Corruption in local government refers to the misuse of public office and resources by individuals in positions of power at the local level for personal gain or the benefit of select groups. It involves the abuse of entrusted authority, bribery, embezzlement, fraud, nepotism, and other forms of illicit activities that undermine the integrity and effectiveness of local governance.
There are several types of political corruption that occur in local government. Some are more common than others, and some are more prevalent to local governments than to larger segments of government. Local governments may be more susceptible to corruption because interactions between private individuals and officials happen at greater levels of intimacy and with more frequency at more decentralized levels. Forms of corruption pertaining to money like bribery, extortion, embezzlement, and graft are found in local government systems. Other forms of political corruption are nepotism and patronage systems. One historical example was the Black Horse Cavalry a group of New York state legislators accused of blackmailing corporations.
Bribery is the offering of something which is most often money but can also be goods or services in order to gain an unfair advantage. Common advantages can be to sway a person's opinion, action, or decision, reduce amounts fees collected, speed up a government grants, or change outcomes of legal processes.
Extortion is threatening or inflicting harm to a person, their reputation, or their property in order to unjustly obtain money, actions, services, or other goods from that person. Blackmail is a form of extortion.
Embezzlement is the illegal taking or appropriation of money or property that has been entrusted to a person but is actually owned by another. In political terms this is called graft which is when a political office holder unlawfully uses public funds for personal purposes.
Nepotism is the practice or inclination to favor a group or person who is a relative when giving promotions, jobs, raises, and other benefits to employees. This is often based on the concept of familism which is believing that a person must always respect and favor family in all situations including those pertaining to politics and business. This leads some political officials to give privileges and positions of authority to relatives based on relationships and regardless of their actual abilities.
Patronage systems consist of the granting favors, contracts, or appointments to positions by a local public office holder or candidate for a political office in return for political support. Many times patronage is used to gain support and votes in elections or in passing legislation. Patronage systems disregard the formal rules of a local government and use personal instead of formalized channels to gain an advantage.
Socioeconomic characteristics and the size of the population of people that make up a municipality can be encouraging factors for local government officials to engage in corrupt practices. Patterns of political corruption can be found in places that have a similar demographic make-up. Demographic factors that have been known to lead to or increase the likelihood of corruption in a local government system are religion, race, class, size of the municipality, local economic conditions, education, political culture, and gender. Some factors are interrelated or can lead to other factors which may cause more corruption.
Size of a municipality
Smaller municipalities may be more prone to experience corruption within their local government. These towns and villages nominate (or self-nominate) residents or officials to represent and run the local government, sometimes without oversight approval from higher levels of government. In a small community, personal opinions and relationships play a larger role in politics. Due to this, problems like nepotism or extortion can be prevalent. In addition, some local governments face another kind of disadvantage: lack of experience and professionalism from their representatives. It can be a challenge to attract qualified up and coming politicians to small towns. Another major issue in small municipalities lies with accountability—some have inadequate or insufficient structures for policing and prosecution of corrupt local officials, culminating in a difficult situation for those affected.[1]
Low economic development has been found to be an encouraging factor for political corruption. Economic practices like dependence on raw material industries and drug trades are characteristic of poorer cities and areas with increased amounts of corruption. Economic dependence on certain industries will also lead to less stable governments and less money available to fund governments. Fragile economies lead to increased levels of poverty and less opportunities to get out of poverty. Poverty is a known factor that encourages corruption in local governments. Places with failing economies and poverty sometimes get loans or start aid programs to support the local economy and the people, and public officials are often able to unlawfully take the money or goods for private gain. With less money available, local officials are more likely to get lower wages, which is seen as another factor that leads to corruption. Officials who get lower wages, which are not enough to provide for their necessities, will many times become corrupt and try something like embezzling money that may entrusted to them in the local treasury. Low wages can cause economic insecurity and encourage politicians to take advantage of current opportunities as public figures of authority. On the other hand, some researchers[who?] argue that the more money a local government has to spend, the more tendency it will have to do so inefficiently, which can lead to suspicions of corruption. Overall, poorer municipalities are more often perceived to have corrupt local governments than rich ones.
