drowning-in-corruption

Interview with CPI-Analyst

‘Rules that are not enforced are useless’

 

The recently published 2017 Corruption Perception Index has placed Korea at 51st position, just a few places above Italy but below Spain. Because of this ranking, the government has started an initiative to improve Korea’s position from 51st to 20th. We recently interviewed one of the analysts for the CPI in Korea and asked for his thoughts on this plan. 

 

Interview with Prof. Thomas Kalinowski,

Ewha Womans University, Seoul

 

TI-Korea: The South Korean government has ambitious plans. They want to increase TI’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) ranking from 51st (2017) to 20th place. In your opinion, what must change to impose South Korea’s corruption perception?

 

Prof. Kalinowski: It is very good that the government has this ambitious plan to improve the situation and fight corruption in Korea. However, I think that to have this relative ranking might not be the best way to benchmark the achievement as it is also dependent on how the other countries are doing. Therefore, Korea should focus on its own situation, primarily on continuously improving its institutions, and the legislation concerning corruption.

Regarding the latter, even under the previous conservative government, Korea has done quite a lot to tackle corruption (Kim Young Ran Law etc). At the organisational level, it would be important to provide the anti-corruption agencies with more independence from the government, which I think the present government has started to do. Also, it must be ensured that the anti-corruption agencies cannot be utilised for political purposes and vendettas, nor their daily operations being meddled into by the government.  

At a societal level what is crucial is the strengthening of civil society groups such as Transparency International and other domestic civil society organisations (CSO), and to include them in the decision-making process. Korea has a very active civil society, so it would be a great benefit for the government to include them in decision-making, despite the fear of receiving critique from the CSOs, as this critical review can assist them in identifying and correcting problems early on.  

 

TI-Korea: In your opinion, are corruption and corruption perception one in the same, or the highlighting of the latter a sign of awareness and possible creation of avenues for improvement?

 

Prof. Kalinowski: The difference between corruption perception and corruption itself needs to be distinguished. The former can be misleading in the sense that if you have an active civil society and the citizens are aware of the problems, it may actually seem that corruption is increasing even though it is actually getting better because people become more sensitive. Personally, while I would be very happy for Korea to reach the 20th ranking, I believe that their present score is realistic (between Spain and Italy’s rankings) and would be very surprised if they were to achieve this desired score in the short term.

I should state that there were two interesting and opposing developments in Korea: institutional improvements with the Kim Young Ran law; on the other hand when it comes to governmental abuse of power, it got worse. Hence the reason why basically the CPI score also remained relatively stable because of these diverging trends. For the present government, it is hoped that their behaviour will be less abusive with its power, and I expect that in the future once the government implements the changes promised that Korea’s score will improve, but maybe not to the 20th position in the short run.  

 

TI-Korea: Since the CPI only covers the public sector, what do you think about the situation of South Korea’s private sector?

 

Prof. Kalinowski:  I think the situation in the private sector is worse than the public sector, although the latter needs to be held to higher standards as it represents the public good. When considering both sectors’ roles in corruption, they need to be held accountable for giving and receiving bribes. On the other hand, the Kim Young Ran law has assisted in enforcing this accountability from not only government officials, but also from anyone in a position of power (professors, journalists etc). I should say that as the law is in its early stages there is a sense of legal uncertainty as to the exact procedures, what is allowed versus disallowed. This can pose problems for the private sector, although in long run this will be resolved if clear enforcement of the procedures occurs.   

 

TI-Korea: What are the implications of the CPI for national and international business in Korea? What and why do companies have to change?

 

Prof. Kalinowski: It is crucial that companies obey the laws. In the past, there was an attitude by some companies that they could violate rules, so much that it was almost the norm for the Chairmen from various firms to be sent to prison for corruption. It seemed that prison terms carried little stigma which is I believe now changing. The government needs to ensure enforcement of the law. Rules that are not enforced are useless and probably worse than useless as people become cynical about rules! It is also important to explain the rationale behind the rules; why it is not just a government policy but also why it is for the public good to implement and enforce these rules.      

In the case of Korea, private economic power is concentrated in the hands of a few big conglomerates. This is a structural problem. As I mentioned earlier if power is concentrated there is the tendency to abuse it, so the best way to fight that would be to disperse power and to make sure that structural and market powers are reduced, and the power between and within the company is dispersed. Internally, while the Chairman or CEO remains at the helm, there is a system of checks and balances from the Board, the employees, and the labour unions. For transparency, civil society groups should be able to scrutinise company activities.  

I do not have much faith in companies voluntarily changing their work culture, but I do believe that through the combination of rule enforcement and pressure from CSOs (in this case Transparency International playing a very important role) positive changes are possible.  

 

Interview by Ellyn Marita Lewis, Business Integrity Program, TI-Korea

—————————————————————————————————————————-

Prof. Thomas Kalinowski

Graduate School of International Studies, Ewha Woman’s University, Seoul

Thomas Kalinowski is a professor of political science at the Graduate School of International Studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul.

At Ewha he is teaching International Political Economy, Comparative Political Economy, International Organizations and Development.

After receiving his Ph.D. from Freie Universität Berlin in 2004 he was a lecturer at Humboldt University Berlin, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of California in Berkeley and a visiting assistant professor at Brown University.

Recent publications include works on the political economy of financial crisis and crisis management, global governance, sustainable governance, the diversity of capitalism and the transformation of the East Asian developmental state. You can follow his research at

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Thomas_Kalinowski

 

List of selected recent publications: