Fighting corruption is a systemic battle

President Rodrigo Duterte has expressed frustration over the seeming inability of his two-year old administration to stem corruption in the country. He should not be too hard on himself. People do not expect him to end corruption in government in one fell swoop.

I won't harp on the president's outward thoughts of stepping down for being tired of corruption. By now we should know already if the president is merely just expressing his thoughts or is about to take significant action.

Obviously, it pains the president to realize that the problem of corruption is systemic and well-entrenched. Which means that either he sticks to his strong-arm style of dealing with corrupt officials or he lays down a clear-cut policy that outlines his plan to address the problem, or he can do both.

The proverbial saying goes “power corrupts, and absolute corrupts absolutely.” But neither should we begrudge nor fear power. Wary maybe, but insofar as making things happen, one must not hesitate to seek the ability to influence decisions and summon resources – the very definition of power.

The problem arises when power is being sought or held free from accountability and unguided by any moral compass. “Power without moral direction is the most dangerous force in the world,” quotes a netizen on Instagram. “Power without accountability is nothing but tyranny.” The “temptation to do evil” trumps the “obligation to do good.”

So how should the president deal with corruption in government aside from expressing sincere frustration with fighting an impossible battle? This is the part where I should say President Duterte should set a good example with a morallybound drug war and by making good and efficient use of the P6.2-billion budget of his office.

Since the problem of corruption in this country is systemic, the solution must also be systemic which goes beyond merely setting a good example or expressing a sincere dose of frustration.

I reviewed some academic literature about corruption in government and found three principal themes that define the battle lines in the fight against corruption; measuring the magnitude of corruption, how corruption affects efficiency and equity, and how corrupt officials respond to monitoring and punishments.

In the latter theme, for example, corrupt officials always find new and creative ways to adapt to anti-corruption policies in an attempt to make an end run around new regulations and reforms. One type of corruption is simply substituted with another type. But this should not be a reason to give up. More research should be done to find out how corrupt officials try to respond to anti-corruption policies.

Improving transparency, such as “freedom of information” disclosures, is another good method to address corruption. Studies show transparency reforms increase the likelihood of politicians performing better and more talented individuals entering politics. The executive freedom of information had been put in place during the first year of the Duterte administration. Pushing proposals for follow-through legislation, however, remains a complex and disappointing exercise.

While strong penalties should stay in place as a deterrent against corrupt activities, catching the big fish or having highprofile convictions against erring officials barely make a dent on corruption. Studies show that removal of leaders from office only has a very short impact on corruption. The rent-seeking politicians and corrupt stakeholders in the private sector simply were able to form new connections with emerging powers.

Such contagion of corruption calls for culturally-centered approaches that will address the roots of corruption in society. In the Philippines, close family ties oftentimes lead to corruption. If we personally by ourselves cannot take the bull by the horns, so to speak, in our tendency to bend the rules to accommodate family and kin ties, then we as a society should collectively come up with policies and practices that discourage such culture.

Early education is key in this regard. On a personal note, the best lesson my elementary and high school teachers taught us students against corruption was them treating us fairly and without discrimination as to economic class, gender, religion, and family background.

Cheating in any form was firmly dealt with back then. Mediocrity had a corresponding cost and excellence had its rewards. Notably, I had not heard of parents complaining about their children being subjected to disciplinary action or being given poor grades.