Skip Content

Project Blog The Role of Parliaments in Curbing Corruption at the Country Level

November 2017 news

On 3 November 2017 Anthony Staddon attended the 63rd Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in Dhaka, Bangladesh, to present a paper at a panel entitled The Role of Parliament in Combating Corruption. The  conference, hosted by the Parliament of Bangladesh, brought together over 500 Parliamentarians, parliamentary staff and decision makers from across the Commonwealth. 

Anthony Staddon provided an overview of the ACE Programme and presented some of the key findings from the country level on how parliamentary oversight is undertaken, which oversight mechanisms are effective and how national parliaments interact with other anti-corruption stakeholders.

At the end of the panel, delegates endorsed the following recommendations: 

1.Parliament must provide legislation, resources and institutional tools to enable the removal of any tolerance for corruption in the community, government and politics.

2.Parliamentarians should role-model high standards of integrity in personal conduct; maximise transparency across government; and recognise how policy-making can counter cultures of corruption.

3.The Legislature should set the legal framework for the establishment and functioning of anti-corruption institutions, including the provision of adequate resources and proper follow-up.

The concluding statement of the conference summarised the discussions of the full panel as follows. 

3rd Plenary: The role of Parliament in Combating Corruption.

With regard to the first recommendation of the 3rd plenary session, delegates felt that anti-corruption models had to deal with systemic corruption and misconduct and that bodies had to be established to deal with these corrupt practices. One such body given as an example by one of the discussion leaders was the Integrity Commission of Tasmania: an independent arbiter which would receive complaints of corruption, ascertain the merits of those complaints and determine the appropriate place for such complaints to be dealt with.

 The process involved sought to root out corruption as it were but to educate and engender standards and a culture of change. The commission adopted a four pronged approach:

1)     compulsory participation in misconduct workshops

2)     mandatory reporting of corruption

3)     authority to monitor the progress of all reports and to bring inaction to Parliament’s attention

4)     the reporting of any suspected criminality to the Director of Public Prosecution or the police.

 In regard to the second recommendation, a three-limbed approach was canvassed: personal conduct; across government; law and policy making. It was argued that because of the very close connections in small societies, the systems of transparency and accountability in relation to personal conduct and the embracing of corporate governance. There should be diversity of membership in Parliament and effective procurement systems be established across government. There should be effective law and policy making underpinned by effective rule of law, the practice of free and fair elections and that the assumption of office is done fairly. Importantly, a culture of learning, transparency and education are key to tackling corruption.

 The third recommendation was discussed and it was suggested that Parliament was a critical determinant of corruption with the need for resources to be made available and the adoption of oversight tools. Internally the setting up of committee systems was fundamental as well as administrative and financial autonomy. Externally it was noted that the gain of public trust was important and should be achieved through effective communication, declaration of assets and the adoption of a code of conduct. The contribution of the free press was also noted and the advantages and threats of investigative journalism. The session stood for a moment’s silence as a mark of respect to the investigative journalist killed recently in Malta.

 A full summary of the discussion will appear in the December issue of The Parliamentarian, a quarterly journal of Commonwealth Parliaments published by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA). 

Members of the Research Team have also worked with the CPA and Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD) on an update of the Benchmarks for Democratic Parliaments to include greater emphasis on anti-corruption initiatives and integrity frameworks. In Dhaka, Commonwealth parliamentarians endorsed a proposal to revise the benchmarks as a tool to ensure their contribution to SDG 16 (on inclusive and accountable governance). The next stage is expected to be a Study Group in London next year to consider and agree the revised benchmarks in full. 

***

 

July 2017 news

 Rick Stapenhurst, Anthony Stadden and the team recently visited Myanmar to undertake field research. Some photos are below, showing (from top to bottom): 

Anthony Staddon with U Kyaw Soe, Director General of the Union Parliament

Anthony Staddon with the Directors of the Open Myanmar Initiative

Anthony Staddon with Daw Phyu Phyu Thin (Pyithu Hluttaw Union Level – NLD MP)

Anthony Staddon and Gabriela Thompson (University of Westminster) with Daw Thet Thet Khine (Pyithu Hluttaw Union Level -  NLD MP) 

Anthony Staddon with Director General of the Union Parliament

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Anthony Staddon with the Directors of the Open Myanmar Initiative

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anthony Staddon with Daw Phyu Phyu Thin (Pyithu Hluttaw Union Level – NLD MP)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anthony Staddon and Gabriela Thompson (University of Westminster) with Daw Thet Thet Khine (Pyithu Hluttaw Union Level -  NLD MP)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

February 2017 news 

Anthony Stadden and Rick Stapenhurst are interviewed on MTV in Grenada (aired 10th January 2017) 

 

Dr Rasheed Draman appears on Ghana's Joy News, discussing the country's alleged parliamentary corruption scandal.

