Pablo Sanguinetti
Ex vicepresidente de Conocimiento, CAF
Corruption has long been rooted in Latin America as a major pressing issue, due to its impact on daily life and its economic and political consequences. Perceived corruption within the region is slightly higher than the global average, and much higher than the average in developed countries, according to Transparency International.
In addition, CAF’s Economy and Development Report (EDR 2019) reveals that 51% of Latin Americans consider corruption to be the main problem in their countries (taking priority over economic conditions, access to housing and services, or insecurity), and 23% of citizens report that they have been solicited a bribe by a public official within the last 12 months.
There are compelling reasons behind such concern. Corruption reduces the ability of governments to provide high-quality goods and services, while also curbing economic growth. But the consequences on government institutions are likely to have a larger impact: When citizens feel that corruption is widespread, trust in democracy is undermined.
This reality has prompted Latin American governments to react, mostly by implementing legal instruments and strengthening judicial bodies; and, in addition, several countries are undertaking initiatives to increase transparency and improve accountability. However, there is still a long way to go to fill legal gaps and ensure effectiveness of many of the measures being implemented.
The establishment of an effective anti-corruption agenda in Latin America should include actions in four mutually complementary and enriching areas. The first item on the list is to improve public service regulation and control mechanisms. This involves combining ex ante rules to limit the powers and discretionary authorities of officials (which decisions can be made and how), and ex post oversight to audit those decisions and actions once they have been carried out. In other words, it is necessary to adopt objective decision-making criteria (e.g. in the event of public procurement and contracting), strengthen supervision agencies (such as auditing bodies) and improve judicial systems with procedures and protocols that facilitate investigations and production of evidence (such as the leniency system).
The second front of action involves the improvement of politics and public office entry mechanisms. This involves the recruitment of qualified professionals, with low tolerance for corruption, no clientelistic ties or private interests to ensure independent discharge of their duties and an effective checks and balances system. In the case of public office, electoral systems should be aimed at maximizing plurality and competition. To this end, it could be useful to implement campaign funding regulations, such as limits on corporate and private contributions and caps to election expenditures.
The third item involves encouraging citizens to oversee the actions of officials and promote accountability. An essential requirement is to make information available, for instance, through laws on access to information and open government. In addition, there must be complaining channels other than the polls, such as the creation of reporting systems through digital platforms or social networks promoted by the State.
Finally, it is essential to improve regulations to control the influence of corporate and private interests over government decisions. To achieve this, there is a need to implement laws that punish corporations involved in offering/payment of bribes. Similarly, conflicts of interest and lobbying also have to be regulated. In the procurement of public works and in PPP initiatives, it is important to strengthen procuring entities’ capacities to prevent inadequate contracts from resulting in costly post-bid renegotiations.
In the coming years, countries in the region have an important task ahead: to restore people’s trust in their public institutions through transparent management that minimizes the chances of corruption. And this will only be achieved with more transparent states that use public funds efficiently, punish irregularities and are sensitive to the real needs of their people.