Education
Lower levels of education which are often caused by poverty are seen as a factor which encourages corrupt government practices.[citation needed] Those with less education are not as informed as to how the government works or what rights they have under the government.[citation needed] It is easier for corrupt office-holders to conceal corrupt activities from a poorly educated public. Uneducated citizens are less likely to be aware of corruption in local governments or how to stop it, and therefore, corruption is able to remain and spread. Without some kind of political awareness, citizens will not know which candidates to elect that are honest or dishonest or other ways to prevent corruption from taking place in their local governments.[citation needed] This often leads municipalities to be continually governed by one or more corrupt local officials who use patronage or nepotistic practices to stay in office or keep influence in the government for long periods of time. When local political leaders are less educated, they will be less likely to find legitimate ways to make the municipality well-structured, productive, and successful.[citation needed]
Political culture of municipality
Many local governments have an established political culture with certain expectations and practices that often determine what is seen as acceptable and not acceptable in local politics. In municipalities with an undeveloped or underdeveloped political culture, accountability and legitimacy is usually low and principles of ethics in government are not established. This can encourage corruption to take hold in the local government because citizens do not know what is considered corrupt, and local officials are not afraid to be corrupt because of the low accountability.[citation needed]In some places the local governments have been corrupt for so long that the citizens think that is how it is supposed to work because that is all they have been exposed to.[citation needed] Long periods of political instability will also lead to corruption in the government because people are unsure of how the government should operate, and thus do not know what practices are corrupt or how to stop them if they are corrupt.[citation needed]
Political corruption is the use of powers by government officials or their network contacts for illegitimate private gain.
Bribery is the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official, or other person, in charge of a public or legal duty. With regard to governmental operations, essentially, bribery is "Corrupt solicitation, acceptance, or transfer of value in exchange for official action." Gifts of money or other items of value which are otherwise available to everyone on an equivalent basis, and not for dishonest purposes, is not bribery. Offering a discount or a refund to all purchasers is a legal rebate and is not bribery. For example, it is legal for an employee of a Public Utilities Commission involved in electric rate regulation to accept a rebate on electric service that reduces their cost for electricity, when the rebate is available to other residential electric customers. However, giving a discount specifically to that employee to influence them to look favorably on the electric utility's rate increase applications would be considered bribery.
Racketeering is a type of organized crime in which the persons set up a coercive, fraudulent, extortionary, or otherwise illegal coordinated scheme or operation to repeatedly or consistently collect a profit.
Corruption is a form of dishonesty or a criminal offense which is undertaken by a person or an organization which is entrusted in a position of authority, in order to acquire illicit benefits or abuse power for one's personal gain. Corruption may involve many activities which include bribery, influence peddling and the embezzlement and it may also involve practices which are legal in many countries. Political corruption occurs when an office-holder or other governmental employee acts with an official capacity for personal gain. Corruption is most common in kleptocracies, oligarchies, narco-states, and mafia states.
Corruption in China post-1949 refers to the abuse of political power for private ends typically by members of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), who hold the majority of power in the country. Corruption is a very significant problem in China, impacting all aspects of administration, law enforcement, healthcare and education. Since the Chinese economic reforms began, corruption has been attributed to "organizational involution" caused by the market liberalization reforms initiated by Deng Xiaoping. Like other socialist economies that have undertaken economic reforms, such as post-Soviet Eastern Europe and Central Asia, reform-era China has experienced increasing levels of corruption.
The Philippines suffers from widespread corruption, which developed during the Spanish colonial period. According to GAN Integrity's Philippines Corruption Report updated May 2020, the Philippines suffers from many incidents of corruption and crime in many aspects of civic life and in various sectors. Such corruption risks are rampant throughout the state's judicial system, police service, public services, land administration, and natural resources. Examples of corruption in the Philippines include graft, bribery, favouritism, nepotism, impunity, embezzlement, extortion, racketeering, fraud, tax evasion, lack of transparency, lack of sufficient enforcement of laws and government policies, and consistent lack of support for human rights.
Several statutes, mostly codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, provide for federal prosecution of public corruption in the United States. Federal prosecutions of public corruption under the Hobbs Act, the mail and wire fraud statutes, including the honest services fraud provision, the Travel Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) began in the 1970s. "Although none of these statutes was enacted in order to prosecute official corruption, each has been interpreted to provide a means to do so." The federal official bribery and gratuity statute, 18 U.S.C. § 201, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) 15 U.S.C. § 78dd, and the federal program bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 666 directly address public corruption.
Corruption in Afghanistan is a widespread and growing problem in Afghan society. Transparency International's 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index ranks the country in 150th place out of 180 countries. The 180 countries of the Index are scored on a scale of 0 to 100 according to the perceived corruption in the public sector, and then ranked by their score. The country whose public sector is perceived to be most corrupt is ranked 180th. Afghanistan's 2022 ranking was based on a score of 24. For comparison, the best score was 90, the worst score was 12, and the average score was 43.
