Sir, - The Global Corruption Report 2001, published recently by Transparency International, makes very compelling reading for anyone interested in ethical standards in international politics and business. It is especially of value to anyone doing business in or supplying humanitarian assistance to developing countries.
Although the report is presented with a very positive spin, highlighting the many attempts to crack down on corrupt practices around the world, it contains much of a very disturbing nature.
Corruption does not respect national boundaries, it is a cancer affecting countries throughout the world, but it is particularly rampant in the poorer countries. Addressing this issue in his introduction to the report Transparency International's chairman, Peter Eigen, says: "Corruption makes it impossible for many people to earn an honest living. Worse, for millions of people in developing countries, it costs lives".
This is particularly the case in war situations because, for corrupt political elites, war offers unique opportunities for personal gain. Kickbacks and straightforward bribes, an integral part of the international arms trade, make the continuation of war an attractive financial proposition for corrupt leaders interested only in increasing their own personal fortunes.
Earlier this year a top level UN report detailed huge levels of exploitation and looting of natural resources by commanders and politicians involved in the vicious war in the Congo. They make fortunes from a situation which has cost the lives of three million people while the rest of the population lives in misery.
Similarly, the report documents cases in various Sub Saharan African countries of corrupt officials diverting money and medicines intended for the fight against the HIV/AIDS pandemic for their own gain.
One of the lessons of this important report is that countries offering aid to developing countries must think very seriously about the methods they adopt in its delivery. Aid must be accompanied by very strict conditions concerning its dispersal. Many politicians and officials in developing countries have shown that they see tenure of public office as being a passport to personal wealth and they have no qualms about diverting aid money, meant to benefit the poor, to their own ends.
If we in the wealthier nations wish to help the poor in the developing world we must ensure that our aid money does not go astray in this way. Many donor states have in recent years come to the realisation that giving huge amounts of bilateral aid to recipient governments to administer is not the best way to help the poor of those countries. Instead they have channelled much more of their aid budgets through the non-governmental organisations.
It is to be hoped that, following the recent overseas aid review, the Irish Government will follow this welcome trend. - Yours, etc.,
John O'Shea, GOAL, D·n Laoghaire, Co. Dublin.