Good governance has so many aspects and requirements that it is difficult to achieve them all completely. Good governance is achieved through on-going cooperation between political actors that makes sure that the interests and needs of the people are addressed and reflected in government policy. Measures that promote good governance can be separated into steps that promote participation and steps that improve institutions.
Measures to Promote Participation (Demands Side Measures)
Policies and initiatives should be judged in terms of whether they enhance the legitimacy of institutions; receive popular support as well as compliance; encourage both citizens and leaders to develop a recognized stake in reform; help deepen the strength and complexity of civil society; and are backed up by long-term efforts at public education and attention to citizen values and opinions. These initiatives are not only valuable in themselves, but should be seen as steps toward building a long-term, sustainable foundation for good governance.
Citizen’s desire for faster economic growth and improved public services frequently motivate reform. For example, in Indonesia, the advocacy efforts of civil society and local stakeholders to perform monitoring and evaluation functions, especially in decentralization projects, has increased transparency and accountability and promoted good governance.
Pioneered by committed social activists working in the context of rural development in the Indian state of Rajasthan, the campaign on right to information became a national law in 2005. The transformation of this micro-level experience into national legislation resulted from a campaign which drew the support of the national political leadership and involved a protracted process of bargaining with civil society activists all the way through to the details of the legislation.
Measures to Improve Institutions (Supply Side Measures)
Public institutions will foster good governance to the extent that they ensure effective, equitable, honest policies and implementation, and access to information, both in terms of popular access to government information, and mutual access within government. Provisions for horizontal accountability are critical. An independent and effective judiciary, a free and competitive press, and a strong civil society (both an institution and an aspect of participation) will be essential partners in improving and sustaining institutions over the long run.
For example, the Election Commission in India as a vital actor in disciplining the electoral process and thereby improving the functioning of Indian democracy. The importance of the Indian Election Commission lies not in any new legislation per se but rather in its emergence since the mid-1990s as an independent-minded body that is willing and able to assert the authority vested in it by law. It is precisely through greater assertiveness and by incrementally developing codes of conduct, clearer eligibility criteria and improved by-laws that the Indian Election Commission is transforming itself into a critical guardian of the democratic process.
Anti-corruption Measures
In fighting corruption, good governance efforts rely on principles such as accountability, transparency and participation to shape anti-corruption measures. Good governance may include establishing institutions such as anti-corruption commissions, information sharing, and monitoring governments’ use of public funds and implementation of policies.
The two best-known examples of successful initiatives to tackle corruption are from Hong Kong and Singapore, where a combination of a well-resourced anticorruption agency, effective follow-up and prosecution, and improved pay and conditions significantly reduced the extent of the problem.
Corruption encourages discrimination, deprives vulnerable people of income, and prevents people from fulfilling their political, civil, social, cultural and economic rights. Anti-corruption mechanisms (especially criminal law) can prevent this by stopping corrupt officials from misusing their powers.
Examples of the anti-corruption as an aspect of good governance
Malaysia
Malaysia has ratified the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), a successor of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), was established in 2008. In June 2011, the MACC reported that it had made 944 arrests in 2010, almost 90% more than in 2009.
The Whistleblower Protection Act, which was introduced in December 2010, protects individuals who file complaints against corrupt individuals and grants them immunity from civil or criminal charges.
Nepal
To strengthen Nepal’s governance system, its parliament passed four bills in 2002 aimed at constructing an anti-corruption legal framework and established a unit under the prime minister’s office to monitor and advocate for anti-corruption initiatives. The changes also required that all public officials submit documented statements of their wealth and property.
| Case Study: Thailand
Apart from measures to ensure clean elections and government and enhance electoral accountability in the Senate, independent institutions have been employed as a main mechanism to check and balance the system. The National Counter-Corruption Commission and the office of the Auditor General of Thailand were set up independently from the government. These organizations have been assigned to monitor and combat corruption. The constitution aimed to strengthen the country’s legal backbone so as to combat corruption in the following areas: • Reducing potential conflicts of interest of public officials Cabinet members cannot hold partnerships or own shares of more than 5 per cent in business companies and cannot take part in commercial transactions with state agencies. Political parties also have to declare the size and source of donations received to the Election Commission for public disclosure. • Monitoring the wealth of public officials The new rules require that top politicians and senior civil servants must declare their assets and liabilities before and after gaining their positions to the National Counter-Corruption Commission. The commissioners can verify whether or not the declared assets and liabilities are correct. In the event of faults and flaws in the disclosure, the commission is empowered to investigate and prosecute. • Increasing investigation of abuses of public office The constitution mandates the National Counter-Corruption Commission to investigate complaints of corrupt practices and to prosecute officials and propose penalties for violators, including removal from office. Public officials and private businesses involved in corruption in state transactions, as well as public officials who are aware of corrupt practices but fail to act against them, are subject to severe sanctions.
There are now more channels for the public to complain against the abuse of power and corruption of public officials. People can file a case at the Administrative Court or report to the Ombudsman. They may also, after gathering no fewer than 50,000 signatures, file a petition to the Senate to compel investigation of the highest officials of government. Source: Corruption and Good Governance in Asia |