for transparency and anti-corruption. This will include direct support for anticorruptionorganisations in partner countries.Traditionally donors, including AusAID, have been more comfortable in the zone of ‘supply-side’programs, offering financial resources, training, technical assistance and external advisors to build andsupport a quantity of top-down mechanisms and institutions to counter corruption. As AusAIDconsiders how to better support demand-led initiatives against corruption, Transparency Internationalis presented with an opportunity to offer recommendations on what works and why in communitybased anti-corruption programs.Given the Australian aid program has a significant interest in the Pacific region, this research hasconsidered how lessons learnt from successful community based anti-corruption programs could beapplied in a Pacific context. Section 6 outlines six case studies recommended for further research andconsideration for piloting in the Pacific.2.3 MethodologyResearch commenced with a review of Transparency International toolkits and documented casestudies of community-based anti-corruption programs. This was followed by search of allTransparency International chapter websites for further examples of community based anti-corruption1 AusAID, 2006, Australia Aid: Promoting Growth and Stability, A White Paper on the AustralianGovernment’s Overseas Aid Program.- 10 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsprograms. The researcher also directly contacted Transparency International chapters and groups inthe Asia and Pacific regions by email and phone. Other NGOs and community organisations involvedin anti-corruption activities were also contacted.There was also a field trip to visit the Transparency International Advocacy and Legal Advice Centresin Azerbaijan and participate in an international workshop on the opportunities for replicating thisprogram in other countries. This field trip gave the opportunity to visit an Advocacy and Legal AdviceCentre, meet with program staff and volunteers, discuss the program with clients and also discuss theprogram with donors. The workshop involved program staff from over a dozen countries currentlyrunning an Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres. This was a rare opportunity to speak to programcoordinators implementing a successful community program in different social and political contexts,and highlighted that certain factors for the success of the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres wereconsistent across different countries and communities.The criterion for ‘successful’ community anti-corruption programs was at the discretion of theimplementing organisations. Most organisations declared success on the basis of meeting their projector program’s goals and objectives. Some case studies also highlighted unexpected accomplishmentsthat were deviations from the original strategy, but nevertheless were achievements in fightingcorruption. The measure of success was a subjective perception of success, given that this researchcould not undertake an objective measure of effectiveness or impact or affect on curbing corruption.Except for the field work on the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres there was also no opportunity toassess community views and attitudes towards the various programs. Where possible organisationsdid share critical evaluations of their programs. However the short time frame for the research gavelittle limited opportunity for building relationships with the various organisations approached. Thismeant that independent evaluations and critiques of programs, often prepared for internal use withprogram stakeholders were not made readily available.Not all anti-corruption organisations contacted currently conduct or support community based anticorruptionprograms. Of the organisations and groups who do have community programs,approximately 60% were available to respond to requests for in-depth phone interviews. The majorityof the respondents were staff (directors, program coordinators and technical advisors) with somevolunteer board members also responding. Some organisations unavailable for phone interviews wereable to answer questions and share evaluations of their programs by email. The email and phoneinterviews were semi-formal with a minimum set of standard questions but in most cases, informalfollow up conversations were more informative than the initial interviews. Two case studies have beenpresented on the basis of previous assessments and analysis.The case studies selected for this report have been given a simple comparative assessment as to thefactors and pre-conditions for their success. This was to establish if certain preconditions and factorsfor success were consistent across the programs, or if catalysts for success were wholly unique toeach program’s circumstances.2.4 Assumptions and limitations of researchPrimarily due to the limited time frame, there have been some unavoidable assumptions andlimitations in the research. This investigation is hopefully a first step in a longer process of discussionand learning on what works and why in community based anti-corruption programs. To challenge theassumptions and assess and verify the conclusions, further research will be necessary.• Uncritical approach to notion of communityThe greatest assumption in this research is the uncritical reference to community. There has been noopportunity for this research to challenge individual case studies’ interpretation of community, orassess individual community relations or power structures. Defining the ‘boundaries’ of community isalso important (Mansuri and Rao 2004), but there was no opportunity for a thorough investigation thatcould determine community borders or investigate if people at the borders – the poor, marginalised,excluded people – were involved in the various programs.- 11 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsOne assumption that is put aside through the diversity of case studies is the presumption thatcommunity is simple a geographic construct. To counter this notion there are lessons learnt fromprograms working with economic and social communities.• No independent assessment of successThe research has been obliged to be uncritical of the various program’s processes or achievements.The research largely relied on an organisation’s own assessments and evaluations of their programsalthough some programs did provide independent evaluations that indicated a reduction in corruptionin their target area. But for most activities there was also no opportunity to properly assess the impactof programs on reduction of corruption. Comparison of a program meeting its goals (a routine measureof success), and the wider impact on curbing corruption would be a vital next step for the short-listedprograms. Community-programs are not the panacea for addressing corruption and their limitationsneed to be better understood.• Limited consultation with community membersThere was only limited opportunity for field-based research which involved visiting and assessing theTransparency International Advocacy and Legal Advice Centre program of Azerbaijan. For all otherprograms there was no other opportunity to ask what worked and why from the perspective of otherstakeholders, most importantly community members themselves.• ‘Unsuccessful’ programs not discussed or analysedTo ask why is a program successful invites the question ‘what are unsuccessful programs’?Understanding the reasons why, even in optimal conditions, some programs don’t work can revealpertinent lessons for what not to do. However analysing what has been a designated failure, orperhaps simply unproductive, needs to be done with sensitivity and trust.There was insufficient time to build trusting relationships with program coordinators for them todisclose information about program ‘failures’. The next phase of research needs to invest time andeffort into building relationships with other anti-corruption organisations in order to discuss the reasonsbehind ‘unsuccessful’ programs. This will be crucial research because as noted above, the limitationsof community-based programs need to be better understood.• No forestry case studies discussedThe original terms of reference asked for a special focus on community programs addressingcorruption in forestry and fisheries industries, as these are two significant industries for Pacific Islandcountries, and also areas known to be prone to corruption. In this initial search for such programs, onlyone example of a successful community program working with fisher folk could be found andanalysed. No successful community-based anti-corruption forestry programs were available. Follow upresearch should be dedicated to looking for and analysing such sectoral programs.- 12 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs3. Case studies3.1 IntroductionThe 15 community-based anti-corruption programs examined in this research come from around theworld: from Bangladesh to Papua New Guinea, Indonesia to Bosnia. There are experiences ofdifferent Transparency International Chapters alongside programs from other anti-corruption groups,networks and organisations.This chapter briefly describes each program with a review of their results. Comparative analysis of thefactors and preconditions that fostered progress for these programs is further discussed in sectionfour.Organisations and groups were invited to put forward what they considered was a successfulcommunity-based anti-corruption program. Because this research sought to analyse a range ofdifferent community-based anti-corruption programs, the broadest definition of community orcommunity-based programs was offered. Most organisations interpreted community-based work asvocational occupations at a grassroots level with citizens in a locality specific activity. However someactivities were engaging with ‘social’ communities, for example faith-based communities. One programis working with an ‘economic’ community of fisher folk whose unifying feature is their trade.All programs had direct contact with citizens, by providing information and education on corruption, oroffering legal advice or bringing people together for popular action against corruption, for examplepublic meetings, rallies or collective monitoring against corruption. Some programs are verysophisticated with a range of sub-programs and many different activities. A few programs are verysimple. Some have been running for a number of years, others programs are still new and conclusionsare tentativeThe programs are discussed in five groupings:6. Community-led programs empowering communities to fight corruption7. Community programs monitoring against corruption;8. Community programs providing information and advice services;9. Community programs and anti-corruption education; and10. Anti-corruption coalitionsGrouping the programs in five general categories enables a simple comparative assessment of whatworks and why within each group, as well as across all the programs. All of the programs discussedhave elements or aspects that could relate to more than one group, but main purpose of the programdetermines which group they have been allocatedThe last category of programs is anti-corruption coalitions. These are coalitions that involvecommunity groups and civil society organisations together with other organisations – businesses,private sector, media groups and others.- 13 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs3.2 Community-led programs: Empowering communities to fightcorruptionThis section outlines four ‘community-led’ programs that are tackling corruption. Often community-ledprograms are conflated with community-based programs, however there are important distinctions.Community-led, or sometimes referred to as ‘community-driven’ programs give community membersdirect control and responsibility over all aspects of decision-making within the program. This meansthe community controls the strategy and implementation of the activities at all stages, most commonlythrough a consultation and decision-making process that works towards consensus. This sets up adifferent dynamic to other anti-corruption programs that might be located in a community setting, butare managed and directed by an outside organisation, or a small group of people who may not be ableto represent the whole community.In each of these case studies the priority of the program is to bolster community’s own efforts to tacklecorruption. The implementing organisation is aiding and facilitating the process that the communitywants to adopt._________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY ONEBox 3.1 Committee of Concerned Citizens – BangladeshTransparency International (TI) Bangladesh is a leading organisation in the movement againstcorruption in Bangladesh. TI-Bangladesh maintains a strong grassroots focus, aiming to catalyse andstrengthen anti-corruption participatory social movements from local platforms. One of the successfulways that TI-Bangladesh has engaged with communities is through the Committees of ConcernedCitizens.Committees of Concerned Citizen (Triple Cs) are local voluntary watchdog committees, engaging withcommunities to both bolster communities’ efforts to eradicate and prevent corruption and providecitizens with anti-corruption information and advice. Triple Cs respond to corruption concerns raisedby communities members and undertake collective monitoring activities. They also publicly report oncorruption problems and evidence of corruption obtained from monitoring exercises.Committees have 9-21 appointed members with an elected convenor (for a maximum of twosuccessive one year terms). All members are volunteers and come from a variety of professionalgroups including teachers, lawyers, journalists, physicians, business people, NGO workers, retiredgovernment officials, public representatives and community activists. Membership in the Triple C isgranted on the basis of personal credibility and ability to lead, motivate and support citizens in thecommunity struggle against corruption. Special care is taken that Triple Cs are non-partisan. Triple Cmembers cannot be office-bearers of a political party, and must ensure that any partisan politicalposition does not affect the nature of their role and participation in the Triple C.Committees receive initial financial support from TI-Bangladesh, with arrangements that each Triple Cwill grow and evolve to self-reliance on financial support from their community. This includes sourcingoffice space, which may be donated from local businesses, or premises within an education institution.Ongoing training, technical assistance and logistic support is provided by TI- Bangladesh throughlocally based staff. Triple Cs may also ‘opt-in’ to TI-Bangladesh’s national anti-corruption campaigns.Attached to each Triple C is a Volunteer Youth Group. Youth Groups, together with Advice andInformation Desks 2 , are the engine room of Triple C’s community activities. Made up of members 15-30 years old, Youth Groups help organise local events, such as open assemblies with Triple Cmembers, public meetings with local journalists and community representatives, mothers meetings atschools, workshops and trainings. They assist in collecting responses to Triple C Report CardSurveys, and undertake sub-programs of their own such as study groups, publication of magazines,2 Case study nine- 14 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsand debate and essay competitions. Also linked to each Triple C are Volunteer Street Theatre groups,communicating messages of anti-corruption awareness. The activities of both the Youth Groups andStreet Theatre Groups are usually held on weekends and holidays, fitting with the overall volunteeraspect of the Triple C program.TI-Bangladesh receives many requests and expressions of interest from people wanting to form aTriple C. In the first instance communities commence a group known as ‘Friends of TI-Bangladesh’.This allows interested people to first form a relationship with TI-Bangladesh, with the aim that groupswill be nurtured and strengthened before being launched as a Triple C. Both ‘Friends of TI-Bangladesh’ and Triple Cs can access ongoing technical assistance and training.Communities’ response to Triple Cs has been overwhelmingly positive. This is because Triple Cs andtheir associated groups and advice services offer a direct way for people to voice complaints, raiseconcerns, make suggestions and get active in anti-corruption campaigns. The impact on localcorruption problems has also been successful. After documenting corruption problems in localhospitals, schools, transport or public services, Committees present recommendations to localgovernment, with practical resolutions to curb and cut corruption. Problems that affect people in theirdaily lives – such as petty corruption by hospital registrars, or black market profiteering in train ticketsales – have been addressed by simple and realistic solutionsKey Strengths● The Committees of Concerned Citizens offer a direct way for people to make their voice heard onlocal corruption issues.● Committees of Concerned Citizens are established on the request of local citizens; they aredriven and managed by local advocates. They can join local coalitions and campaigns, and work at amicro level that is often not feasible for a larger national organisation to reach.● Committees of Concerned Citizens receive technical assistance, logistical support and thebacking of the national Transparency International Chapter.