Corruption laws exist in Egypt to criminalize extortion, embezzlement and bribery in business, but they are poorly enforced.
Corruption in Uganda is characterized by grand-scale theft of public funds and petty corruption involving public officials at all levels of society as well as widespread political patronage systems. Elite corruption in Uganda is through a patronage system which has been exacerbated by foreign aid. Aid has been providing the government with large amounts of resources that contribute to the corrupt practices going on within the country. The style of corruption that is used is to gain loyalty and support so that officials can remain in power. One of the more recent forms of corruption is through public procurement because of the lack of transparency with transactions that happen within the government.
Since independence, corruption has been more than prevalent in Cameroon. In fact, corruption has become pervasive and has affected all sectors of the government and civil society including the executive, judiciary, police, and even the private sector. The main causes being a deep lack of political will to fight corruption and neopatrimonialism. Other causes include; personal interests and absence of duty conscience, weak judiciary and almost nonexistent opposition in the legislative, nepotism and favouritism, ineffective system of accountability, among others.
Corruption in Uzbekistan is a serious problem. There are laws in place to prevent corruption, but enforcement in terms of laws regarding corruption is very weak. Low prosecution rates of corrupt officials is another contributing factor to the rampant corruption in Uzbekistan. It is not a criminal offense for a non-public official to influence the discretion of a public official. The judicial system faces severe functional deficits due to limited resources and corruption.
Corruption in Sudan is substantial, as it is considered one of the most corrupt nations in the world. On the 2010 World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators, on one hundred point scale, it scored in the single digits in every category, including 0.9 for political stability, 6.2 for rule of law, 7.2 for regulatory quality, 6.7 for government effectiveness, and 4.3 for control of corruption. In 2011 Freedom House named Sudan as one of the worst nations for human rights.
The Appearance of Corruption is a principle of law mentioned in or relevant to several SCOTUS decisions related to campaign finance in the United States, while the basis of the principle 'corruption' refers to dishonest or illegal behavior for personal gain. Corruption has existed since ancient times, and there are a series of factors that cause the appearance of it. On the other hand, corruption adversely affects these factors. In the process of fighting against the appearance of corruption, both the government and different organizations take steps to prevent it.
Corruption in Bolivia is a major problem that has been called an accepted part of life in the country. It can be found at all levels of Bolivian society. Citizens of the country perceive the judiciary, police and public administration generally as the country's most corrupt. Corruption is also widespread among officials who are supposed to control the illegal drug trade and among those working in and with extractive industries.
Corruption in Tajikistan is a widespread phenomenon that is found in all spheres of Tajik society. The situation is essentially similar to that in the other former Soviet republics of Central Asia. Reliable specifics about corruption can be difficult to come by, however, as can hard information about the effectiveness of supposed anti-corruption initiatives.
Corruption in Ecuador is a serious problem. In 2014, the U.S. Department of State cited Ecuador's corruption as a key human-rights problem. According to Freedom House, "Ecuador has long been racked by corruption", and the weak judicial oversight and investigative resources perpetuate a culture of impunity.
Corruption in Yemen is a highly serious problem. Yemen is the most corrupt country in the Arabian Peninsula. It is also the poorest country in the Middle East, "with an exceptionally high birth rate, acute rates of child malnutrition and rapidly dwindling reserves of oil and water." In Yemen, according to Chatham House, "corruption, poverty and inequality are systemic"; in the words of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, corrupt activity is "so entrenched and pervasive" that many citizens feel powerless.
Corruption in Turkmenistan is considered by many independent sources as a serious problem. The country is near the bottom of several annual indices that measure corruption, including The Wall Street Journal's Index of Economic Freedom. Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index scores 180 countries according to the perceived corruption of the public sector and then ranks those countries by their score. A high score earns a low ranking, and signals a perception of an honest public sector. In the 2021 Index, Turkmenistan scored 19 and ranked 169 ; for comparison, the highest score was 88, which earned a rank of 1, and the lowest score was 11, which earned a rank of 180.
Corruption in Chad is characterized by nepotism and cronyism. Chad received a score of 19 in the 2022 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index on a scale from 0 to 100. When ranked by score, Chad ranked 164th among the 180 countries in the Index, where the country ranked first is perceived to have the most honest public sector. For comparison, the best score was 90, and the worst score was 12.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
