home

about us

mission

contact us

The Prospect is published by The Indonesian Institute. Our messages are study, democracy and unity.
 

 

MAIN ISSUES
 

Democracy

 

Economy

 

Labor/Unemployment

 

Education

 

Development

 

Global Issues

 

Research

 

Contact Us:

Elwin Tobing

Caution: A new kind of AIDS

A wrong prescription or a wrong direction?

A tale of two economic plans. So, who is to blame?

Tax and Expenditure Reforms, Instead of Subsidy Reduction

Why did Megawati Choose Unpopular and Bad Options?

Peace on Earth (2)

Peace on Earth (1)

What Megawati Should Do?

The New New World Order (2)

The Majority's Blunder

A Self-destructive Play or a Winning One

Fire and Ice

Promoting Dialog with a New Paradigm

Searching for Good Politicians (2)

Searching for Good Politicians (1)

Belajar Memahami Perbedaan

Internet and Knowledge Advancement

Information is not power

 


Fighting our own war! (1)

The need for a coalition of the willing

 

 

There is increasing evidence that corruption undermines development. It also hampers the effectiveness with which domestics savings and external aid are used in many developing countries, and this in turn threatens to undermine grassroots support for foreign assistance. - James D. Wolfensohn

 

03/23/03

Facts

While we should concern on the war in Iraq, let’s not forget to fight our own war: The war against corruption and poverty. According to the recent report by Transparency International, Indonesia remains the most corrupt country in the East Asian Pacific region and is rank number 7 as the most corrupt country in the world after Bangladesh, Nigeria, Paraguay, Madagascar, Angola and Kenya. The ranking is based on Corruption Perception Index (CPI) designed by TI which relates to perceptions of the degree of corruption as seen by business people, academics and risk analysts, and ranges between 10 (highly clean) and 0 (highly corrupt). CPI score for Indonesia is 1.9, only 0.7 point higher than the lowest score (See table 3).

The ranking tells us little about the size of corruption. If we compare to the Gross Domestic Product, the CPI ranking gives us a better picture that Indonesia is the most corrupt country on earth (table 1). It is widely believed, according to the statement by the Chairman of National Development Planning Agency, Kwik Kian Gie and the late Professor Sumitro, that about 30% of the government budget is corrupted. Suppose we use this number to approximate the total amount of funds that has been corrupted in Indonesia during the last 25 years prior to 1999. The results are listed in table 2 and it shows a staggering amount of $150 billions! This is very close to the current total of our national debts (public plus private debts).

Suppose we assume that the percentage of the government budget corrupted is between 20% to 40% then the total amount of funds that has been corrupted during the period of 1975 to 1999 is between $100 to $200 billions. So far, there has been a limited studies conducted to estimate the total amount of funds corrupted in the country. But, whatever it might be, it is likely to be in that range.

Corruption, unfortunately, is everywhere, but as the number suggests, corruption in Indonesia is too much to comprehend. It is safe to say that it is the major culprit that has brought the nation down.

The manifestations of corruption creep up in all aspects of government and society. There is big corruption in a big arena, like Bank scandals, Pertamina scandal and multimillion-dollar-government projects.  There is small corruption in a small arena, like a police officer that accepts a bribe to forget about a traffic violation. Any type of corruption, no matter how big or small, is a blow to national economy and development.

Next: What should we do?

Related articles:

Did corruption contribute to the economic crisis?

Corruption: common places and its implications

 

Table 1. The most corrupted countries in the world.

Country Worst rank by CPI GDP in 2001(US$ billion - constant 1995)
Bangladesh 1                51.43
Nigeria 2                33.47
Paraguay 3                  9.30
Madagascar 4                  4.07
Angola 5                  7.10
Kenya 6                  9.98
Indonesia 7                216.18
Source: GDP: World Development Indicator, World Bank ; CPI: Transparency International

 

Table 2. The Indonesian government expenditures, 1975-1999

  Expenditures (Current US$ - billions) 30% of expenditures
1975 6.25 1.87
1976 8.13 2.44
1977 8.93 2.68
1978 11.02 3.31
1979 11.69 3.51
1980 17.27 5.18
1981 22.55 6.76
1982 20.51 6.15
1983 17.99 5.40
1984 16.38 4.91
1985 18.70 5.61
1986 19.37 5.81
1987 15.85 4.76
1988 17.02 5.11
1989 18.39 5.52
1990 21.01 6.30
1991 21.19 6.36
1992 25.72 7.71
1993 26.34 7.90
1994 28.63 8.59
1995 29.67 8.90
1996 33.29 9.99
1997 38.80 11.64
1998 17.39 5.22
1999 28.45 8.53
 
  500.53 150.16

Source: GDP: World Development Indicator, World Bank

 

Table 3. Corruption Perception Index 2002 Scores

 
Country Country  CPI 2002 High-low Range 

 