● Committees can opt-in to Transparency International Bangladesh campaigns, or maintain aspecific local approach. TI-Bangladesh also has a representative of the Triple C membership on theAdvisory Committee to the TI-Bangladesh Board of Trustees. This committee advises the TI-Bangladesh board in realising their goals.Key Challenges● Committees of Concerned Citizens require ongoing logistical and training support, which can beresource intensive for the local Transparency International Chapter. Managing the numerousrelationships between Committees and Transparency International Bangladesh is also resourceintensive.● As committees become more independent, levels of activity can vary from district to district.For the program to be sustainable in the long-term Committees of Concern Citizens must establishfinancial and resource support from their local community.● There are challenges in ensuring that the needs of minority or marginalised groups arerepresented on committees.● The positive results of community-based initiatives such as these cannot be sustained withoutpolitical will at the national level, and independent and effective functioning of the key institutions ofnational integrity system. In other words Committees of Concern Citizens cannot succeed in fightingcorruption alone, but must be part of a comprehensive anti-corruption strategy.Transparency International Bangladesh_________________________________________________________________________________- 15 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsCASE STUDY TWOCommunities are not only defined by their territorial boundaries. Economic communities, such asnetworks and groups of workers play a very important role in people’s lives. Assisting workers to cometogether and organise collective actions to deal with corruption is a very practical method ofcommunity empowerment.The following program was initially conceived as a coastal resource management project. Howeverlocal networks of fisher folk identified corruption as an underlying problem that unless addressedwould threaten the viability of any local resource management scheme. With resources, training andmoral support, the fisher folk of Lamon Bay, Philippines have made impressive advances in bringingcorruption out into the open.Box 3.2 Lamon Bay Integrated Coastal Resources Management Project – PhilippinesThe Integrated Coastal Resources Management Project originally aimed to increase communitycapacity to manage local coastal resources. What quickly emerged from the fisher folk community wasthat unless collusion between local government and illegal fisheries was halted, any efforts toestablish sustainable resource management and fishing would be fruitless.The major problem facing fisher folk in the Lamon Bay was poverty. Fisher folk faced competition withillegal commercial fishers who destroyed coral reefs and left breeding grounds depleted andunproductive. With reduced catches, unemployment and ensuing poverty, many local fisher folkthemselves had resorted to illegal fishing. Attributed to the proliferation of illegal fishing operations wascorruption within the local government units mandated to enforce fishery laws.Local fisher folk were members of local Fishery and Aquatic Resource Management Councils andvolunteer bantay dagat (sea patrol) groups. Most Resource Councils were dominant, struggling withdefunct leadership and urgently needed re-energising. Bantay dagat were also in trouble, lackingbasic resources, such as communication or surveillance equipment. Yet there was also a desire fromcommunities not to form new groups or collectives, but to rather to improve their Resource Councilsand bantay dagat instead.Most fisher folk reported that although they believed their government should not be profiting from theillegal fisheries, they did not have the skills to make complaints or advocate for change. Bantay dagatswere permitted to apprehend illegal fishers, but patrols were uncertain of their responsibilities whenreporting incidents.In response, the project re-focused towards assisting fisher folk consolidate and strengthen theireconomic and support networks and bantay dagats. An extensive two-year training program was setup. Paralegal training was provided on the status and extent of current fishing laws, the legalities ofpatrol and apprehension, and the importance of documentation of complaints. Leadership trainingidentified and developed potential leaders for councils and patrols. Organisation development training,especially focused on handling conflict and negotiations helped resolve old disputes and re-orientatecouncils towards the common goal of fighting corruption that bred illegal fishing. Select fisher folk alsobecame trained and accredited fish wardens and inspectors.With boosted morale, new skills and armed with evidence that illegal fishing remained sanctioned bygovernment and the navy, fisher folk made their voices heard. Bantay dagat increased their patrolsand filed cases of violations of illegal fishing. They gathered evidence of and exposed the longsuspectedcollusion between Maritime personnel and commercial fishers.Lobbying started with local governments as fisher folk demanded laws be enacted against collusionand illegal fishing, or that existing laws be enacted. They demanded local governments take theconcerns of the fishing community to the National Government, particularly in relation to congressionaland military favouritism of certain companies. Communities also successfully lobbied for thesuspension of Maritime operations in the Lamon Bay in light of officials’ involvement in corruptactivities.- 16 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsKey Strengths● This program responded to the requests of the workers community to assist them deal with alocal corruption problem.● Rather than creating new committees or groups, structures that were already in place werestrengthened.Key Challenges● Entrenched corruption has been a factor in poor resource management of local fishing areas.The impact on livelihoods for local fisher folk has been devastating. To sustained the efforts made,anti-corruption activities will need to be integrated with future development programsWorld Vision Development Foundation, Inc. Philippines_________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY THREEFinding out what are the corruption problems that most impact on people’s lives can be as simple assitting down and asking people. This was the starting point for the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan(MKSS). By then creating a public space in which marginalised communities could verify or challengetheir local government’s spending records, the MKSS successfully facilitated a community-led activitythat has changed laws, seen embezzled funds returned to communities and truly empowered peopleto fight corruption.Box 3.3 Jan Sunwais, Village Based Public hearings – IndiaMazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) means “Organization for the Power of Labourers andFarmers”. Living in the villages and sharing the communities’ life experiences, MKSS began bywalking from village to village to ask simple questions: did the people know how much governmentmoney was coming to their village, and where it was being spent?Very quickly it emerged that villagers were not being paid for their work, and that funds supposedlyspent on development was being stolen and embezzled. Under the slogan ’Our Money-Our Accounts’,MKSS assisted villagers to demand local administrators provide an open account of all publicexpenditure. For many years communities struggled against government authorities that refused toprovide access to information, despite Rajasthan law enshrining freedom of information. Aftercontinued pressure and public events, MKSS and communities eventually received access to recordsof expenses in public development projects. To enable citizens to then critique the information, MKSSbegan to organise Jan Sunwais, or public hearing audits.At each Jan Sunwais, government authorities and officials sit face to face with local villagers.Arrangements are simple – the first Jan Sunwai in 1994 was held under an old parachute providingshade. Now a tent with a few chairs and tables, loudspeakers and a video recorder are the onlylogistic requirements. What is important is the space established at the Jan Sunwais allows citizens,usually people living in poverty, to scrutinise public spending in their community. Information such asdescriptions of public projects, budgets and expenses, timetables for projects, records of workers,employees’ working hours and workers’ payments are publicly read out. Villagers then stand up andpoint out discrepancies - dead people who are listed as workers, amounts paid to workers actually farless than what is recorded, absent workers marked present, receipt of payments found to be forged.Citizens pointed to public schools recorded as built being nothing more than a pile of discarded bricks,or roads supposedly repaired remaining unusable.Though many are illiterate, the Jan Sunwais gives citizens, especially the poor and disempowered, achance to scrutinise complex and detailed accounts. In the Jan Sunwais villagers can publicly testifythat enormous inconsistencies exist between government reports and the reality in their community. AJan Sunwai does not pass a verdict or punish the guilty, but has proven to be a more powerful“naming and shaming” tool. Public officials whose corruption and embezzlement has been revealedhave begun to return stolen money. Workers can demand – and receive their full and entitled pay.- 17 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsFacilitators do not become a permanent presence in the community, believing this could lead tocommunities coming to depend on the BRG.The community sets the pace of discussion and development. The community engagement process isalso recognised as a guide with necessary flexibility. Each community is recognised and respected forits unique qualities and different strategy in dealing with its local issues. Community facilitators willfocus for as long as communities need on any one stage of a development process, although theyavoid suggesting to a community that the process of empowerment is at any particular ‘stage’. Therewill be repeated visits and significant time spent in communities, and a high value is placed on makingtime and space for discussion and listening with community members outside the planned meetings.BRG also allocates significant periods of time discussing and sharing experiences among staff andcommunity facilitators. While community facilitators do not live in the communities where they work,after a series of visits to communities (field patrols), facilitators spend time in their own village to followat home what they apply at work.Communities’ achievements in environmental conservation, resource management has beenimpressive. These achievements stem from behavioral and attitudinal change as the communityrealizes their own capacity to effect change.Key Strengths● The time for reflection and sharing within the Bismarck Ramu Group team is highly valued. Thegroup relationships between staff and community facilitators are very important. As discussed insection four, this focus on sharing experiences within an organisation/group contributes significantly totheir achievements as facilitators of a community-led process.● Rather than depending on a single solution to a situation, the Bismarck Ramu Group processworks with communities to explore a range of options for responding to a particular issue. Thisenables different approaches or responses to be crafted.● There is no imposition of an outside agenda, the process and the outcomes are owned entirelyby the community.● Through community coalitions that link advocacy organisations with community groups, groupssuch as the Bismarck Ramu Group can mobilise grassroots support for national anti-corruptioncampaigns.Key Challenges● Community-led programs cannot be a method that is dipped in and out of.● The commitment to the process rather than the outcomes must be wholehearted.● Experiences of the Bismarck Ramu Group, MKSS and other community-led programsdemonstrate that while sustainable and significant changes can be achieved through the communityledapproach, it takes time. There must be respect for the demands of work and life on individualcommunity members. Time and space is needed for communities to explore their own indigenoussolutions to a governance or corruption issue. This means that the community will dictate the pace ofwork.● Communities that have become accustomed to an outsider ‘recommending a solution to theirproblems’ may at first hesitate at the prospect of controlling their own development. This can bemisconstrued as communities ‘not knowing what is best for themselves’.● There are many local politics within clans and between communities that must be navigated,which again takes time.Bismarck Ramu Group- 19 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs3.3 Community programs monitoring against corruptionMonitoring methods have long been used in anti-corruption programs to assess the functioning ofaccountability systems, identify areas vulnerable to corruption and highlight corrupt practices.Community-based monitoring engages communities, local citizens and ordinary people in scrutinizingand reporting on incidents of corrupt acts and vulnerabilities to corruption. Community-basedmonitoring has emerged from many parts of the world and employs a range of different tools, such asreport cards, public hearings and watchdog units set up in local groups or schools.Effective monitoring can establish a constructive two-way dialogue between communities, andgovernment and business. With a feedback mechanism from citizens to government, publicaccountability of government and service agencies can increase. Communities can increase theirawareness of what local representatives, authorities and service delivery agencies are actually doing.Government and private sector agencies can also learn about corruption problems or weakness intheir departments and industries. In the case of ‘Textbook Count’, a simple monitoring exercisehighlighted to government the costly impact of entrenched corrupt practices. This led to a governmentcommitment to increase public accountability by involving community monitors in the national textbookprocurement and delivery process.Monitoring is a valuable tool in itself, but is made most effective when results of the monitoringexercise can be used in public information campaigns or as an advocacy tool for policy change andreform. Transparency International Bangladesh supports its local Committee of Concerned Citizens toundertake regular Report Card Surveys, capturing the views and experiences of local citizens inregards to corruption in local services. Results of the Report Card Surveys are then used as localadvocacy tools._________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY FIVEBox 3.5 Local Report Card Surveys – BangladeshTransparency International Bangladesh’s Committees of Concerned Citizens (Triple Cs) are localvoluntary watchdog committees established to monitor and publicly report on corruption problems, andengage with communities to demand reform and promote integrity in public services.One of the tools of Triple Cs in monitoring corruption is the use of Report Card Surveys. Modelled onclient satisfaction surveys, Report Card Surveys are an aggregate of public ratings based on citizens’first hand experiences of service delivery by public agencies. Report Card Surveys offer a useful toolfor presenting community testimony on corruption in public utilities. Surveys also bring hard data and ameasure of specificity to diagnosing a corruption problem.Triple Cs consult with citizens to determine what public services present the greatest problems ofcorruption for the community. Health, education, land administration and local government are amongthe most frequently chosen services for a report card survey. Report Card Surveys from Triple Csacross Bangladesh have been collated to illustrate patterns of corruption across the different districts.Triple Cs use the findings of the Report Card Surveys as tools for mobilizing stakeholders and foradvocating change in relevant institutions.Key strengths● Local Report Card Surveys offer credible diagnosis on instances of corruption at the micro-levelof public service delivery.● The monitoring program is integrated into other anti-corruption activities. Results of Report CardSurveys can be used in local advocacy and information campaigns.Key challenges● Monitoring serves limited purpose as a one-off activity. Surveys need be repeated to validateresults and assess shifts in behaviour and practice.- 20 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs● Report Card Surveys require some centralised coordination.● Report card surveys can introduce a large population of people to the concept of monitoringissues, but do rely on having a core group of persons or activists skilled in gathering data and collatingresults.● Data analysis, particularly if requiring statistical analysis, does require some skilled competency.● Report Cards give voice to people’s experiences, but unless there is follow-up and links to otheractivities, citizens are not engaged as agents of change or defenders against corruption. 