Anti-Corruption agencies in four Asian countries: a comparative analysis

Abstract

Corruption is a serious problem in many Asian countries, judging from their ranking and scores on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). To combat corruption these countries have relied on three patterns of corruption control. The first pattern relies on the enactment of anti-corruption laws without a specific agency to enforce these laws. For example in Mongolia, the Law on Anti-Corruption that was introduced in April 1996 is jointly implemented by the police, the General Prosecutor's Office, and the courts (Quah, 2003a, p. 44)¹. The second pattern involves the implementation of anti-corruption laws by several anti-corruption agencies. In India, the Prevention of Corruption Act (POCA) is implemented by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), and the anti-corruption bureaus and vigilance commissions at the state level (Quah, 2003a, p. 66). Similarly, the Philippines has relied on 18 anti-corruption agencies to enforce the many anti-corruption laws since the Integrity Board was formed by President Quirino in May 1950 (Batalla, 2001, p. 47; Oyamada, 2005, pp. 99–101).

Citation

Quah, J.S.T. (2008), "Anti-Corruption agencies in four Asian countries: a comparative analysis", Bowornwathana, B. and Wescott, C. (Ed.) Comparative Governance Reform in Asia: Democracy, Corruption, and Government Trust (Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 17), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 85-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-1317(08)17006-3