I found myself sitting around a picnic table the other day, talking about corruption in Pakistan, and then the broader problem of corruption in the Muslim world. By corruption I don't mean what goes on at midnight on a dance floor, but governmental corruption.
Bribery is a problem because it gives people an incentive to NOT do their job. "That area is not zoned for commercial development, so I can't let you build your factory there, unless . . ." When corruption exists in the justice system, it becomes an incentive for officials to actively dole out injustice. That's why it's called "corruption," of course, because it well, corrupts.
One person at the table recounted a story of how his uncle, who worked for a police force in Pakistan, was significantly poorer than his colleagues, because he refused to offer or take bribes. At the lower levels, however, the policemen had much less choice - they were paid a pitence, and had many economic and social pressures to fend off. His uncle, however was only relatively poor, and that is tolerable. When his son was arrested with several others in connection with a robbery, however, the other defendents were quickly released, as soon as they figured out the price. Even an honest man couldn't let his son languish in jail awaiting a suspect trial, when a little cash would get him out like all the others. . .
"It starts at the top," said another Pakistani. It certainly existed there; when the people running the country treat the constitution like a thug treats a public phone directory, people get the idea that laws are just suggestions.
"No," I and one of my brethren said together, "it starts at the bottom." This I had said almost automatically; 'God does not change a people's lot unless they change what is in their hearts' (13:11). The leaders are derived from the population. If bribery is how you get ahead in life, then the young leaders will grow up seeing it as tolerable, even normal. If you draw from a stagnant pond, you can't expect pure water.
The counter, of course, is that the people live under the system made for them by the leaders; corrupt politicians will appoint corrupt judges and ministers, who will run corrupt courts and departments, which will induce their employees to be corrupt, until the ordinary citizen will have to give and take under the table in order to just get by.
It's a perplexing problem. Barring abnormally heroic leaders, of whom there are only a handful (none of them being heads of state), how do you fix it? How do you break the cycle? There must be an entry point somewhere. Is it through the ulema? In most Muslim countries, that is an institution with its own innumerable failures, so I wouldn't hold my breath for it.
There must be an entry point somewhere.
3 comments:
What about cultural causes of corruption?
From my experience, many Muslim countries are strongly family oriented; The tribe trumps the nation.
Think of Pakistan, for example. No one can deny that tribal associations are very powerful for a people whose marriages are often intra-tribal, for a people whose local leaders have sway over the national leaders.
As a result, it is questionable whether people identify more as Pakistani or as (insert family/caste/tribe identity here).
To continue my previous train of thought...
If the local identity is stronger than the national identity, you have a prime breeding site for corruption. Why not enrich your family rather than a government with whom you do not identify?
You have a point, but I'm not sure how far that tribal analysis can go in Pakistan. In the rural area, for sure it has sway, but in the big cities the tribal relationships tend to become muted, although ethnic identities certainly persist. The social order in Karachi is nothing like the social order in interior Sindh, or in FATA.
I think the more important cultural element is a culture of the rule of law, that has never really reached large parts of Pakistan. In the tribal areas, that might be partly due to the fragmentation you're talking about. In other parts of the country, I suspect low literacy and impoverished social services have more to do with it: for the writ of the state to be established, people have to believe in some sort of social contract between themselves and the powers that be. In Pakistan, a lot of people don't see that contract, or see it to be very one-sided.
Post a Comment