3Transparency International Bangladesh_________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY SIXCommunity-based monitoring programs need to be able to get people actively engaged, not only inraising issues to be scrutinized, but in the monitoring process itself. This can be achieved bymonitoring programs that avoid a reliance on technical or skilled operators.Textbook Count is an excellent example of a proactive, local monitoring program that involves peopleas inspectors and gatekeepers in a proactive program to stop corruption happening in the first place.Its simplicity - counting and checking delivery of textbooks – belies its sophistication as a programthat has mobilised thousands of people, especially young people, as agents in corruption prevention.Box 3.6 Textbook Count – PhilippinesTextbook Count is a nationwide monitoring program where volunteers are mobilized to help publicschools count and check textbook deliveries. Coordinated by Government Watch or ‘G-Watch’ (ananti-corruption project of the Ateneo School of Government, Philippines), Textbook Count is foundedon the principle that ordinary citizens can make a meaningful and practical contribution to preventcorruption in the government.In the 1990s the Philippines’ largest public department, the Department of Education (Dept Ed) wasconsidered one of the top five most corrupt agencies in the country. Major problems existed inprocurement and supply of textbooks with reports of unqualified bidders winning contracts, long delaysin delivery times, ghost deliveries and under-deliveries to schools, poor physical quality of textbooks,and a lack of feedback mechanisms for schools or communities to report on problems.Textbook Count began in 2001 with G-Watch monitoring delivery of textbooks in 32 school districts.Results confirmed the problems mentioned above. Disturbed by the outcomes and also impressed bythe simple yet effective monitoring tools employed by G-Watch, the then Under Secretary forEducation realised community-level monitoring could play a key role in reducing corruption in theprocurement and delivery process. With this high level support, 2003 civil society monitors wereengaged in 2003 as (1) observers during the overall bidding process, (2) members of quality controlinspection teams for the printing process and (3) on-the-spot monitors during deliveries.It is as volunteer monitors for textbook deliveries that communities have been most involved. In 2003volunteer citizens were mobilised in 5,500 school districts. Armed with a Dept Ed checklist of textbookallocations for each school, monitors counted and verified deliveries. In an effort to reduce paymentperiods (a problem known to increase the risk of fraudulent payments being made), suppliers wereguaranteed faster processing of payments once the Dept Ed received a verified Acceptance Report foreach delivery.In 2004, G-Watch expanded the community participation with the involvement of the Philippines BoyScouts and Girl Scouts. They offer a presence in virtually every school and provide a means for youngpeople and children to be involved in a proactive, positive anti-corruption activity.3 The Triple C model of using report card surveys does have a program of follow up and campaigningto call for policy reform to address systemic problems.- 21 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsBetween 2003-2005, 53 million textbooks have been tracked through Textbook Count. From theinvolvement of eight civil society organisations in 2003, Textbook Count has grown to involve 34national and local groups in 2005 mobilising thousands of community monitors. And in just a few yearsthe improvements due to Textbook Count are impressive. Procurement periods have been shortened,textbook costs reduced by 40%, delivery errors reduced to an average 5% and the cycle of paymentsreduced from up to three years to 15 month.Key strengths● Textbook Count offers a very simple yet effective monitoring model that could be adapted toother sectors or areas of interest to a community 4 .● The program has very successfully brought government community and business together in ajoint effort to eradicate corruption.● Without relying on an extensive civic education program, this monitoring program has providedordinary citizens with a proactive, positive mechanism to prevent corruption.Key challenges● Textbook Count benefited from the very public support of a senior government authority and agovernment department prepared to engage with a civil society anti-corruption program.● There is now the challenge of institutionalizing the practice as an ongoing monitoringcollaboration between community, government and private business.● Textbook Count has required centralized coordination of volunteer monitors.● Maintaining open communication and cooperation between the three sectors depended on thegood relations and networks that the coordinating organisation had established.While school students and young people have come on board as volunteer monitors, there must befollow-up civic education to make the links to wider corruption issues.Government Watch –an anti-corruption project of the Ateneo School of Government, Philippines3.4 Community programs providing information and adviceservicesThe following community-based anti-corruption programs provide free legal advice and informationservices to citizens who have witnessed or been victims of corruption. They also act as a focal pointfor resources on local corruption issues, available for accessed by citizens, local media, communitygroups and organisations or other interested parties.Both the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres, known as ALACs, and the Advice and InformationDesks have been established by TI Chapters. ALACs originated in a program undertaken by TIChapters in Romania, Macedonia and Bosnia & Herzegovina in 2004, and have since been launchedby TI Chapters in 16 countries. The Advice and Information Desks are attached to TI-Bangladesh’sCommittee of Concerned Citizens.In regards to offering a public service for advice and information, there are strong similarities betweenthe ALACs and the Advice and Information Desks. Both ALACs and Advice and Information Deskswork within the principle that access to information is key to creating awareness, preventing citizensfrom becoming victims of corruption and preparing citizens to resist corruption. Therefore ALACs andAdvice and Information Desks are not stand alone services, but rather an integral aspect of theadvocacy campaigns and awareness raising activities of their respective TI Chapters. ALACs andAdvice and Information Desks both offer free services, most significantly legal advice on how citizenscan lodge a complaint about corruption. They are both dependent on a mix of volunteer assistance aswell as resources of paid staff. In keeping with Transparency International practice, neither programrepresents clients or ‘takes on’ cases, but rather focuses on providing the support and necessary legaladvice for citizens to follow through their own complaints. The point of divergence is that ALACs are4 G-Watch has begun to adapt the tools of Textbook Count for community monitoring of construction and repairprojects.- 22 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsusually centrally located with both a local and national focus, whereas the Advice and InformationDesks are decentralised and localised._________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY SEVENThe ALAC service commences with a toll free hotline where citizens can access initial adviceregarding possible incidents of corruption. If prima facie evidence of corruption exists, referral forfurther legal counseling in face-to-face meetings is arranged. As each TI Chapter manages one,sometimes two centres 5 , resources and attention is consolidated so the ALAC offers the community aconsistent and professional standard of legal advice and support. Each ALAC is also a focus pointthrough which national anti-corruption campaigns and activities can flow.Box 3.7 Advocacy and Legal Advice CentresThe Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres (ALAC) program is an excellent example of a communitybased anti-corruption program that has been designed to act as both a bottom-up and a top-downdriver of change. The ALACs, currently based in a number of Southern and Eastern European, andCentral Asian countries, combine three components: free legal services regarding citizens rightswhere evidence of corruption exists; education and information to raise public awareness and invokeactivism against corruption; and advocacy calling for policy and institutional reform.Each ALAC operates a toll-free hotline. Citizens who have witnessed or been victims of corruptionreceive initial advice about their rights and, where prima facie evidence of corruption exists, referral ismade for further legal counseling. In a face-to-face session with trained legal advisors, citizens receiveassistance to articulate, develop, file and pursue their complaints. The ALACs do not represent clientsor ‘take on’ their cases, but rather provide the support and legal advice for citizens to make their owncomplaints.ALACs also link their legal advice service to education and advocacy programs. TI chapters collectand store data on each case presented to the ALAC, and on occasion actively monitor the progress ofcomplaints. Based on the trends in cases presented to the centers, TI Chapters release reportsdetailing institutional and legal vulnerabilities and patterns of corruption. They also give regular pressconferences and work through the media to raise awareness about corruption problems in sectors andinstitutions frequently cited by ALAC patrons. TI chapters also provide recommendations togovernments on policy and administrative reform to strengthen the capacity of public complaintsmechanisms and improve citizens’ access to information.Key strengths● By offering a service that listens to people’s complaints and gives practical advice to those whohave been dismissed or ignored by others, the ALAC program is helping to restore people’s dignity(McCarthy 2005). This is a very important aspect of empowering a community to fight corruption.● By maintaining a specific and narrow focus on corruption ALACs have built up a comprehensiveand unrivalled expertise and professionalism in the area of community based advice services. Thisresults in ALACs standing out against other legal advice centers and hotlines.● The success of the advice programs has increased the profile of Transparency International andenhanced public trust and confidence in Transparency International activities.● The ALACs also benefit from the backing of Transparency International as a global, credible anticorruptionmovement.● Many of the ALAC centres have successfully linked their casework with a broader programincorporating public anti-corruption education and awareness raising, and advocacy for policy andlegislative reform.5 TI-Azerbaijan manages five ALAC centres, one central ALAC in the capital Baku, and four regional centres. Thishas been very successful in reaching out to a wider constituency.- 23 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs● By collecting information on cases presented to the ALACs, TI Chapters can build a picture ofnational trends in corruption and its impact on communities. This provides TI Chapters with specificadvocacy targets.● The focus of an ALAC can be tailored to the specific context, receiving either general complaints(all areas of corruption) or focusing a more specific area of concern (for instance corruption in thehealth sector or tax inspection).● While remaining entirely independent, ALACs have thus far been welcomed by governmentauthorities in all countries of operation.Key challenges● Crucial to the success of the ALACs is generating sufficient volumes of cases for centers togenerate momentum and influence.● In the absence of an educated and empowered populace, anti-corruption laws or complaintmechanisms cannot achieve sustained progress against corruption. Advice services, such as theALAC program, need to be complemented by public education on corruption.● Advice centres depend on a degree of public disgruntlement about corruption so that people willbe motivated to seek assistance in pursuing a complaint. Where there is deep social tolerance orresignation to corruption, or when taboos about discussing corruption are still deeply entrenched,advice centres may not be frequented by the community.● The model of a toll-free hotline and a central advice centre may exclude isolated communitiesfrom accessing services. Lack of access to telephone services, distance or difficulty in travelling to anadvice centre, or social and cultural issues may prevent people visiting a public ALAC centre. Thiswould be the particularly relevant for small communities or communities where people are reluctant tomake public criticisms.● There could be a distinct lack of community engagement if an advice centre is perceived to bepushing an outside interest.● In societies where media freedom is restricted promoting the ALAC services will be difficult.● Providing professional, accountable and reliable advice requires an investment in high qualityadvisors. If these advisors are volunteers there may be challenges in recruitment and retention.● While advice centres can support citizens’ efforts to pursue justice against corruption, political willto reform remains crucial for long-term progress against corruption.Transparency International Chapters in South, Eastern Europe, Central Asia_________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY EIGHTIn comparison to the centralised ALAC model, TI-Bangladesh is working to establish an Advice andInformation Desk in conjunction with each of its Committee of Concerned Citizens (Triple Cs). As TI-Bangladesh aims to foster community establishment of Triple Cs in each of Bangladesh’s 64 districts,this means 64 localised Advice and Information Desks will be set up to offer people advice on issuesof local relevance.Box 3.8 Advice and Information Desks – BangladeshAdvice and Information Desks are locally based centres providing information, training and advisoryservices on corruption-related issues. They manage a range of free services for the public, collect dataon corruption, disseminate information to local media, community groups and local authorities and actas a conduit between TI-Bangladesh and local Committee of Concerned Citizens.Originally designed to serve clusters of TI-Bangladesh’s Committees of Concerned Citizens, it wasquickly realized that the success of the Advice and Information Desks relied on a physical proximityand a close social relationship with their individual communities. It was also realised that Advice andInformation Desks offered people an entrance point through which they could become better informedabout responding to a corruption problem and better equipped to fight against corrupt acts in thefuture. To bring an Advice and Information Desk closer to people and to better assist and publicise the- 24 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programswork of each Triple C, TI Bangladesh has expanded the program to partner each of the 36 Triple Cswith an Advice and Information Desk.With locally based Project Officers and Training Officers, Advice and Information Desks providefrontline support to the Triple Cs. Desks compile and manage information gathered by the Triple Cs,such as in Report Card Surveys, as well as information from other sources, such as media reports oncorruption. At each Advice and Information Desk members of the public can access information andadvice on their rights in dealing with public service agencies. Information and advice can obtainedthrough personal visits to the local Desk, or via phone calls, letters and in some cases email. Legaladvice is available from the locally stationed legal counselors. All services are provided free of cost.Because Desks are community based, localised entities, each Desk adapts to their localcircumstances. They may share premises with a Triple C, or be located in their own centre.Advice and Information Desks are an important bridge between anti-corruption campaigns and otherrights-based initiatives and organisations. On various local issues alliances are formed, such thatAdvice and Information Desks can refer citizens to other complementary organisations if TI-Bangladesh may not have expertise or resources to assist. Satellite Advice and Information Deskshave also been initiated to take information and advice to people for whom it is difficult for variousreasons to come to the Desks.Advice and Information Desks also act as a link between TI- Bangladesh and the local Triple C,channelling information in both directions.Key strengths● The decentralized approach of the local Advice and Information Desks is an advantage forresponding to corruption concerns of local significance. Potentially this model offers a greater level oflocal community support, particularly for vulnerable or marginalized groups, than a service that isnationalized and primarily urbanised.● The success of the Advice Desks has increased the local profile of TI and enhanced public trustand confidence in local Triple C activities.● The Advice Desks also benefit from the backing of Transparency International as a global,credible anti-corruption movement.Key challengesThe Advice and Information Desks approach can also experience many of the challenges of the ALACmodel:● In the absence of an educated and empowered populace, anti-corruption laws or complaintmechanisms cannot achieve sustained progress against corruption. Advice services need to be part ofa holistic program that includes public education on corruption and awareness raising about citizen’srights.● Advice centres depend on a degree of public disgruntlement about corruption to foster citizens’motivation to seek assistance or pursue a complaint about corruption. Where there is deep socialtolerance or resignation to corruption, or when taboos about discussing corruption are still deeplyentrenched, advice centres may not be frequented by the community.