Search results

The purpose of this paper is to reconsider, from a historical perspective, New Zealand’s reputation as a country largely without corruption, with particular reference to the colonial government’s confiscation of Māori land in the 19^th century and beyond.

This paper is based on published historical commentary.

The findings are that much of the Māori land confiscation was rendered legal for illegitimate purposes, and that the colonial and successive New Zealand governments abrogated the country’s foundational document, the Treaty of Waitangi, signed between the colonial government and many Māori chiefs in 1840. Adverse consequences for Māori have been felt to this day, despite the Treaty settlements process that began with the Māori renaissance in the mid-1970s.

The academic analysis of corruption in New Zealand has seldom if ever adopted this historical perspective.

New Zealand has had success in combating corruption. It has been ranked consistently as one of the five least corrupt countries in the world. The purpose of this paper is to shed light on this accomplishment.

An analysis of the policies, socio-cultural attributes and historical and geographical elements that have contributed to New Zealand’s success in combating corruption.

New Zealand’s long-term geographical isolation, egalitarian socio-economic and cultural traditions, its close legal and cultural affinity with Britain, and its unique regulatory civil service largely explain its success in combating corruption. Nevertheless, global influences, the absence of a single anti-corruption agency, and changing values may be eroding New Zealand’s record of success.

This paper will be useful to policy makers and those concerned with New Zealand’s recent decline in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index.

New Zealand has long been regarded as a country with little or no governmental corruption. In recent times it has been ranked consistently as one of the five least corrupt countries in the world, on Transparency International’s (TI) Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). In 2009 and 2011 it was ranked as the single most corruption-free country on the CPI, and in 2012 it shared first place with Denmark and Finland. This chapter examines the reasons why historically New Zealand has been largely free of governmental corruption, using widely accepted definitions of what constitutes corrupt behavior. It goes on to argue that, at least by its own normal standards, the country might now be more susceptible to corruption, for a variety of reasons, in both the public and private sectors, and that more political and administrative attention may need to be paid to this issue. This chapter discusses New Zealand’s surprising tardiness in ratifying the United Nations Convention against Corruption, an apparent reluctance that leaves the country sitting alongside other non-ratifying countries which have endemic levels of corruption in all its forms. In this context, this chapter also notes some international dissatisfaction with New Zealand’s anti-money laundering legislation, enacted in 2009.

Chapters 2–6 have dealt in turn with how Denmark, Finland, Hong Kong, New Zealand, and Singapore have been effective in curbing corruption, as manifested in their rankings and scores on the five international indicators of the perceived extent of corruption. In contrast, Chapter 7 focuses on India’s ineffective anti-corruption measures and identifies the lessons which India can learn from their success in fighting corruption. The aim of this concluding chapter is twofold: to describe and compare the different paths taken by these six countries in their battle against corruption; and to identify the lessons which other countries can learn from their experiences in combating corruption. However, as the policy contexts of these six countries differ significantly, it is necessary to begin by providing an analysis of their contextual constraints before proceeding to compare their anti-corruption strategies and identifying the relevant lessons for other countries.

Brazil and Chile have nearly similar recent political histories. Emerging from protracted military dictatorships at roughly the same time, both developed presidential and representative democratic processes, though with contrasting individual national emphases. Military dictatorships in both countries originated in anti-corruption rationales, among others, and both have emphasized anti-corruption practices since regime changes. Brazil impeached two presidents, ostensibly for corrupt practices. Yet, Chile has managed a corruption level, according to Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, that is among the lowest in Latin America, while Brazil’s is among the highest. This study compares and contrasts the two nations’ experiences with a view to uncover key causal, or at least explanatory, variables in this striking contrast in levels of perceived corruption.

The purpose of this paper is to explain why Botswana, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, New Zealand, Rwanda and Singapore have succeeded in combating corruption and identify the lessons for policy makers in other countries.

The five countries are compared to identify the reasons for their success in combating corruption and the lessons that can be learnt by policy makers elsewhere.

Political will of the five governments is critical because combating corruption effectively requires them to provide the anti-corruption agencies (ACAs) with the necessary powers, budget, personnel and independence to enforce the anti-corruption laws impartially. New Zealand has succeeded in curbing corruption without an ACA because it relies on other institutions to maintain its good governance. Singapore’s rejection of the ineffective British colonial government’s method of using the police to curb corruption and its reliance on a single ACA was emulated by Hong Kong, Botswana and Rwanda. However, having a single ACA does not guarantee success unless it has the powers, budget, personnel and independence to perform its functions impartially as a watchdog instead of an attack dog against the government’s political opponents. As combating corruption remains a work in progress in the five countries, their policy makers must sustain their effective ACAs to meet the rising threat of private sector corruption.

The paper will be useful to scholars and policy makers concerned with improving the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures in those countries where corruption is rampant.