Rank score 
1 Finland 9.7 8.9 - 10.0
2 Denmark 9.5 8.9 - 9.9
New Zealand 9.5 8.9 - 9.6
4 Iceland 9.4 8.8 - 10.0
5 Singapore 9.3 8.9 - 9.6
Sweden 9.3 8.9 - 9.6
7 Canada 9 8.7 - 9.3
Luxembourg 9 8.5 - 9.9
Netherlands 9 8.5 - 9.3
10 United Kingdom 8.7 7.8 - 9.4
11 Australia 8.6 6.1 - 9.3
12 Norway 8.5 6.9 - 9.3
Switzerland 8.5 6.8 - 9.4
14 Hong Kong 8.2 6.6 - 9.4
15 Austria 7.8 7.2 - 8.7
16 USA 7.7 5.5 - 8.7
17 Chile 7.5 5.6 - 8.8
18 Germany 7.3 5.0 - 8.1
Israel 7.3 5.2 - 8.0
20 Belgium 7.1 5.5 - 8.7
Japan 7.1 5.5 - 7.9
Spain 7.1 5.2 - 8.9
23 Ireland 6.9 5.5 - 8.1
24 Botswana 6.4 5.3 - 8.9
25 France 6.3 4.8 - 7.8
Portugal 6.3 5.5 - 8.0
27 Slovenia 6 4.7 - 8.9
28 Namibia 5.7 3.6 - 8.9
29 Estonia 5.6 5.2 - 6.6
Taiwan 5.6 3.9 - 6.6
31 Italy 5.2 3.4 - 7.2
32 Uruguay 5.1 4.2 - 6.1
33 Hungary 4.9 4.0 - 5.6
Malaysia 4.9 3.6 - 5.7
Trinidad & Tobago 4.9 3.6 - 6.9
36 Belarus 4.8 3.3 - 5.8
Lithuania 4.8 3.4 - 7.6
South Africa 4.8 3.9 - 5.5
Tunisia 4.8 3.6 - 5.6
40 Costa Rica 4.5 3.6 - 5.9
Jordan 4.5 3.6 - 5.2
Mauritius 4.5 3.5 - 5.5
South Korea 4.5 2.1 - 7.1
44 Greece 4.2 3.7 - 5.5
45 Brazil 4 3.4 - 4.8
Bulgaria 4 3.3 - 5.7
Jamaica 4 3.6 - 4.3
Peru 4 3.2 - 5.0
Poland 4 2.6 - 5.5
50 Ghana 3.9 2.7 - 5.9
51 Croatia 3.8 3.6 - 4.0
52 Czech Republic 3.7 2.6 - 5.5
Latvia 3.7 3.5 - 3.9
Morocco 3.7 1.7 - 5.5
Slovak Republic 3.7 3.0 - 4.6
Sri Lanka 3.7 3.3 - 4.3
57 Colombia 3.6 2.6 - 4.6
Mexico 3.6 2.5 - 4.9
59 China 3.5 2.0 - 5.6
Dominican Rep. 3.5 3.0 - 3.9
Ethiopia 3.5 3.0 - 4.0
62 Egypt 3.4 1.7 - 5.3
El Salvador 3.4 2.0 - 4.2
64 Thailand 3.2 1.5 - 4.1
Turkey 3.2 1.9 - 4.6
66 Senegal 3.1 1.7 - 5.5
67 Panama 3 1.7 - 3.6
68 Malawi 2.9 2.0 - 4.0
Uzbekistan 2.9 2.0 - 4.1
70 Argentina 2.8 1.7 - 3.8
71 Cote d’Ivoire 2.7 2.0 - 3.4
Honduras 2.7 2.0 - 3.4
India 2.7 2.4 - 3.6
Russia 2.7 1.5 - 5.0
Tanzania 2.7 2.0 - 3.4
Zimbabwe 2.7 2.0 - 3.3
77 Pakistan 2.6 1.7 - 4.0
Philippines 2.6 1.7 - 3.6
Romania 2.6 1.7 - 3.6
Zambia 2.6 2.0 - 3.2
81 Albania 2.5 1.7 - 3.3
Guatemala 2.5 1.7 - 3.5
Nicaragua 2.5 1.7 - 3.4
Venezuela 2.5 1.5 - 3.2
85 Georgia 2.4 1.7 - 2.9
Ukraine 2.4 1.7 - 3.8
Vietnam 2.4 1.5 - 3.6
88 Kazakhstan 2.3 1.7 - 3.9
89 Bolivia 2.2 1.7 - 2.9
Cameroon 2.2 1.7 - 3.2
Ecuador 2.2 1.7 - 2.6
Haiti 2.2 0.8 - 4.0
93 Moldova 2.1 1.7 - 3.0
Uganda 2.1 1.9 - 2.6
95 Azerbaijan 2 1.7 - 2.4
96 Indonesia 1.9 0.8 - 3.0
Kenya 1.9 1.7 - 2.5
98 Angola 1.7 1.6 - 2.0
Madagascar 1.7 1.3 - 2.5
Paraguay 1.7 1.5 - 2.0
101 Nigeria 1.6 0.9 - 2.5
102 Bangladesh 1.2 0.3 - 2.0
Explanatory notes
 
A more detailed description of the CPI 2002 methodology is available at http://www.transparency.org/cpi/index.html#cpi or at www.gwdg.de/~uwvw/2002.html
 
A CPI 2002 Score
relates to perceptions of the degree of corruption as seen by business people, academics and risk analysts, and ranges between 10 (highly clean) and 0 (highly corrupt).
 
A Surveys Used 
refers to the number of surveys that assessed a country's performance. A total of 15 surveys were used from nine independent institutions, and at least three surveys were required for a country to be included in the CPI.
 
Standard Deviation
indicates differences in the values of the sources: the greater the standard deviation, the greater the differences of perceptions of a country among the sources.
 
High-Low Range
provides the highest and lowest values of the different sources.
       

 

 Your comment

Back to top

 

© 2002 The Prospect and The Indonesian Institute, All Rights Reserved.