● There could be a distinct lack of community engagement if an advice centre is perceived to bepushing an outside interest.● Providing professional, accountable and reliable advice requires an investment in high qualityadvisors. If these advisors are volunteers there may be challenges in recruitment and retention.● While advice centres can support citizens’ efforts to pursue justice against corruption, political willto reform remains crucial for progress against corruption.● Advice and Information Desks are linked to corresponding Triple Cs, which vary in their localadvocacy activities. Individual Advice and Information Desks may vary in their capacity to leveragecommunity concerns into advocacy campaigns.Transparency International Bangladesh- 25 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs3.5 Community programs and anti-corruption educationThis section highlights four examples of interesting, successful and innovative community-basedprograms working with schools and universities to sensitise young people to the effects of corruption.What made these education programs successful was their relevance and resonance with the studentparticipants. Each of the programs described below has tapped into an area of interest for students.Using examples of ethics in sport, setting up clubs in schools or working with students from commonfaith backgrounds, these programs have come to where students are at, to foster an understanding ofgovernance and corruption through a topic or subject of interest to the students.Not all of these programs tackle corruption head on or explicitly promoted an anti-corruption message.Some are examples of governance programs, seeking to build a sense of civic pride in students. Theycontribute to building positive awareness and understanding about good governance, localgovernment services and what should be expected from a community that aspires to care for all itsmembers. These types of programs create fertile ground for other anti-corruption programs. Guidingyoung peoples’ interest in civic matters lays the foundations for a future community that can condemnand speak out against corruption and demand better accountability from government, private businessand NGOs._________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY NINEBox 3.9 Ethics and Sport – Italy“Learning to respect game rules today means learning to respect civic rules tomorrow”Since 2003 the Transparency International Italia Ethics and Sport project has promoted ethicalbehaviour in sport as a means to foster young people’s respect for civic values and distain forcorruption.The Ethics and Sport Project exalts the positive values conveyed through sport. In sessions andseminars with schools and sports associations, young people identify the positive personal benefits ofsport, such as enhancing skills in teambuilding, group negotiation and cooperation with others.Students and teachers are then guided through discussions on the positive contribution of sport inenhancing social ethics and civic values in young people. An understanding and respect for rules,acceptance of diverse people and fair play for example, all aspects of social ethical behaviour, can bereinforced through principled practices in sport.The project challenges young people to examine the negative impact and destructive force ofcorruption in sport, not only on the playing field, but in breaking down ethical values and in creating anatmosphere of tolerance for corruption in other parts of society.Students were polled on their perspective of doping in sport, with results showing there was sometolerance and acceptance of the use of drugs and corruption that covered up the use of drugs in sport.To respond to the views and issues, TI-Italia engages prominent sport stars to speak with studentsand talk about doping and corruption in sport. Giving the students access to sportspeople who areadmired and identified as being ‘successful’, and stimulating debate about what was acceptablepractice has been a successful method for challenging the mentality of young people, a beginning toguiding them towards an intolerance of corruption in all its manifestations.Key strengths● The attention of young people will be caught when topics of relevance and interest are raised.Sport offers an excellent entry point for discussion that can cover ethics, rules and laws, and rightsand responsibilities.● Good behaviour in sport is a positive analogy that young people can relate to.- 26 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs● The approach is simple and could be adapted to many contexts, especially where sport plays aprominent role in social networking. The program also lends itself to creative and interactive activities,rather than relying on theoretical or classroom based teachings.● Prominent sports stars, admired and respected by young people, can be influential and positiverole models by promoting an anti-corruption message.Key challenges● The program discovered a degree of young people’s tolerance for corruption in sport wasgrounded in a view that some corruption practices were not ‘that bad’. Discussion about ethics insport needs to be complemented by wider public education about the damaging effects of corruption.● There are challenges in reaching out to sports clubs and associations who may not see a role forthemselves in anti-corruption education.Transparency International Italia_________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY 10Many education programs focus on teaching young people about the impact and affect of corruption.However one community-based initiative is demonstrating that young students, including children, canalso be powerful agents of change. Giving children a space to discuss what is important in theircommunity and to make changes to the social problems that they confront has been not only arewarding experience for the students, but has introduced positive changes in the wider community.Box 3.10 Children's Movement for Civic Awareness – IndiaChildren's Movement for Civic Awareness (CMCA) is an innovative program that aims to ‘nourish thespirit of active citizenship, driven by the strength of voluntarism’. CMCA fosters civic andenvironmental consciousness among children through the establishment of school based Civic Clubs.Commencing as a small initiative with 14 schools in 2000, CMCA now boasts Civic Clubs in over 180schools in India.Civic Clubs actively engage young students 12-14 years. Clubs are assigned an external volunteerfacilitator who visits their designated schools at least once every week. Facilitators, who come from avariety of professional and social backgrounds, conduct sessions based on a common annualcurriculum for all Civic Clubs. Schools must also demonstrate support and ownership of the programwith an assigned teacher-coordinator to their students’ club, and regular time given each week forCivic Clubs meetings and activities. Sessions consists of outdoor activities, competitions and classes.Topics covered include how to coordinate and work in a group, civic values, active citizenship, rightsand responsibilities, urban local government, solid waste management, water conservation, traffic androad safety, urban greenery, public health and sanitation and other local issues. During a givenacademic year, one of the service themes is selected as a focal issue for all Civic Clubs.In addition to the school-based activities, civic club members also participate in city level annualcampaigns, surveys and interclub festivals. Each August and September, Civic Club members hit thestreets in fact-finding missions. Armed with questionnaires, children visit households, speaking toadults and collecting information to understand what adults in their city think about local service andgovernance issues. Surveys collected by Civic Clubs have asked citizens about management ofwaste, water resources, road and traffic safety and government services.Civic Clubs have made a difference in their communities in very novel ways. One Civic Club has setup awards for service to the community; another has run a campaign to improve waste deliveryservices. Other clubs have sent out fliers to households regarding waste disposal and safe driving.In recent years the CMCA has seen a growing level of interest from Civic Club members ongovernance issues. One factor for this is the increasing opportunity for Club members to meet with- 27 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsand interview public service authorities. These interactions have taken place as a result of studentaction, either when students from government schools identified infrastructure problems in theirrespective schools and requested officials to find a solution, or when children attempted to solve aservice problem in their local community by contacting the responsible agencies. During the city levelannual campaigns, groups of children from different Civic Clubs interview the officials to probe intocivic problems and issues. Two agencies that have shown considerable interest and support for in theactivities of CMCA are the Traffic Police Department and the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board.Key strengths● The CMCA initiative takes young students out of the classroom and gives them real-lifeexperiences in ‘good governance ‘ and ‘civic education’.● Participating schools in the CMCA program welcome the long-term approach of the program,both in running through the academic year, and in returning to schools to establish new civic clubs forthe returning students.● By supporting local volunteer facilitators for the civic clubs, the CMCA program builds communityownership. Facilitators report a ‘sense of belonging’ and ‘ownership’ in the program. This has resultedin high volunteer retention.● CMCA has ensured that themes and issues of its curriculum complement the civics andenvironmental science curricula in schools.● The program provides civic and environmental education that is locally relevant and communitycentred.Key challenges● A given school’s approach and commitment to the program is critical. Without support within theschool, civic clubs cannot operate.● Sustaining student’s motivation is a continuous challenge for CMCA. However for students inmost schools, the CMCA program aims to provide activities and education that is ‘radically differentand absorbing compared to the regular school curriculum’.A collaborative venture of Public Affairs Centre and Swabhimana, Bangalore, India________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY 11The following program is an example of fighting corruption through religious and ethical teaching.Building anti-corruption groups in Indonesian Islamic schools, the program mobilised people in theirreligious community to monitor public spending and condemn corruption.Box 3.11 Anticorruption education in faith-based schools – IndonesiaThe Pesantren-Based Anti-corruption Movement is a campaign against corruption based in thereligious communities of Indonesia’s Islamic boarding schools (pesantren).As institutes of religious education situated outside of state control, pesantren are autonomous andpolitically neutral. The religious leaders of pesantren, known as kiai, are also highly respected andtrusted members of their community. With this underpinning, the Pesantren-Based AnticorruptionMovement began by locating Islamic teachings that expunged the giving and taking of bribes. Workingwith the kiai, the movement spread the message of a religious condemnation of corruption throughbooklets, pamphlets and in Friday sermons in mosques.This provided religious communities with a moral platform for their fight against corruption. However,the words of moral teachings alone could mobilise or empower communities to increase their struggle.Communities needed information on where and when public funding was stolen, and assistance inorganising effective collection action. They also needed representation to take their concerns anddemands to local government.- 28 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsThe Pesantren-Based Anticorruption Movement responded by tapping into its best and most availableresource – pesantren students and kiai in-preparation. Training was organized for students and kiai ofall levels on how to analyse local government budgets, how to conduct simple audits of publicspending and methods for coordinating public gatherings. Networks of community organizers withinpesantrens were formed.Key strengths● As institutes of religious education outside state control, pesantren are autonomous andpolitically neutral.● The kiai represent an important group looked up to by the community as symbols of morality.They command respect in efforts to uphold public ethics. Their influence is strong and places them ina special position in the eyes of the decision-makers in the government.● The guidance of respected religious community figures and the enthusiasm of young studentsnetworked through their pesantren bolstered community efforts to demand greater transparency andan end to theft of public funds.● Successor forums were set up in almost all of the schools that participated in the Pesantren-Based Anticorruption Movement’s campaign. Many students used their training to set up their owngroups within their schools and communities to continue monitoring local government budgets.Key challenges● Customarily kiai are religious leaders and scholars, with minimal training in monitoring publicspending.● In some communities kiai lacked political independence and could not play an optimum role incritiquing government processes.● Pesantren schools had also had little previous contact with other anticorruption groups working inthe community.● Very often, those involved in corruption resorted to violence and the hiring of street thugs to gettheir way – a problem compounded by the weakness of law enforcement efforts.Pesantren-Based Anticorruption Movement_________________________________________________________________________________3.6 Anti-corruption coalitionsBuilding an anti-corruption platform through alliances or coalitions with others can offer communities anumber of advantages in the fight against corruption.Coalitions can provide communities with ‘strength in numbers’ and bolster local campaigns throughnew access to resources and skills (Holloway 2006l). Coalitions can open new opportunities fornationwide monitoring if the alliance members can cover and complement different regions. TheGovernance Coalition of Bangladesh includes many local development NGOs from across thecountry. Members have received assistance from the Coalitions’ national program to increase liaisonbetween communities and local government authorities.Broadly representative coalitions, particularly on a national front, can also have greater impact onpolicy decision makers. This is evident in the national Korean anti-corruption K-PACT, which hasbrought public, political, private and community sectors together with a unified anti-corruption pledgeand strategy. Where individual sectors were unable to make an impact on public policy, K-PACT’sfacilitation of collective efforts has yielded impressive results. Similarly the PNG Community CoalitionAgainst Corruption has run national anti-corruption campaigns by linking national anti-corruptionorganisations with local groups in intimate contact with communities.Coalitions can also bring together representative from different aspects of social communities. TheInterfaith Coalition Against Corruption in Indonesia is an alliance across religious and ethical groups,uniting different aspects of Indonesian society in a common struggle.- 29 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsCASESTUDY 12Box 3.12 Multi-sector Coalition – South KoreaIn 2005 four sectors of South Korean society; Political, Public, Economic, and Civil Society, cametogether to form the Korean Pact on Anti-Corruption and Transparency, or K-PACT. This social pactbrings together a national collective effort to increase transparency and end corruption.K-PACT emerged from mounting public discord towards Korea’s endemic corruption problems.Dogged by repeated slush fund and electoral scandals, government’s claims to be clamping down oncorruption were viewed with popular cynicism. Civil society anti-corruption groups were popping upacross the country, but with no national coalition or links to the economic or public sector, theircampaigns were limited to sideline critiques of business and government.Capitalising on an expressed willingness of the business and economic sector to instigate reforminitiatives, and with national community support, TI-Korea proposed the formation of a quad-partitecoalition. With the signing of the social pact, each sector committed to national anti-corruptioncampaigns.K-PACT involves sectoral commitments to address weaknesses to corruption and improve systems.For instance:Public sector: improving local government transparency, reforming Information Disclosure Acts andstrengthening anti-corruption education; and improvement in public corporation's transparencyPolitical sector: strengthening of the National Assembly Ethics Committee, eradication of illegalpolitical fundsPrivate sector: improving accounting and audit standards, establishing ethics, protection ofwhistleblowers and information disclosureCivil society: improvements in accountability and transparency of civil society, introduction of CitizenOmbudsmanLogistical support is provided through the secretariat (K-PACT Council), assisting with cooperationbetween participants and enforcing the four agendas of inspection, evaluation, dissemination, andrenewal of the Pact.The K-PACT is not a fixed framework. It is designed to be adapted to fit the different needs of varioussectors, spheres, and regions. For example, on the basis of K-PACT Korean medical andconstruction sectors have established their own pacts, bringing together relevant government, public,private and community stakeholders.Regarding community involvement, civil society groups in the K-PACT network represent 12 ofKorea’s 16 regions. Community groups receive K-PACT support for youth education, research andinvestigation activities and monitoring of local governments’ administration, legislation and finances.The K-PACT Council and civil society organisations organize national public campaigns for occasionssuch as UN Anti-Corruption Day. A citizen charter is included in K-PACT and citizens can be includedin K-PACT through organisations or as individuals.Key strengths● Results of K-PACT testify to the commitment from each sector to fulfil their commitments andmove away from corruption practices. More that 85% of the top 500 South Korean corporations havesigned onto the pact. In just 12 months 10 laws have been passed, addressing issues raised by K-PACT.