 

January 2017 update: The Role of Parliaments in Curbing Corruption at the Country Level

Professor Frederick Stapenhurst, Mr Anthony Mark Stadden, and Professor Louis M. Imbeau

It is widely recognized that corruption hinders development and, increasingly, that parliamentary oversight is an important determinant of corruption. Until now, little research had been undertaken at the country level on how parliamentary oversight is undertaken, which oversight mechanisms are effective or on how national parliaments interact with other anti-corruption stakeholders. 

Principal accomplishments to date include:

-          The development of a survey instrument, comprising approximately 40 open-ended and closed questions, for key informant interviews. This looks at issues relating to executive-legislative relations, the use and effectiveness of oversight tools and mechanisms (review of appointments; censure/confidence; veto power; dedicated oversight committees; question period/interpellations; supreme audit institutions; anti-corruption agencies; and ombuds offices); the influence of partisan politics; support services (research staff, libraries); interaction between civil society/think tanks and parliament; and ‘informal politics’. Protocols for focus groups have also been developed.

-          National partners have been identified and are assisting in field research: African Centre for Parliamentary Affairs; the Nigerian Institute of Legislative Studies; the Parliament of Trinidad & Tobago; the Research Department of the Parliament of Uganda; and UNDP in Myanmar. Having good, influential in-country partners is helping us not just complete field research but also helps promise broader impact of the results, at the country level.

-          Field work is near completion in two of the six target countries (Ghana and Nigeria) and is planned for January in Trinidad & Tobago. Data is currently being encoded and tabulated, and country case studies are being written.

 Prof. Stapenhurst's team meeting Grenada's Integrity Commission

Anthony Staddon with staff of the Parliament of Grenada

This project is one of eight British Academy-funded anti-corruption research projects, and you can see the main project page with full details of all awards and award holders here.

*****

September 2016 update: The Role of Parliaments in Curbing Corruption at the Country Level

It is widely recognized that corruption hinders development. Over the past decade, a growing body of research has demonstrated that parliamentary oversight is an important determinant of corruption. This view is based on a simple proposition: if parliaments can oversee government activity, then corruption will be reduced. Within this proposition is nested a second assumption: since financial oversight has long been the traditional cornerstone of accountability, effective oversight of public expenditure is an essential component of national anti-corruption strategies and programs. These propositions have been well tested and proven at the global and regional levels, including by this project’s research team but until now, little research had been undertaken at the country level on how parliamentary oversight is undertaken, which oversight mechanisms are effective or on how national parliaments interact with other anti-corruption stakeholders.

The objective of our research under the British Academy/DFID Anti-Corruption Evidence program is to address the gap in existing knowledge regarding the role of parliament in curbing corruption, and to develop practical policy advice for parliaments themselves and for anti-corruption assistance agencies such as the World Bank and DFID.

To date we have made very considerable progress regarding project implementation. Ethics clearance – not easy, given the subject matter! – has been received from l’universite Laval and is expected shortly from the University of Westminster.

A survey instrument, comprising approximately 40 open-ended and closed questions has been developed. It looks at issues relating to executive-legislative relations, the use and effectiveness of oversight tools and mechanisms (review of appointments; censure/confidence; veto power; dedicated oversight committees; question period/interpellations; supreme audit institutions; anti-corruption agencies; and ombuds offices);  the influence of partisan politics;  support services (research staff, libraries); interaction between civil society/think tanks and parliament; and ‘informal politics’. Protocols for focus groups were also developed.

Field work is near completion in two of the six target countries (Ghana and Nigeria) and is planned for December in Kenya. In each country, some 48 key informant interviews have taken place/are planned (12 with Members of Parliament (both governing and opposition parties)), parliamentary staff, civil society representatives and journalists. Data is currently being encoded and tabulated; thereafter, country case studies will be written.

It is too early to give even preliminary results, but a cursory view of the data suggests that while journalists and civil society in Ghana have at least some confidence in the role that the Ghanaian Parliament is playing in helping curb corruption, their counterparts in Nigeria have much lower levels of confidence in the National Assembly and seem to consider that the legislature is more part of the problem of corruption,

rather than as an effective part of the solution. In Ghana, the emerging results seem to point to a growing convergence between Parliament and Civil Society to increase the pressure on government to fight corruption.  While the parliamentary front is led mainly by elements from the opposition, there are some majority MPs who have joined hands with the opposition in this effort.  Interestingly, opposition MPs recently petitioned the Speaker of Parliament to recall Parliament to consider a motion to start impeachment proceedings against the President in an alleged bribery scandal.  The Speaker was compelled to recall Parliament from recess and even though he dismissed the motion in the early hours of the sitting, this was a 'first' in Ghana's democratic history.  The opposition has called on all MPs not to shirk their constitutional oversight responsibilities and to continue to pursue this matter once Parliament reconvenes in October.

(In parallel, as part of another research project (funded by the Canadian government) that some members of this research team are working on, an index of oversight is being developed. There is some synergy between the two projects, and most especially the results of the other project will allow the triangulation of data to help ensure validity of results of this project). 

