the most corrupt country in the world

Tweet

WASHINGTON - Bangladesh and Indonesia are seen by international banks, risk analysts, and businesspeople as among the most corrupt countries among some 91 nations which attract foreign investment, according to the latest annual index released by Transparency International (TI) this week. The corruption-fighting group said Scandinavian countries, led by Finland and Denmark, as well as New Zealand, Singapore, Canada, and the Netherlands were rated as the least corrupt by the same respondents, according to TI's 2001 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). Banglandesh was dead last at 91st, Indonesia was close behind at 88th, while Hong Kong ranked 14th, behind the United Kingdom. The United States ranked 16th, between Israel and Chile. Japan finished in the 21st position. This year's edition, which is based on 14 international surveys by Western-based agencies and companies, measures the degree to which corruption is perceived to exist among public officials and politicians. While major advances in forging new multilateral anti-corruption accords and making public officials accountable for their self-dealing were achieved over the past year, this year's index showed that there is a "worldwide corruption crisis", according to Peter Eigen, TI's chairman. "Corruption levels are perceived to be as high as ever in both the developed and developing worlds," he said. Indeed, of the 91 countries rated in this year's index, 56 - all but two of them developing countries - rated a score of five or below. In the six years it has been published, the CPI has gained a strong following among bankers and ratings agencies that advise investors. "Their judgements influence the flows of vitally needed private capital to developing countries," said TI's vice chairman Frank Vogl, who released the report here. "With very few exceptions, international capital will not go to countries that are seen to be hotbeds of corruption," he noted. China, which ranked 57th in this year's index and has attracted more foreign direct investment than any other developing country by far during the past decade, was one of the notable exceptions, according to Vogl. He also stressed that the traffic in small arms is particularly corrupt, as suggested by the ongoing investigation of former Argentine president Carlos Menem, the media sting of senior Indian Defense Ministry officials, and the pending prosecution of former Peruvian spymaster, Vladimiro Montesinos. "We estimate that a very high proportion of small arms deals in the world are the results of bribes,'' he said. Vogl stressed that the index should be used cautiously for several reasons. More than 100 countries, including some, like Angola and Morocco, which attract substantial foreign investment, were not rated this year. TI included countries on the index only if they appeared in at least three independent surveys by reputable agencies over the past three years. Among the source surveys on which the index is based are the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, the Economist Intelligence Unit, and PricewaterhouseCoopers. Overall, according to Vogl, the survey is weighted towards the perceptions of international businesspeople. He conceded that TI's own index, because it receives broad media coverage, may affect the surveys upon which it bases its own report. In addition, because the surveys used in the report were taken over a three-year period, major advances or backsliding by some countries in fighting corruption during the past year would not necessarily be reflected in this year's index, according to Vogl. Nonetheless, there were some significant changes in the scores and rankings in this year's index compared to the 2000 CPI. Israel, Italy, Colombia, and Egypt, for example, all made impressive gains in both categories in the new index, while Bolivia, Costa Rica, Germany, Norway, Greece, and Malawi all posted steep losses. Finally, different surveys sometimes produced remarkably different results for the same countries. Pakistan, for example, was given scores as low as 0.8 in one survey, and as high as 4.2 in another; while Russia scores ranged from 0.3 to 4.2. TI gave them both weighted scores of 2.3, placing them in a tie with Ecuador for the 79th spot on the index. Zimbabwe, with a 1.6 to 4.7 difference in scores, fell into a similar category. Vogl suggested the lower scores reflected the results of more recent surveys since the country fell into economic crisis and political turmoil. It received a 2.9 score in the 2001 CPI, tying it with Senegal for the 65th ranking. All 91 countries fell within the range of the best, Finland, with a 9.9 score and the worst, Bangladesh, which appeared on the index for the first time with a score of 0.4. That was less than half of the next worst, Nigeria, which scored 1.0. Indonesia and Uganda, which tied for the 88th place, each received a score of 1.9, while Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Cameroon, and Kenya, all scored 2.0. Broken down regionally, Asia had the widest range of scores, topped by Singapore (4th ranked) at 9.2, Hong Kong (14th), Japan (21st) at 7.1, and Taiwan (27th). Malaysia (36th) came in at 5.0, followed by South Korea (42nd at 4.2), China (57th at 3.5), Thailand (61st at 3.5), Philippines (65th at 2.9), India (71st at 2.7), Vietnam (75th at 2.6), Pakistan (79th at 2.3), Indonesia (88th at 1.9) and Bangladesh (91st at 0.4). Western Europe received the best scores, with only Greece (42nd ranked) and Turkey (54th) scoring below 5.0. The next lowest was Italy (29th) at 5.5, up substantially from last year's when it was rated at 4.6 and ranked 39th out of 90. As a region, sub-Saharan Africa, represented by 14 countries, had the lowest scores. They were led by Botwana (26th) with a 6.0 score, Namibia (30th at 5.4), and South Africa (38th) at 4.8. The next African slot went to Ghana (59th at 3.4), followed by Malawi, Senegal, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Ivory Coast, and Tanzania. Scoring 2.0 or less were Cameroon and Kenya (84th at 2.0), Uganda (88th at 1.9), and Nigeria (90th at 1.0). Latin America and the Caribbean also showed wide variations. It was headed by Chile, which ranked 18th worldwide with a 7.5 score; Trinidad and Tobabo (31st at 5.3); and Uruguay (35th at 5.1). Costa Rica suffered a serious loss compared to last year, falling from the 30th to the 40th rank and from a score of 5.4 to 4.5. It was followed by Peru (44th at 4.1), Brazil (46th at 4.0, and Colombia (50th at 3.8), Mexico and Panama (51st at 3.7), El Salvador (54th at 3.6), Argentina (57th at 3.5), and the Dominican Republic (63rd at 3.1). Ranging from 2.9 to 2.0 were Guatemala, Venezuela, Honduras, Nicaragua, Ecuador, and the lowest, Bolivia, which received 84th rank with a 2.0 score, substantially below the 71st rank and 2.7 score it gained last year. Central and Eastern European and Central Asian countries were roughly comparable to Latin America's performance. They were led by Estonia, Hungary and Slovenia which scored slightly over 5.0, while, bringing up the rear were Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan, with scores ranging from 2.7 to 2.0.