● The program is adopting a long-term view. Future goals include encouraging greater publicparticipation anti-corruption activities and increasing the prominence and understanding of K-PACT inthe public arena.● K-PACT is adaptable to different sectors who can establish their own accountability andtransparency pact based on the overarching principles of K-PACT.● Unlike many coalitions that dependent on members providing all logistical and resource support,the K-PACT is assisted by its own secretariat.- 30 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsKey challenges● The K-PACT is highly dependent on political will to reform and make changes to curb andprevent corruption.● There is no clause regarding non-compliance and as a ‘voluntary’ pact, compulsion must comefrom within each sector to reform and implement necessary changes.● Lacking any legal status, K-PACT and the K-PACT Council do not have guaranteed existenceshould a government hostile to the pact’s goals emerge.K-PACT_________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY 13The Community Coalition Against Corruption in Papa New Guinea brings together the national mediacouncil with anti-corruption organisations and local community groups.Box 3.13 Community Coalition Against Corruption – Papua New GuineaThe PNG Community Coalition Against Corruption, CCAC, is a loose network of approximately 90groups coming together to fight corruption. The CCAC was established in 2002 by the combinedefforts of Transparency International PNG (TI PNG), the Media Council of PNG (MCPNG), theOmbudsman Commission, The Office of the Public Prosecutor, the PNG Chamber of Commerce, andPNG churches. TI PNG and the Media Council of PNG jointly coordinate the coalition. The CCACaims to engage the PNG community in all sectors in the fight against corruption. It also promotes goodgovernance, leadership and a message of unity for PNG, such that PNG society can develop itselfeconomically, socially and politically. Members can be groups, organisations or individuals andincludes NGOs, churches, community groups, businesses and private sector companies. It isestimated that through members and constituents of CCAC groups, the Coalition can reach out to anestimated at two million PNG citizens.In the lead up to the 2002 national PNG elections the CCAC played an important role in the selfdeclared“War on Corruption”. The War on Corruption was declared to create community awareness,debate and networking opportunities for good governance advocates. Activities included a mediacampaign supporting voters’ rights, and a civic program raising issues of selling and buying votes,together with discussion on voting for honest leaders.In 2005 the CCAC campaigned against two proposed Bills: the first proposed to exempt PNG MPsfrom dismissal from office if found guilty of being in breach of the Leadership Code, and the secondsought to increase electoral support grants from K500,000 to K1,500,000. Through community groupstalking with citizens and explaining the ramifications of the proposed bills, and collecting petitions fromacross the country, CCAC brought the discord of the community to the PNG government.With obvious public discontent over the bills, the PNG government withdrew the controversial bills. In2006 the CCAC campaigned to ensure that the Parliamentary Select Committee to review theOmbudsman Commission of PNG did not make changes that would weakened the OmbudsmanCommission. As the 2007 national election looms, CCAC members are preparing for communitycampaigning and education on the inaugural limited-preferential voting system.As a relatively young coalition, the CCAC is determining tactics and strategies for successfulcampaigning. Maintaining a flow of information between members is seen as critical. The CCAC isalso selective about issues and matters for campaigns, advocating on matters with widespreadcommunity impact. Consensus between members of the coalition is vital for campaigns. To facilitatediscussion the CCAC now holds four forums across the country for members to raise issues anddiscuss future campaigns.With a diversity of members, the CCAC must ensure the needs of smaller members are considered.One approach is encouraging larger organisations to make resources available to other CCAC- 31 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsmembers, fostering partner and mentor opportunities. An example of this is the opportunity for CCACmembers to link up with media houses in order to access community service broadcasting and obtaincoverage of news worthy events.Moving outside the established networks of organisations and groups and engaging communities incampaigns is also a challenge. The CCAC works through its membership to reach communities,providing resources and materials (posters, booklets, petitions) to coalition members who engagedirectly with citizens. This is backed up by mass media campaigns to reinforce the Coalition’smessage.Key strengths● The CCAC can depend on coordinating organisations to service and facilitate information flowbetween the Coalition members.● The CCAC works on priority issues that are accepted by all members. This approach preventsthe organisation from ‘burning out’ the capacity or interest of members.● The CCAC primarily targets short action orientated campaigns to prevent or support specificissues.Key challenges● A gap between small, local community groups and larger, national advocacy groups can easilyform. Open communication, mutual trust between members and a collaborative effort that plays todifferent members’ strengths will help bridge the gap.● Corruption problems are systemic and the efforts of the CCAC will have limited impact if politicalwill for reform does not develop.Transparency International PNG_________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY 14Coalitions can be a microcosm of how supply-side and demand-led anti-corruption approaches can bebalanced. In the Governance Coalition in Bangladesh, links are made between micro-levelgovernance and human rights activities at a local village or precinct level, and national level advocacyand policy-reform programs.Box 3.14 Governance Coalition – BangladeshFirst established as a regional coalition in South West Bangladesh, the Governance Coalition hasgrown to become a national network of Bangladeshi NGOs, community groups and communityorganisations ‘promoting responsive governance and human rights’. Governance Coalition memberswork on a range of individual program priorities, but are unified by a common goal to improve localgovernance systems in Bangladesh.Governance Coalition is not a legally bound entity and works with minimum bureaucracy. Support isprovided through member organisations and an elected executive committee oversees coalitionactivities. Programs are framed in a human rights approach and encourage communities to not onlybe aware of their rights, but to claim their rights.One strategy is to increase communities’ involvement in local decision-making processes.Governance Coalition has supported the formation of Loak Morchas (voluntary peoples alliances) in66 local government areas. Loak Morchas bring together representatives from community groups,locally elected bodies, NGOs and professional associations. They also target the involvement ofyoung people and women. Loak Morchas act as mediators between local government, communitymembers and service delivery agencies. Through the Loak Morchas, citizens have increased theirinteraction with local government on constructive anti-corruption activities such as open budgetplanning exercises. With this grassroots activism engaging local authorities, Loak Morchas haveincreased the responsiveness of service delivery and seen an improvement in the quality of basicservices.- 32 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsGovernance Coalition also works to link micro level activities with macro level advocacy. GovernanceCoalition organises dialogues and roundtables national level policy makers, members of parliament,journalists, academics, national civil society organisations and other stakeholders to review, change orreform local government systems in Bangladesh.Key strengths● The Governance Coalition works with various stakeholders (local government representatives,government officials, NGOs, People’s Alliances and community) both at local level and national level.● Coalition members are involved in very local development programs and ensure the coalition isaddressing the communities’ interest● There is opportunity for communities to participate proactively to claim their rights● Governance Coalition has created opportunity for development organisations to be involved ingovernance, anti-corruption and human rights activitiesKey challenges● Volatile political situation and a lack of commitment of political leaders to reform limit the impactof a coalition such as the Governance Coalition.● Long-term support is required to build capacity amongst membersWave Foundation, Bangladesh_________________________________________________________________________________CASESTUDY 15Beyond the illegal dimensions of corruption, positions of morality may be a trigger point for oppositionfor those people able to resist a corrupt activity 6 . If a moral decision could prevent a corrupt actionoccurring, religious and ethical education should play a role in preventing corruption. This was thepremise for the formation of the Indonesian ‘Interfaith Anti-corruption Coalition’Box 3.15 An Interfaith Anti-corruption Coalition – IndonesiaIn 2004 the Interfaith Anticorruption Coalition in the Yogyakarta Special District was formed. TheCoalition brought together Moslem, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist and Hindu representatives topromote anti-corruption values on the basis of ethical and moral positions.Members identified commonalities between their religions in order to establish a multi-faith moralposition against corruption. The Coalition’s action-plan to spread the message was multi-pronged.From the top, religious leaders were encouraged to offer moral guidance to give confidence tocommunities’ struggle against corruption. Materials for sermons and theological discussion weredeveloped, placing anticorruption values in the context of sacred texts, ethical positions and religiousteachings.At the grassroots level, young activists or campaigners from each faith group were selected andtrained to support community actions against corruption. Training focused on building networks of anticorruptioncampaigners within each religious community and organisation represented in the Coalition.These young people focused on support for their own communities, promoting anti-corruptionmessages and linking the community with secular anti-corruption groups. An ‘Interfaith Activists’Anticorruption Forum’ brought the young campaigners together, resulting in a ‘Coalition of YoungInterfaith Anticorruption Activists’ being formed as a sub-set of the overall Interfaith Coalition.Running parallel to the Coalition’s informal education and activities with religious leaders and activistswas the development of formal education resources for religion and ethics teachers. Anti-corruption6 In many situations communities, especially the poor and marginalised have no capacity to resist or fightcorruption regardless of any ethical or moral view of the transaction or activity. This program was targeting thosein the community who when faced with a potentially corrupt action would have the capacity to resist involvement.- 33 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programseducation resources for university students were developed and tested with a range of religioneducators based in Islam, Christianity, Buddhism and Hindiuism as well as teachers in civics,Pancasila philosophy, ethics and other social studies. Rather than setting anti-corruption education upas a separate subject, the materials provided educators with tools for appropriate adaptation andincorporation into their existing courses on values and ethics. Educators and students respondedpositively to the courses and materials, evaluating them as useful and challenging.Key strengths● Religious guidance plays an important role in many people’s decision-making processes.The Coalition’s strategy was sophisticated and comprehensive, targeting the involvement of seniorreligious leaders, educators and young activists.● Unlike alliances that focus only on discussion about corruption, this coalition developed acollective position, and then focused on practical and tangible projects, such as the production of anticorruptioneducation materials for religion and ethics courses.● The strategy of integrating anti-corruption education with religion and ethics subjects, alreadywell established in universities’ curriculum, was successful in addressing teachers’ concerns that theircurriculum could not accommodate new courses.Key challenges● With five religious represented in the coalition, and individual religious leaders in each faith-grouppreaching with their local communities, some inconsistencies emerged across the approaches andmessages contained in sermons and preaching.● Managing coalition members’ view of an appropriate public response to corruption was also a keychallenge. Some members sought to mobilise the constituents of their religious community to putpressure on policy-makers. Other religious leaders believed mass mobilisation contravened theirreligious teachings that condemn violence. In order to bridge these differences, the Coalition firstsought open and constructive dialogue with government authorities or officials, and agreed to ask onlyparticular religious communities to mobilise their communities for public activities.● Individual representatives on the coalition are often community spokespeople or leaders indemandfor other community activities.Establishing Anti Corruption Movement through Formal and Informal Religious Education – Indonesia- 34 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs4. Factors for success in community-based anti-corruptionprograms4.1 IntroductionAs noted in section two of this report, McCarthy’s evaluation of Transparency International’s initialAdvocacy and Legal Advice Centres program assessed the ‘enabling environment factors’ for theprogram’s success. McCarthy considered the factors in two categories: internal factors within thelocal TI Chapter running the advice centres, and the wider environmental dynamics that influenced theprogram – the external factors.This report expands on that framework. Factors facilitating the success of this paper’s 15 case studieshave been analysed as internal or external factors. This has been a qualitative assessment. Someconditions are definitive: program coordinators and evaluations testified that without the particularcircumstances, the given program would not have achieved its goals. Other conditions arespeculative, based on the available information about the programs and the environment in which theywere implemented.4.2 Internal factorsInternal factors are under the control of the sponsoring or implementing organisation. They includehow the organisation is functioning before it commences a community-based anti-corruption program,how the program is designed and who is involved in the program. It also includes endemic features ofthe organisation, such as size, location and relationships with key stakeholders.• Strategy and flexibility of programHaving a defined focus and strategy for the program was a universal and critical factor for success.How the focus was determined and the strategy designed was also important. Every organisationindicated that community involvement, participation and consultation were essential.Flexibility in the program design was also important with some programs radically changing their plansto respond to requests from communities. The success of MKSS and Bismarck Ramu Group was dueto inbuilt flexibility that allowed communities to dictate the pace of work or discussion, with theorganisations showing respect for the other demands on community members’ time. Flexibility in theirprograms allowed time and space for communities to explore their own indigenous solutions to agovernance or corruption issue. Some organisations commented that unsuccessful programs lackedflexibility and imposed an unrealistic expectations and timeline for communities to meet or achieve theimposed benchmarks for progress.