Abuse of ministerial power and vote-buying remain persistent problems: TI Pacific Islands Report

New Transparency International studies, to be launched at the end of June, highlight strengths and weaknesses of institutions in terms of countering corruption in 12 Pacific Island countries

Wellington & Melbourne, 8 June 2004

Government ministers were the people most often deemed at risk of corruption in the Pacific Islands, particularly because of their powers to regulate and license, according to studies into corruption in 12 countries, due to be published by Transparency International at the end of June. An overview of the reports is being presented to the Pacific Islands Forum Economic Ministers meeting being held in Rotorua this week.

According to the studies, ministers were also in a position to interfere with public service recruitment and promotion.

Transparency International (TI), the leading international non-governmental organisation engaged in the fight against corruption worldwide, is now calling for more accountability from institutions expected to set an example.

Sectors prone to corruption included police and customs, land and titles administration, forestry and fisheries, and ports. A high risk of corruption was also identified in the health and education sector, in retirement funds, tendering processes, trade in passports and internet domain names, and offshore banking.

That is the conclusion of an overview of 12 Transparency International National Integrity Studies. The studies cover the Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.

Several countries were found to be less corrupt than in the recent past, whereas in the Solomon Islands corruption had become endemic since the late 1980s,” said Dr Peter Larmour of the Asia-Pacific School of Economics and Government at the Australian National University in Canberra.

Larmour is the lead consultant on the 12 country studies, which have been funded by the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID).

Visible petty corruption – routine small payments for services – was only a problem in Samoa, Tonga and Palau, but the Pacific Islands are all vulnerable to corruption of the political system by a tradition of providing material rewards to voters and jobs for financial supporters.

Vote-buying and offering jobs to independent MPs to achieve a majority in parliament is a persistent problem, although legislation has been introduced in Papua New Guinea to strengthen parties against floor-crossers and independent candidates. Key areas of corruption identified were abuse of ministerial and official travel, ministerial favouritism towards relatives in appointments, contracts and scholarships, and budget processes distorted by unnecessary projects, often to the personal financial benefit of legislators.

On the positive side, the higher judiciary was generally regarded as free of corruption in the countries studied, and electoral administration was found to be generally clean despite the absence of independent electoral commissions in most countries.

Audit offices also were generally considered free of corruption, but considered to be under-resourced and ignored. The oversight role of government auditors was often limited by the weakness of parliamentary accounts committees.

The institution of Ombudsman, where it exists, remains relatively invisible and ineffective, with a 92% dissatisfaction rate with the work of the Ombudsman in the Cook Islands.

In public service, bottlenecks combined with poor record-keeping and a lack of supervision to provide opportunities for corruption. All the countries covered by the reports had laws and regulations that defined and prohibited certain kinds of corruption, such as “bribery”, so no widespread need for new legislation or new institutions was identified.

Mr Frank Costigan QC, Chairman of Transparency International Australia, said that Transparency International Australia had encouraged a regional approach to fighting corruption in the Pacific, a development whereby countries with greater experience in fighting corruption such as Australia play a support role for countries lacking the resources or expertise to counter corruption.

“The TI National Integrity System country studies recommend that donors work to strengthen anti-corruption institutions and to support national anti-corruption strategies,” he said.

“We are working closely with international aid agencies, educational institutions and training organisations to develop new programs and projects aimed at reducing the insidious effects of corruption in the Pacific.”

Mr Costigan pointed to the excellent work undertaken by the Australian government in the Solomon Islands including that of Australian Defence forces (RAMSI).

“The collapse of the state in the Solomons is a case whereby there is a need for partnerships between the public and private sectors to maintain checks and balances.

“RAMSI is “guarding the guards” in the Solomons,” he said. …/3

Transparency International has 22 national chapters in Asia-Pacific, some have very lively memberships such as Vanuatu where TI acted as Secretariat for an Electoral Observer Group in the 2002 elections and waged a national public education campaign against electoral fraud and bribery.

In most Pacific countries, TI chapters are working to educate the public about their democratic rights, and educate parliamentarians as to their responsibilities to their constituents.

Political slush funds and vote-buying had become a major issue in many Pacific countries, and this was compounded by foreign firms and governments corrupting politicians in return for business concessions, activities that frightened away legitimate investors.
-end-