Beyond appointments

When the new Government led by President Maithripala Sirisena came into power, it was with the vehement promise to reduce corruption and investigate large-scale corruption committed by the previous regime. Yet, 10 months later, the public awaits tangible results from these promises.

In an effort to deliver on these pledges the Government this week made fresh appointments to the Bribery and Corruption Commission, which is seen has one of three core bodies responsible for minimising corruption. Despite existing for over a decade the commission has consistently failed to impress and many doubts remain of the efficiency and impact of the current members as well. 

When the commission was first established, Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) made a string of recommendations to improve the credibility, financial and discretionary powers of the body. Even though these were circulated in 2003 they still hold much relevance for the commission going forward, especially given the limited patience of a public already weary of empty promises.

Among its observations was a recommendation by TISL that the definition of corruption should include corruption in judicial administration levels as this element is crucial to seeing justice being done. They also suggested the Commission should be authorised to handle corporate frauds and private sector corruption (in public companies) and the law must be changed accordingly. The standard of having retired judges should be changed to attract more committed mid-career professionals and other qualified persons, TISL said adding that the structure should also be changed to permit the Commission to function notwithstanding any vacancy.

To increase credibility Commissioners should ideally be excluded from the category of public officers under the Constitution enabling the Commission to act effectively. The Commission should be permitted to make public announcements, especially on matters warranting public dialogue and meet any allegations made against the Commission. This latter segment has been somewhat improved under the present set up where officials have been appointed to interact with the media and respond to allegations made on credibility and competence but holistic efforts have to be made to build public confidence. 

Not all accused are guilty so the decision-making process of the Commission vis-à-vis investigators should be transparent and if any complainant requests for the reasons for a decision, reasons must be given to the parties concerned.

Funding of the commission is important as that has a direct link to credibility. While the current preoccupation is with probing actions of the previous Government the Commission must also be given teeth to continue its work in connection to the current National Government as well. Only if such independent funding measures are assured will the “Yahapalanaya” promises be fully realized. 

New investigators have been hired but the influx of applications far outnumbers the officials of the commission. This requires capacity building and prioritising of key cases so public confidence does not falter and resources are not wasted. Technical assistance, local and international training along with consistent policy assistance is essential to ensure competent staff. Serving police officers who also function as investigators should ideally be fully released from Police duties.

Other global best practices on anti-corruption call for external changes such as fresh laws to specifically encourage social interaction such as anti-corruption education so corruption stops becoming a socially accepted practice. Unless the public leads the way politicians will always find ways to establish double standards.