• Quality of human resourcesQuality of human resources refers to the commitment, competency and reliability of the peopleassociated with any aspect of implementing or facilitating the program. It includes staff and volunteers.Every program was uplifted by the energy, drive, skills and commitment of their staff and volunteerteams. Every organisation and group recognised that looking after staff and volunteers was critical toachieving their goals.For programs that required people with specialised skills, such as report card monitoring or developingeducation resources for schools, significant investments in recruitment, training and personnelretention was an essential factor for success. Programs offering legal advice (The Advice andInformation Desks and Advocacy and Legal Advice programs) depended on advisors that offeredprofessional, credible and informed counsel to clients. They also needed people with the skills to listento and empathise with clients, and it was recognised as a worthy investment when advisors weretrained in active listening and basic counselling.- 35 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsInvesting in support for volunteers also paid off for a number of programs. Evaluations of TextbookCount noted improvements in the process when volunteer monitors were given training that clearlydefined their roles. The Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness has a successful rate of retainingvolunteer facilitators, attributed to its commitment to support and look after volunteers.Many organisations noted the outstanding contribution of key individuals (staff or volunteers) pavedthe way to successful outcomes. In some situations it was the passion, commitment and technicalcompetency of these individuals who overcame challenges and without whom, other conditions wouldhave become far more critical. Still, the success of these programs was always due to the humanresources factor plus other factors being in place. No program succeeded on the basis of outstandingstaff or volunteers alone. There were consistently other critical factors in addition to having the bestteam available.• Providing space for communities to take the leadConsultation with communities and fostering community support was not only an essential prerequisitefor success, it is one of the fundamental premises of a community-based program. However there wasan added factor for programs that can be described as ‘community-led’ (Committee of ConcernedCitizens, MKSS, and Bismarck Ramu Group). In these case studies, the implementing organisationhas stepped back and given the community control over the scope and direction of the program. Theactivities varied, governed by the priorities and concerns of the community. Giving communitiescontrol over the program’s decision making, a centrepiece of these organisations’ mission, became acritical factor to their programs’ success.• Adopting a positive profileThis may at first seem frivolous in light of the seriousness of corruption, but many programs indicatedthe importance of profiling their activities and anti-corruption messages in a positive manner.Predominantly programs working with children and young people, and some activities encouragingactivism amongst communities to prevent corruption embraced a positive profile. This was reflected inan action-orientated approach that gave people simple tools to prevent corruption with (Civic Clubs,Textbook Count) or promotion of the widespread benefits for a society that upholds civic values,respects human rights and creates social equity (Ethics and Sport, Children’s Movement for CivicAwareness). It was evident that a positive, constructive message was especially important forattracting and motivating children and young people.• Demonstrable successA number of programs who ran small pilots or trials before expanding their activities noted that theability to demonstrate a previous achievement was a contributing factor to the success of the scaledupprogram (Committee of Concerned Citizens, Textbook Count, Advice and Information Desks,Report Card Monitoring, Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres). It was noted that demonstrating anachievement on a small scale increased the opportunity for donor support and could also improverelationships with local government. Demonstrating success, even in a limited area, boosted theconfidence of program coordinators, staff and volunteers, and also encouraged other communities orgroups to join the activities, or replicate the program in their locality.• Involving youth as anti-corruption campaignersWhile every program tried to reach out and involved young people, some programs actually dependedon the involvement of young people as anti-corruption campaigners to mobilise and liaise withcommunity members (Textbook Count, Interfaith Coalition, Pesantren Anti-Corruption Networks,Committee of Concerned Citizens and others). Incorporating a specific focus or activity for youngpeople in local anti-corruption program was seen as beneficial for the overall program (youth bringing- 36 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsenergy and enthusiasm, and a link to community networks particularly in schools). It was also anendeavour to build a sustained constituency of supporters for future anti-corruption campaigns.• Establishing a relationship with governmentEstablishing a relationship with government was critical to the success of most programs. LaunchingTextbook Count as a national monitoring exercise was completely dependent on a collaborative andconstructive partnership with the Philippines Department of Education. Programs that ran in publicschools depended on establishing good relationships to ensure the willingness and support ofeducation bureaucracy. The public advocacy initiatives of the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centreswere greatly enhanced when resources were allocated towards building relationships with governmentauthorities. Other organisations noted that establishing a relationship with government alloweddiscrete, informal discussions to take place alongside the more public community activities.• Being a member of an international organisation…Being a member of a credible and respected international anti-corruption movement – for mostprograms membership with Transparency International – was a notable factor for success. Forexample the profile of Transparency International assisted the promotion of the Advocacy and LegalAdvice Centres. In Bangladesh, people join Committees of Concerned Citizens recognisingTransparency International as a movement that makes waves against corruption. Governments werereportedly more willing to listen to issues raised when Transparency International was seen to bebacking the initiatives (McCarthy 2005). In some cases, the Transparency International associationprovided protection against those whose power was being usurped.• …Or being small and localBy contrast, for MKSS in India and Bismarck Ramu Group in PNG, being small and local, and not amember of an international movement was a critical factor for their programs’ successes.Underpinning their ability to facilitate community-led anti-corruption initiatives was their structure: local,grassroots community organisations with a physical and conceptual location in a community context.As small organisations with minimum or no expatriate staff, both MKSS and Bismarck Ramu Grouphave connections with communities that larger, outside organisations may not be able to establish.Both have adopted a community-led philosophy that puts the community in charge of the direction andstrategy of the anti-corruption work. This requires deep community-organisation trust, founded on bothMKSS and Bismarck Ramu Group spending significant periods of time in villages to earn people’strust. MKSS members live in the villages where they work, Bismarck Ramu Group membersundertake repeated visits to local villages on a timeframe set by the community. Logistically this isfeasible for smaller, local groups.- 37 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs4.3 External factorsExternal factors are the wider social, political, cultural 7 dynamics of the society and state.Organisations have limited to no control or influence over these factors. Yet these can be the factorsthat create an enabling environment for a community anti-corruption program. Recognising andunderstanding the local external environment is essential.• Trusted by the communityThis was a universal factor for the 15 case studies. Every implementing organisation or group neededto have the trust and support of the community before considering their actual anti-corruption program.This is a special factor, as it is perhaps both an internal and an external factor, and so is representedin Table One and Table Two as both an internal and an external factor. Gaining the trust ofcommunities is partly under the control and influence of the organisation. Organisations and groupscan do much to build trust, partnership and alliances with communities. Without that investment oftime to build community trust and then support, anti-corruption programs will be viewed as outsideimpositions and even resented by communities.However trust and support must come from the community; it cannot be inserted by an organisation orgroup. It is also easy to be misled into believing a community has offered their support, for example inattending trainings or workshops, when on closer inspection citizens have not seen the program as awelcome initiative that they wholeheartedly own or even support.• Public endorsement by an external supporterSome programs benefited from the public backing of an external supporter that championed theirprogram’s cause or publicly endorsed the implementing organisation. Textbook Count for instancewas greatly aided by the support of a senior authority in the Department of Education. TransparencyInternational Italia’s Ethics and Sport involved prominent sport stars whose profiles advanced theprogram. External supporters could be less high profile but still influential people in their owncommunity, for instance religious leaders or principles of schools who in their sphere of influencepromoted particular programs (Pesantren Anti-corruption Movement, Interfaith Coalition, Children’sMovement for Civic Awareness). Groups wanting to build coalitions and alliances across differentsectors of society are especially dependent on external supporters.• Different stakeholders recognise corruption as a problemParticularly for coalitions, the emergence of a corruption problem or situation that impacted ondifferent sectors of society was a factor for bringing groups and organisations together. The proposalof draft legislation mobilised support around the anti-corruption campaign of the Community CoalitionAgainst Corruption in PNG. Public corruption scandals and widespread community discord withgovernment response to corruption provided an opportunity for a national coalition such as K-PACT togain traction with government, business and the community. When establishing local anti-corruptiongroups (Committees of Concerned Citizens or the Loak Morchas established in anti-corruptionprograms of the Governance Coalition), recognition amongst different community members thatcorruption had a negative impact for the whole community was a driver in motivating people to join thegroup.7 There is evidence that economic factors also influence community-based programs, however there was nocapacity for this research to analyse economic factors.- 38 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs• Political will for reformPolitical will for reform is essential for sustained impact against corruption. But is it a necessary factorfor the success of community-based anti-corruption programs? In the long-term, the answer is yes.Communities (or the private sector) cannot make an enduring improvement against corruption withoutcommitment and genuine efforts by all levels of government to also address and solve corruptionproblems.Certain programs directly depended on government’s willingness to instigate reform, for exampleTextbook Count depended on a pro-reform climate. Other programs benefited from local government’swillingness to introduce or uphold anti-corruption laws, for example the Lamon Bay program.In the short-term, some community programs can navigate around a lack of political will. For programsempowering communities to fight corruption, a lack of political will can be a mobilising factor forcommunities to find their own methods of addressing corruption. Community programs can alsocompel government, especially local government, to introduce anti-corruption measures.• Communities are talking about corruptionIn many cases, communities needed to be at a stage where discussion was open about the problemsof corruption for anti-corruption activities to succeed.For instance the Interfaith Coalition and Pesantren Anti-corruption Movement identified thatcommunity tolerance to corruption would be significant challenges to any anti-corruption campaigns.But above the community tolerance was a growing level of ‘noise’ in the public domain aboutcorruption as an increasing problem. Communities were not at a place to mobilise in public collectiveaction or as social change activists, but neither were they intimidated about a discussion oncorruption. In these circumstances, methods such as education programs, creating a dialogue onethics and anti-corruption through faith-based communities, and working in schools or with childrenwere successful.• Communities are ready to take actionIn other situations communities faced a different obstacle to fighting corruption. People were angryabout corruption, ready and wanting to take a stand, yet were unable to, not knowing what to do orwho could help them. There was enough public discussion condemnation of corruption, and citizenswere arriving at the next stage of wanting practical assistance to become anti-corruption activists andagents of change. They were willing, eager, prepared to be involved and eventually take the lead inanti-corruption programs. Programs that offered campaign tools and assistance with collective actions,such as local volunteer anti-corruption groups and networks, volunteer coastal patrols, public meetingswith access to authorities and monitoring and watchdog activities all thrived in these conditions.• Vocal media against corruptionLocal media willing to report incidents of corruption was an enabling factor for a number of programs.Independent media’s interest in corruption enhanced other conditions, such as communities talkingabout corruption, which in turn fostered support for community anti-corruption activities. For example,the reporting of corruption incidents in Bangladeshi press has been used by TransparencyInternational Bangladesh to build a ‘Corruption database’. This has fostered community debate,raising the level of noise about corruption. Monitoring programs benefit from media reports on theircorruption surveys. Advice centres that produced reports on the trends and patterns of corruption alsodepend on a media willing and able to cover corruption stories.Building relationships and credibility with media could also be considered an internal factor, and manyorganisations did work to build good relationships with journalists or secure access to media outlets- 39 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs4.4 SummaryThe context and environment of each program was unique, and on first glance, the differencesbetween influences on the programs seem stark. No two programs demonstrated the same set ofconditions or factors for success. Some programs were influenced by many factors, other programsappear to be driven by a few key factors.Across the case studies, internal factors appear to be more influential over the success of theprograms than the external factors. The process for designing and implementing the program, thepeople employed and engaged by the implementing organisation or group, and the ability of theimplementing organisation or group to engage with other stakeholders, especially governmentauthorities, was critical to the success of most programs. It is not surprising that the organisationsrunning successful programs against corruption optimised their internal factors before their programwas launched.External conditions were important, even highly influential, but appear to have less of an impact on thesuccess of the programs than the internal factors. For most organisations, external factors were morelike dynamics or limitations that their programs needed to work within. Successful programs weretherefore situated in a position that gave the implementing organisation room to manoeuvre within thelocal social, political and cultural context.In addition, external factors were fluid and susceptible to sudden change that was also out of theorganisations’ control. Programs needed to evolve to changing circumstances. As the local corruptionsituation improved or worsened, or external dynamics shifted, successful programs evolved andadapted to the new environment – for example the work of MKSS, Textbook Count and the LamonBay project changed and adapted to the shifting external environment.The importance of external factors as factors for success should not be discounted in favour of a solefocus on the internal factors. Every program was affected by outside conditions. It was important thatorganisations understood and considered carefully the likely impact of external conditions oncommunity programs.Two external factors were important for a majority of programs: ‘Different stakeholders recognisecorruption as a problem’ or ‘community members are discussing or talking about corruption’ wereessential for nearly two thirds of the case studies. Other factors also exhibited a possible reciprocalrelationship for programs. For example, programs that did not depend on ‘political will for reform’ weredependent on the factor of ‘presence of vocal media’ – and vice versa.There were also unanticipated catalysts, external factors that were difficult to predict and had beenrealised as facilitating success only in hindsight. This was an external supporter offering unexpectedpublic endorsement of a program, or a crisis event that jolted people’s consciousness aboutcorruption. Catalysts are difficult to cultivate and predict, so it is helpful to note that in no case studywas an unexpected catalyst the sole reason for a program’s success.This is the most significant result of this research – there was no single condition, factor or catalystthat underpinned the success of a community anti-corruption program. As shown in Table One(internal factors) and Table Two (external factors), every program was successful because of acombination of factors, sometimes only a few, but often up to six or seven significant reasons.Overall only three factors appear to be universal and essential to success of all programs. First is theinternal factor of determining a clear and defined focus and strategy for the program with in-builtflexibility, and second the human resources component – having a skilled, competent team toimplement the program. Third, having the trust of communities was also a universal reason forsuccess. This is a special factor, as it is both an internal and external factor. Organisations and groupsneed to look inwards and structure their processes for maximum participation with communitymembers. However, trust must come from the external community towards the program and programimplementers.