Search results

The purpose of this paper is to offer anti‐corruption experts' personal assessments of the progress international organizations have made in fighting corruption.

This paper contains a survey of the viewpoints of a number of anti‐corruption experts who themselves are current or former staff of international organizations, or who – from their positions within the private sector or in non‐governmental organizations – are able to offer a unique and distanced perspective on the key corruption‐related issues and challenges facing international organizations today.

It is agreed that international organizations today are at a cross‐roads in their individual and collective fight against corruption. International organizations must weather the corruption scandals that have recently plagued several organizations, and must confront the question of whether their staffs, boards, and member governments indeed have the ability, will, and commitment to fight corruption. To address these challenges, international organizations must adopt proactive investigative strategies when combating corruption, seek greater cooperation with each other, and must ensure that their respective investigation units have the necessary resources and independence to effectively detect, investigate, and prevent corruption.

The paper offers a realistic prognosis on the future of the anti‐corruption movement within and among international organizations.

Against the grain of the paradigmatic postcolonial analytics of the colonial state, this chapter presents a non-dichotomous comparison of two regimes within the late 18th century Danish empire, which are commonly presumed to be of essentially different kinds – namely the colonial state in Tranquebar in South East India and the metropolitan government of rural Danish society. By focusing, firstly, on practices of policing and, secondly, on the general technology of power that targeted these significantly different socio-political spheres, it is argued that these regimes were governing according to similar strategies: seeking, on one hand, to deploy societal mechanisms of self-regulation and, on the other, to provide a balance and order to the otherwise chaotic forces of the population. On the basis of a Foucauldian vocabulary of government, it is thereby argued that colonialism, at this time and place, had not yet clearly constituted itself as a particular form of rule.