In the first half of 2017, the field work in the remaining three countries (Tanzania, Myanmar and the Caribbean) will be undertaken and cross-country analysis undertaken. We expect testing of preliminary results to commence in the second half of the year; we are targeting the Wroxton Conference of Parliamentary Scholars and Practitioners, as the principal venue for feedback from legislative researchers and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Annual Meeting for feedback from MPs themselves.

*****

Initial thoughts

May 2016

As Ghana heads into a general election later this year, the media is increasingly focusing on the socio-economic problems facing Ghana, including the problem of corruption; indeed, barely a day goes by without the television broadcast of the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee holding public hearings.

Two of the team members (Rick Stapenhurst (Laval University) and Rasheed Draman (African Centre for Parliamentary Affairs) examining "How to Combat Corruption at the National Level" are currently in Ghana doing field research. To date, they have held nearly 50 key informant interviews, with Members of Parliament (MPs), parliamentary staff, civil society leaders and journalists. A de-brief meeting was also held with Nic Lee (DFID Governance Advisor) and members of the DFID-funded SAAC anti-corruption program in Ghana.

The research team's assistants are currently crunching the numbers - and, following analyses by the research team, a preliminary "zero draft" paper summarizing key findings will be sent to stakeholders for review and comment.

Earlier this year, Rick Stapenhurst made a presentation on parliamentary oversight in Trinidad & Tobago, another target country for this project; it can be seen on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrpRgKpgj-Y

On 3 November 2017 Anthony Staddon attended the 63rd Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in Dhaka, Bangladesh, to present a paper at a panel entitled The Role of Parliament in Combating Corruption. The  conference, hosted by the Parliament of Bangladesh, brought together over 500 Parliamentarians, parliamentary staff and decisionmakers from across the Commonwealth. 

 

Anthony Staddon provided an overview of the ACE Programme and presented some of the key findings from the country level on how parliamentary oversight is undertaken, which oversight mechanisms are effective and how national parliaments interact with other anti-corruption stakeholders.

 

 At the end of the panel, delegates endorsed the following recommendations: 

 

  1. Parliament must provide legislation, resources and institutional tools to enable the removal of any tolerance for corruption in the community, government and politics.
  2. Parliamentarians should role-model high standards of integrity in personal conduct; maximise transparency across government; and recognise how policy-making can counter cultures of corruption.
  3. The Legislature should set the legal framework for the establishment and functioning of anti-corruption institutions, including the provision of adequate resources and proper follow-up.

 

The concluding statement of the conference summarised the discussions of the full panel as follows. 

 

3rd Plenary: The role of Parliament in Combating Corruption.

With regard to the first recommendation of the 3rd plenary session, delegates felt that anti-corruption models had to deal with systemic corruption and misconduct and that bodies had to be established to deal with these corrupt practices. One such body given as an example by one of the discussion leaders was the Integrity Commission of Tasmania: an independent arbiter which would receive complaints of corruption, ascertain the merits of those complaints and determine the appropriate place for such complaints to be dealt with.

 

The process involved sought to root out corruption as it were but to educate and engender standards and a culture of change. The commission adopted a four pronged approach:

1)     compulsory participation in misconduct workshops

2)     mandatory reporting of corruption

3)     authority to monitor the progress of all reports and to bring inaction to Parliament’s attention

4)     the reporting of any suspected criminality to the Director of Public Prosecution or the police.

 

In regard to the second recommendation, a three-limbed approach was canvassed: personal conduct; across government; law and policy making. It was argued that because of the very close connections in small societies, the systems of transparency and accountability in relation to personal conduct and the embracing of corporate governance. There should be diversity of membership in Parliament and effective procurement systems be established across government. There should be effective law and policy making underpinned by effective rule of law, the practice of free and fair elections and that the assumption of office is done fairly. Importantly, a culture of learning, transparency and education are key to tackling corruption.

 

The third recommendation was discussed and it was suggested that Parliament was a critical determinant of corruption with the need for resources to be made available and the adoption of oversight tools. Internally the setting up of committee systems was fundamental as well as administrative and financial autonomy. Externally it was noted that the gain of public trust was important and should be achieved through effective communication, declaration of assets and the adoption of a code of conduct. The contribution of the free press was also noted and the advantages and threats of investigative journalism. The session stood for a moment’s silence as a mark of respect to the investigative journalist killed recently in Malta.

 

A full summary of the discussion will appear in the December issue of The Parliamentarian, a quarterly journal of Commonwealth Parliaments published by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA). 

 

Members of the Research Team have also worked with the CPA and Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD) on an update of the Benchmarks for Democratic Parliaments to include greater emphasis on anti-corruption initiatives and integrity frameworks. In Dhaka, Commonwealth parliamentarians endorsed a proposal to revise the benchmarks  as a tool to ensure their contribution to SDG 16 (on inclusive and accountable governance). The next stage is expected to be a Study Group in London next year to consider and agree the revised benchmarks in full. 

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close

Add a comment to this line