- 40 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsTable three shows the frequency of each factor across the 15 case studies. This shows that in additionevery program depending on the above mentioned ‘universal factors’, two-thirds of programs weredependent on ‘citizens talking about corruption’, and two-thirds of programs were dependent on ‘otherstakeholders sharing a goal with the program’. In fact, only two case studies (Ethics and Sport andChildren’s Movement for Civic Awareness) did not depend on either one of these factors. Thissuggests that in the absence of these two external factors, options for community-based anticorruptionprograms may be limited and the impact of other factors would become critical.The next steps to understanding why certain community anti-corruption programs have beensuccessful should be to rank the importance of conditions and enabling factors for individualprograms. No doubt there also other yet unfound internal and external factors that fostered programs’achievements, factors that would be identified and better understood with in-depth field basedresearch.It would also be important to independently assess the impact of short-listed programs (see nextsection) on reducing or curbing corruption.- 41 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsTable One: Internal factors for success in community-based anti-corruption programsProgramFocusedand flexibleprogramHumanResourcesSpace forcommunityledinitiativesProgramusesobviouspositivemessagingImplementingorganisationhasdemonstratedprevioussuccessImplementingorganisationexplicitlyinvolves youngpeopleImplementingorganisationestablishesrelationships withgovtImplementingorganisationis localmember ofinternationalaffiliationImplementingorganisationis small, localgroup withoutinternationalaffiliation.Implementingorganisationis trusted bycommunityCommittees ofConcernedX X X X X X X XCitizenLamon BayFisheriesX X X X XMKSS X X X X XBismarck RamuGroupX X X X X XReport CardSurveyX X X X XTextbook Count X X X X X X XAdvocacy &Legal Advice X X X X X XCentresAdvice & InfoDesksX X X X X XPesantren Anti-CorruptionX X X X X XNetworkdsEthics andSportX X X X X X XChild Movementfor CivicX X X X X XAwarenessK-Pact Coalition X X X XCCAC Coalition X X X X XInterfaithCoalitionX X X X XGovernanceCoalitionX X X X X- 42 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsProgramTable Two: External factors for success in community-based anti-corruption programsCommittees ofConcerned CitizenLamon BayFisheriesImplementingorganisation istrusted bycommunityExternal supporterendorses andpublicly supportsprogramDifferentstakeholdersrecognisecorruption as aproblemPolitical will forreform ispresentCitizens are talkingabout corruptionCitizens are ready totake action againstcorruptionX X XX X X X X XMKSS X X X X XVocal mediaagainstcorruptionBismarck RamuGroupX XReport CardSurveyX X X XTextbook Count X X X X XAdvocacy & LegalAdvice CentresX X XAdvice & InfoDesksX X X XPesantren Anti-CorruptionX XNetworksEthics and Sport X XChild Movement forCivic AwarenessX XK-Pact Coalition X X X X X XCCAC Coalition X X X X X XInterfaith Coalition X X XGovernanceCoalitionX X X- 43 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsTable Three: Frequency of internal and external factors across case studiesInternal FactorsNumber of case studiesdependent on factor(total number of casestudies 15)External FactorsNumber of case studiesdependent on factor(total number of casestudies 15)Focused and flexibleprogram15Implementingorganisation is trustedby community15Human Resources 15Citizens are talkingabout corruption10Space for community-ledinitiatives8Different stakeholdersrecognise corruption asa problem9Implementingorganisation establishesrelationships with govt7Citizens are ready totake action againstcorruption7Local implementingorganisation is affiliatedwith internationalorganisation7Vocal media againstcorruption is present6Implementingorganisation explicitlyinvolves young people6External supporterendorses or publiclysupports program5Implementingorganisation hasdemonstrated previoussuccess5Political will for reform ispresent4Program uses obviouspositive messaging4Implementingorganisation is small,local group withoutinternational affiliation.4- 44 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs5: Linking to a Pacific context5.1 IntroductionStage one of this research was to investigate community-based anti-corruption programs, analysingthe factors for their success. The second stage is to recommend what mechanisms could beemployed in future Transparency International programs in the Pacific region.Before outlining what anti-corruption programs this research recommends for further analysis, twoimportant considerations need to be taken into account. First, the National Integrities Systems reportof 12 Pacific Island Countries and second, the capacity and views of local Transparency InternationalChapters.NISPAC reportsIn 2004, Transparency International coordinated the National Integrity Systems surveys of PacificIslands Countries (NISPAC program). The NISPAC studies offered an assessment and comparison ofanti-corruption activity in 12 Small Island Pacific States 8 (excluding PNG and Fiji, which were studiedearlier and separately by local Transparency International groups).The picture of the Pacific from the NISPAC reports reveals societies experiencing pressure fromvarying vulnerabilities to corruption. The studies found perception of corruption varied within andbetween states, with ambiguity and disagreement about what might be considered as corruption. Insome Pacific states corruption is being contained and reportedly decreasing, whereas in other statescorruption is at ‘endemic proportions’. Corruption problems were largely in political corruption,particularly during election campaigns, and exposure to corruption was found in all public services. Ona positive note, judicial systems, especially higher courts, were consistently regarded as independentand robust against problems of corruption.All Pacific Island states examined in the NISPAC studies, as well as Fiji and PNG, have laws, orprovision in their criminal code or public service regulations that define and prohibit certain kinds ofcorruption – usually bribery. Some gaps exist, but generally the studies not recommend a widespreadneed for changes in legislation. Electoral administration and audit offices were found to be generallycorruption free, although they struggled with a lack of resources and governments unwilling to listen tothem. The challenge is to leverage up these existing institutions. They need space to speak up againstcorruption, and greater resources to effectively do their jobs.While the institutions and processes to counter corruption are largely in place in Pacific States,community and citizen demand for public accountability needs to be bolstered. In regards to civilsociety in Pacific communities, the NISPAC reports found differences between their existence,composition and effectiveness. In some states, such as Kiribati and Nauru, no citizens groups wereidentified. In Tonga civil was described as ‘poorly developed’. By comparison Vanuatu, Cook Islandsand Solomon Islands have diverse and active civil societies. Most significant to this research was theextremely limited number of community groups focused on corruption. Aside from TransparencyInternational groups in Vanuatu and Solomon Islands, the 12 NISPAC reports found no otherorganisations or groups that monitor or speak out against corruption. Where lawyers’ associations arementioned in the reports (in Samoa and Palau) they were apparently not focusing on corruptionissues.Some NISPAC reports commented that traditional, cultural or familial factors could affect people’swillingness to act against corruption, even when it was common knowledge that corruption had takenplace. Cultural factors were not causing corruption to happen, but contributing to corruption remainingunchallenged. Some reports suggested that people were ‘fearful of intimidation, or reluctant to rock theboat by public criticism’. Others suggested that communities seemed simply forgiving of corruption,particularly of kin.8 Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Niue, Nauru, Palau, Tonga,Tuvalu, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu- 45 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsThe recommendations of each NISPAC report were prepared in response to the circumstances ofindividual states. The general awareness and ownership of corruption as a problem with negativeramifications on the whole society was reportedly low, and specific education campaigns aimed atorganisations that influence community and communities’ values was recommended. Reports advisedthat donors, development agencies and anti-corruption organisations needed a deeper understandingof cultural values and tradition governance systems, including research into how traditionalgovernance systems could work together with more western governance structures.Overall the findings of the NISPAC reports give a sense of the different social, political and culturalfactors that challenge, and encourage, anti-corruption efforts in the Pacific region. This has beenimmensely useful when considering what community-based anti-corruption programs might besuitable for a Pacific context.Transparency International in the PacificThere are currently six Transparency International Chapters or groups in the Pacific region: Australia,Fiji, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. Capacity and resources varyacross these chapters/groups.Before commencing an in-depth scoping mission in the Pacific on the proposed short-list of communityanti-corruption programs (outlined below) there must be considerable consultation and dialogue withlocal Transparency International representatives. A pilot or trial of any of the following programs, largeor small, would have a significant impact on local Transparency International groups. The views oflocal Transparency International members on what community-based activities would be mosteffective and appropriate in their local communities need to be considered, and respected. Thepriorities, strengths, weaknesses and future plans of Pacific Transparency International members alsoneed to be better understood.5.2 Short listed community-based programsIntroductionThe following is a short-list of programs recommended for further research and investigation forpossible piloting in the Pacific. Note that all of the 15 programs documented in this research werecreative and successful initiatives in their fight against corruption. There may be elements from eachprogram that could be adapted for a Pacific context. Therefore the following short-list should not deterTransparency International from considering additional research on any of the other case studies.What the following programs offer is a spread of activities that could be adapted for small, rural andisolated communities, as well as small urban populations. They include activities that adopt a ‘positivemessage’ framework, which does not require the condition that populations are vocal about ordiscussing corruption. Predominately these are programs that do not depend on political will for reformin order to achieve short-term progress.These are straightforward activities for communities to pick up and modify to suit local circumstances.Civic Clubs in schools can work on a range of local governance issues. Committees of ConcernedCitizens can be established through the churches or with traditional leaders. These are also programsthat can build awareness and break down taboos about corruption in a non-confronting, nonthreateningmanner, such as a version of Ethics and Sport. Complex programs with manycomponents – for example the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres – deserve further investigationbecause of their immense success in many different countries, demonstrating a degree oftransferability, and because they confront corruption on many fronts: through education, individualsupport for victims, empowering communities and capacity building of accountability mechanisms.- 46 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs1. Committees of Concerned Citizens (CASE STUDY ONE)The Committees of Concerned Citizens (Triple C) program from Transparency InternationalBangladesh establishes autonomous community committees to work on corruption issues at their locallevel.Triple Cs bring together an appointed group of people selected for their ability and capacity to mobiliseand motivate citizens against corruption. The model of small, local volunteer groups networkedthrough a national anti-corruption movement is adaptable for rural or isolated communities. For Pacificcommunities, tribal leaders, church leaders and community representatives could be approached forcommittee membership.The Bangladesh model for support of the Triple Cs maintains ongoing technical assistance andtraining for committee members, but only provides initial financial support. Committees undertake tosource long-term financial support from their own community. This would encourage committeemembers to establish community support and ownership for the program. Committees can also ‘opt-in’to national level anti-corruption campaigns, giving them the profile and positive association with aninternational anti-corruption movement such as Transparency International.The Triple C program in Bangladesh is also closely linked with the provision of advice and support forcitizens pursing a complaint against corruption (Advice and Information Desks program, case studyeight). The decentralised, localised features of the Advice and Information Desks program would beappropriate for many Pacific communities.There would be challenges for a Triple C and its associated services in a Pacific context. There can bedifficulties fostering initial support and maintaining the momentum for volunteer groups. A Triple Cprogram may also struggle to mobilise people in situations where familial and tribal links are valuedabove wider community or national identities.2. Textbook Count (CASE STUDY SIX)The runaway success of Textbook Count in mobilising thousands of people as volunteer monitors is awonderful example of employing simple tools in a sophisticated effort against corruption. The programis worthy of further investigation. Already the model has been replicated in other sectors, for examplemonitoring construction of public buildings such as schools or roads.Textbook Count was dependent on a number of external factors, including the public and politicalsupport of a senior authority, the then Under Secretary for Education, and the political will of theDepartment of Education to clean up corruption within its ranks. However the support of the UnderSecretary was cultivated after Textbook Count had demonstrated success on a small scale. A pilotscheme in the Pacific could monitor a relevant issue or sector link to a government department that isshowing the motivation to address corruption, but is lacking the resources or capacity for thoroughmonitoring of its services.A model similar to Textbook Count could also be incorporated with other community-based programs;such as the Civic Clubs established though the Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness. This wouldtap into a large source of volunteer monitors, offer students and teachers a practical monitoringexercise that would bring momentum to the Civic Clubs, and illustrate to students and the communitythat with simple tools successful efforts against corruption can be achieved.3. Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres (CASE STUDY SEVEN)The Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres offer a successful model that complements direct servicesand support for victims of corruption with comprehensive education, advocacy and policy reformprograms.In most Pacific Island States, coverage of anti-corruption legislation is reasonable and accountabilityinstitutions do exist, although experiencing a lack of resources and/or lack of clout with government.- 47 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsThere are currently no services providing legal advice to assist citizens to access complaintmechanisms or accountability institutions. Such a service, in line with advocacy for governments toimprove resources for institutions such as Ombudsmen or Public Auditors, could be a powerful tool infighting corruption.The capacity building aspect of the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres program would be veryrelevant for the Pacific region. Centres in Eastern Europe and Central Asia have been shown toincrease and bolster the profile and capacity of the associated Transparency International Chapters. Insome Pacific Islands, Transparency International is the only NGO or community group working onanti-corruption. Capacity building for these Transparency International members is a key priority forfuture anti-corruption activities.Capacity building for the current accountability mechanisms and institutions is also very important inthe Pacific. These institutions exist in many Pacific Island countries but suffer from a lack of resourcesand governments unwilling to listen to them. With a better-informed population regarding complaintprocesses, and Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres providing policy recommendations togovernment, advice centres in Europe have contributed to strengthening state-level accountabilitymechanisms. This could also be achieved in the Pacific.There are obvious challenges to an Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres program for the Pacific.Issues such as remoteness and smallness of population, lack of access to telephone services, specificcultural and social issues that may stop people coming to an advice centre, social tolerance towardscorruption, or reluctance to ‘rock the boat’ and make a complaint, possible lack of communityownership of an advice centres if viewed as outside imposition – these and other challenges to anadaptation of the Program for the Pacific need to be considered.4. Ethics and Sport (CASE STUDY NINE)This may first appear to be a small target project. However it has potential to be expanded to not onlytarget school students, but to also reach a wide community audience by working with sports clubs andassociations.People don’t necessarily need to be playing sport to be engaged in this program. People (usually)agree on the principle that respecting the rules of the game makes for an enjoyable sport experience,regardless of being a participant or a spectator. Simple, positive analogies from good behaviour insport can be made with civic values, transparency and accountability and eventually anti-corruption.The previous success of this program did not depend on a high level of community discussion aboutcorruption, and so would be appropriate for a situation where talking about corruption remains a socialtaboo. In many Pacific Island countries sport is very popular, and sport stars admired and respected inthe community. Their involvement and endorsement of the program’s messages would be crucial.5. Civic Clubs, Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness (CASE STUDY 10)The Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness is a creative program aimed at building civic andenvironmental awareness among children through their participation in Civic Clubs. The program hassuccessfully fostered a culture in schools that supports and encourages children to be active in localgovernance issues. This is a stepping-stone towards bringing up a generation that will hopefully beoutspoken against corruption.Currently there are anti-corruption education programs run by Transparency International PNG andVanuatu. The model of Civic Clubs could be included in their school programs and adapted to includeprojects on anti-corruption. The Ethics and Sport (case study nine) program could be an introductoryanti-corruption project for a Civic Club.Civic Clubs depend on the resources of skilled and committed club facilitators; external adults whoguide and instruct the young club members. The Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness has a veryhigh rate of retention for volunteers, attributed to its efforts in caring for volunteers and ensuring they- 48 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsfeel involved in all aspects of the program. This is resource intensive, however finding and trainingvolunteer facilitators would be a significant factor in the programs success.6. Coalitions (CASE STUDIES 12-15)More research is needed into the viability of cross-sector anti-corruption coalitions in the Pacific. Thisis where Transparency International can play a unique role. With individual members coming frombusiness, community and public sectors, Transparency International Chapters are already formingtheir own microcosm coalitions.Coalitions are examples of where Transparency International can muster community support for anticorruptionactions through a partnership with more experienced community-based organisations.Transparency International needs to investigate how and where it can build links and relationshipswith local Pacific NGOs, community groups and organisations. Local community organisations andgroups often witness and deal with the negative results of corruption, but don’t have the capacity orresources to engage in national level campaigning and policy reform. International and national anticorruptionmovements may be able to affect change at a top-down level, but are not equipped orappropriate for basing themselves in a local community to foster the demand for better governancefrom the ground up.Certain conditions need to be in place for anti-corruption coalitions to come together. It will be verydifficult to build an anti-corruption coalition in a setting where public discussion on corruption is nonexistent;each coalition in this report depended on a level of community awareness and argumentabout corruption. There also needs to be a common goal that can unite members. This seems tooccur when there a corruption problem affects a broad sector of society. It is difficult to create a senseof urgency or crisis when entrenched corruption is regarded with apathy or even tolerance. Howeverthe ‘crisis’ factor has been useful for galvanising support in a number of analysed coalitions.Coalitions should not be viewed as a permeant structure on the anti-corruption landscape. They mayfocus attention around a particular issue or event (forth coming elections for example) and then reassesstheir viability after that event.SummaryThe Pacific Islands represent a unique region of island states with very small nation-state populationsand diverse and isolated communities. There are issues in the Pacific, such as small population, someweak governments and lack of civil society that may limit the applicability of the case studies outlined.Based on the factors for success in the above short listed case studies, the following, in order ofimportance, is a very general criteria to consider when assessing if an individual program would suit aparticular Pacific Island community:1. Are citizens open to discussing or talking about corruption – important for three programs2. Is the media reporting corruption as a problem – important for three programs3. Is there recognition among different community stakeholders of the problems of corruption –important for three programs4. Is there political will for reform – important for two programsIn the absence of any of these four factors, the dependence on an external supporter to endorse orsupport the program is critical. It would also suggest two programs; Ethics and Sport and Children’sMovement for Civic Awareness, would then be the most appropriate community programs to consider.The most important stakeholders in determining what, if any, case studies could work in the Pacific willbe the citizens of the Pacific Islands’ communities. Time spent identifying and understanding thesocial, cultural, political and economic environment with the full participation of the community shouldresult in the conception of an anti-corruption program that addresses the priority concerns of thecommunity, rather than imposing an outsider’s agenda. This will result in program that is appropriatefor, relevant to and welcomed by Pacific community.- 49 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs6. Recommendations for Transparency InternationalThis research is hopefully a first step in a process of learning about what works in community basedanti-corruption programs, and investigating what might be appropriate for community anti-corruptionprograms for the Pacific. The following are recommendations for what next steps TransparencyInternational to advance this process.Field-based research for short-listed programsTo learn and understand the nuances and subtleties of these successful community programs,Transparency International needs to invest in field-based research of the short-listed case studies.The internal and external factors that have aided the success of these programs needs to be betterunderstood. Ranking the importance of various factors for individual case studies would also beuseful.Transparency International should not consider a pilot or trial of any of the anti-corruption programsdescribed in this report simply because they have previously been successful. They must be found tobe appropriate for a Pacific context. There needs to be further, thorough research and discussion withPacific Islanders about the appropriateness of any of these programs for a Pacific context. Thatrequires community-level engagement.And while this report has carefully considered the merits of the six short-listed case studies for aPacific context, Transparency International should seek other comments and views on the possibletransferability of these programs, especially from Pacific Chapters and other relevant Pacific-basedstakeholders.Consult with Transparency International Chapters in PacificTransparency International Australia needs to work with the guidance of Pacific Island TransparencyInternational Chapters. There are experiences of the Fiji, New Zealand, PNG, Solomon Islands andVanuatu chapters that TI Australia can learn from. Given AusAID’s new priority focus on anticorruption,TI Australia should look to playing a greater role in facilitating the views, advice andexperience of Pacific TI Chapters to AusAID.The available resources, priorities and strengths of each Pacific Island Transparency InternationalChapter/group should be carefully considered before further discussion about what, if any, communitybasedanti-corruption programs Transparency International could support in the Pacific.Recognising that the resources of TI Australia are also limited, TI Australia should consider securingadditional resources to support a coordinator to build stronger relationships with community-basedorganisations in the Pacific to listen and learn from their experiences and identify areas where TIAustralia can provide, or source, practical assistance for local anti-corruption programs. This shouldbe explored with Pacific TI Chapters and the TI Asia Pacific Desk of the TI Secretariat.Repeat NISPAC studiesThe NISPAC reports provide a detailed outline of Pacific Island states’ current mechanisms andstructures for fighting corruption. The reports are now almost three years old, and the situation in moststates will have changed. Transparency International should consider follow-up in-country research toupdate each NISPAC report. This would not require an entire re-write of each report. Rather, keyissues could be updated and recommendations expanded to include a focus on what practicalcommunity-based anti-corruption activities would be relevant and needed by communities. This wouldrequire bringing researchers with community development experience and engaging them in adiscussion on anti-corruption strategies.- 50 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsResearch role of traditional governance systemsTraditional governance systems placed great power but also great responsibility on the shoulders oflocal leaders. Today this responsibility can be brutally abused. While traditional governance is an areanot usually considered within the National Integrity Systems, Transparency International shouldconsider a specific cross-cultural study to investigate traditional governance systems in Pacificcommunities and their possible role in anti-corruption strategies. Bringing together a cross fertilisationof the traditional and ‘Western’ models of community governance can enhance the role of customaryprocesses while also bringing greater public accountability and transparency to the traditionalleadership roles.Learning about the different governance experiences of other communities would also beconstructive. The Indigenous Community Governance Project of the Centre for AboriginalEconomic Policy Research (CAEPR) in the Australian National University would be a usefulguide and reference. This project is exploring the state of community governance inIndigenous communities in Australia, including looking at different models of governance, thefactors influencing culturally legitimate governance arrangements and the challenges andstrengths in traditional community governance. There may be relevant learnings for Pacificcommunities from the experiences of small, isolated Australia Indigenous communitiesattempting to meld traditional and western governance systems.Ask what Transparency International cannot doTransparency International needs to consider carefully its role in community-based activities. Workingat the ‘grassroots’ may be ideologically appealing, but it requires significant periods of time andallocations of resources to develop a genuine partnership with communities, one that is equal and freeof a perceived authority of an outsider over the community.Transparency International should study the experiences of the Bismarck Ramu Group and the MKSS,organisations that facilitate entirely community-led programs. Their success in community-ledprograms involved years of relationship building, a distinct absence of outsiders and a willingness tonot simply listen to communities, but to be directed by the priority concerns of communities. On thebasis of its current structure as national-level advocacy groups, Transparency International could facenumerous challenges in building and supporting a local or grassroots community constituency againstcorruption.The fight against corruption necessitates a balance of community-based programs with higher levelcampaigning from NGOs to change policy and affect change at a national level. TransparencyInternational should not lose sight of the bigger picture policy changes that are needed. It may onoccasion be more appropriate for Transparency International to lend to support to other establishedcommunity organisations, and to complement their grassroots efforts by focusing on macro leveladvocacy. This will vary from TI Chapter to Chapter, and when considering a region program against anational or local program.The question of what an organisation should not do is a challenging and confronting subject. It doesnot suggest that Transparency International does not have an important contribution to make incommunity-based anti-corruption programs. As witnessed through many case studies, a range of localTI Chapters are working at a very grassroots and direct level. Transparency International must nowconsider its own ‘internal’ factors amongst local Pacific chapters and determine if the preconditions areripe for considering a community-based anti-corruption program.- 51 -

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs7. ReferencesAnderson, Tim, 2005, ‘Challenging ‘integrated conservation and development’ in Papua New Guinea:the Bismarck Ramu Group’ Pacific Economic Bulletin pp 56-70Botes, Lucius and van Rensburg, Dingie, 2000, ‘Community participation in development: nineplagues and twelve commandments’ Community Development Journal, vol. 35, iss. 1, p. 41Brady, Gregory 2002 Strengthening Civil Society Lessons Learned An Analysis of CARE’sExperiences In AfricaHolloway, Richard 2006, NGO Corruption Fighters’ Resource Book – How NGOs can use monitoringand advocacy to fight corruptionLarmour, Peter and Barcham, Manuhuia, 2006, National Integrity Systems Pacific Islands OverviewReport Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government, Australian National UniversityLarmour, Peter and Barcham, Manuhuia, 2006, ‘National Integrity Systems in Small Paciic IslandStates’, Public Administration and Development vol. 26, pp 173-184Mansuri, Ghazala and Rao, Vijayendra 2004, Community-Based and -Driven Development: A CriticalReview, World BankMcCarthy, Paul, 2005, Drivers of Change: An evaluation of the Advocacy and Legal Advice CentresProject, completed on behalf of Transparency InternationalMishra, Neelabh, People’s Right to Information Movement: Lessons from Rajasthan, Discussion PaperSeries 4, United Nations Development ProgrammeTransparency International 2002, Corruption Fighters’ Tool Kit: Civil society experiences and emergingstrategiesTransparency International 2005, National Integrity Studies of Pacific Island Countries (NISPAC)http://www.transparency.org.au/nispac.phpTransparency International 2005, Stealing the Future: Corruption in the ClassroomTransparency International, UN-HABITAT, 2004, Tools to Support Transparency, in LocalGovernance, United Nations Human Settlements Programme, Urban Governance Toolkit Series,- 52 -