Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

I don’t know if she is paranoid, but who can accuse Zardari of corruption? The man is a saint. :smack:

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | Transparency?s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

Friday, 25 Sep, 2009

Central Secretary Information, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Fouzia Wahab. — Photo by APP
PAKISTAN
PPP, PML-N trade charges of wrongdoing
KARACHI: Central Secretary Information, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Fouzia Wahab on Thursday strongly criticising a recent report of Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) about corruption in Pakistan has said the report is against our national interests.

Addressing a press conference at the Karachi Press Club, Fouzia Wahab said the objective of the TIP’s report about corruption in Pakistan is to influence the public opinion.

She said the issuance of Transparency’s report at such a time, when the meetings of Friends of Pakistan (FOP) are underway, is not only against the government, but it is also against the country and our national interests.

Rejecting the TIP report’s alleged findings with regard to lack of accountability laws in the country, Fouzia Wahab noted that Pakistan is a functional state, where the departments are intact and the anti-corruption departments and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) are also working.

She said we welcome the criticism but the people have given us their votes and we have to protect their rights.

The PPP leader raised a question as to why such a report had not been published in the past and its issuance at the time of the meetings of Friends of Democratic Pakistan (FoDP) is animosity with the country.

She also raised questions about the credibility as well as the aims of the patrons and financers of Transparency International.

She said the TIP’s report about corruption in Pakistan is published simultaneously from New York and Islamabad with intentions against the country.

2

Re: Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

The one who protests loudest about investigations into corruption is most likely the one who is most corrupt.

This woman's financial assets ought to be very closely examined.

Manners
3

haha its like choor machai shoor !!

4

Re: Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

She had a comment that when ever PPP comes into power, Transparency International comeup with a report of high corruption level in Pakistan... i wonder y

5

TI has no agenda, they report it like how it should be. Not too long ago they reported the Musharraf regime as being more corrupt than its predecessors, and the same anti-pakistani agenda accusations came out as a rebuttal. This has to do with the amount of corruption in pretty much everywhere in the country, not just the Federal Govt alone so miss fauzia needs to calm down.

Timepass-April 2014
6

It is surprising that ... Allah has cursed the Liars still Liars keep telling lies (Jhoot bolnay walon per Allah kee lanat hoti hay ... phir bhie jhootay jhoot boltay rahtay hain) ... and in Pakistan the biggest Liar and corrupt is Nawaz and members of his party (PMLN), something Transparency International knows very well.

Fact is that, putting aside extremely low corruption and nepotism along with astronomical economical progress Pakistan made during Musharraf period, to be fair with Zardari government and to my surprise too, I believe that if we compare how Pakistan has done during last over one year (since Zardari is in power) with how Pakistan did any year between 1988 to 1999, or during period BB or NS ruled, there is no doubt that Zardari ruling Pakistan is much better, more efficient, and less corrupt then NS or BB governments of past.

Timepass-April 2014
Timepass-April 2014
7

Re: Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

Yet TI ranked Musharraf’s regime as being more corrupt than NS and BB combined :hehe: p.s. MQM has the honor of being associated with ALL three corrupt regimes, mashallah.

8

Re: Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

This guy should be given Dr. Fauzia’s position, seriously… Remarkable intellect, which you cant really find in the PPP anymore, for sure.
*Legal eye

*Saturday, September 26, 2009
Babar Sattar

The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.

Transparency International has issued its annual report listing Pakistan amongst the most corrupt nations in the world and has highlighted General Musharraf’s National Reconciliation Ordinance as the point when we voluntarily regressed into a state of madness that justifies looters.

While the NRO continues to outrage citizens for perverting the very concept of rule of law, the Holders of Public Offices (Accountability) Bill, 2009 – meant to replace the NAB Ordinance – is coming to be seen by concerned citizens as a permanent NRO. But our problem of corruption is not limited to the NRO or the new (un)-Accountability Bill, but is much more deep-seated. While we continue to focus on financial corruption that the elites indulge in, we tend to ignore various forms of social and intellectual corruption being practiced in our midst with vigour, which allow financial corruption to exist in the first place. The bane of our existence is a deeply entrenched logic of necessity and the unscrupulous ethic of success it produces wherein the end justifies all means however rotten.

“When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion – when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favours – when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed,” wrote Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged back in 1957. She could well have been writing about Pakistan today. Have we not started promulgating and justifying laws that indeed redeem and protect the looters? Have we not turned into an economy where becoming middlemen is so much more profitable than indulging in the business of actually producing goods or services? Are we not becoming a nation where mastery of shrewd street-smart ways of dodging work is preferred over investing time and effort to learn the ethic of diligence? Are we not degenerating into a society where honesty and integrity is indeed a burden that retards upward social mobility of the individual infested by these virtues?

Notwithstanding reports of international accountability groups, can we remember a time over the last few decades when ordinary people felt a visible decline in the level of corruption in Pakistan? Have the land transfer departments, the police, the magistracy, the municipal authorities, cantonment boards, public utility providers or the taxation authorities become any less corrupt under any regime? Are we not aware that a patwari, a police inspector or a magistrate cannot sustain himself and his family in the paltry compensation being provided by the state and will indulge in bribery and extortion because he has the power to do so? And while we do nothing about the deformed salary structure that eliminates the possibility of an honest individual surviving in public service let alone attracting fresh talent, we continue to justify graft as an occupational hazard for public officials while also continuing to participate in a system of patronage where huge bribes are paid and favours called to get friends and family members inducted into jobs where the salary is pittance but which bring along the possibility of extracting bribes.

Do we expect an individual, who has paid half a million and used all his political pull to get the job of a sub-inspector that pays around Rs10,000 a month, to derive pleasure from serving the people and the penal justice system? Is a lawyer of dodgy reputation feverishly lobbying to be elevated to the bench in order to get access to means of state patronage, influence and power likely to uphold the rule of law and contribute to the evolution of sensible jurisprudence?

If we continue to sustain a political culture where men of wealth and influence seek to acquire political power only to make more money to fight the next round and dispense state authority and patronage to satisfy the fair and foul demands of their cronies and constituents, what will become of the men of ability and integrity who cannot play this dirty game? This is not to say that in order to address the problem of corruption Pakistan must first be transformed into a fairyland where no one conceives an impure thought and where nobility and virtue prosper unabatedly. But that we need to revamp the rules of the game in this polity to create a social, political and professional incentive structure where ability, integrity and courage to speak candidly is rewarded and not penalized. We will need to understand clearly that every corrupt individual is no lone miscreant but part of a patronage system supported by a cultural and ethical code that places a higher premium on loyalty, subservience and personal allegiance than ability, professionalism and dedication to principle.

The existence of this system of patronage has been made possible not necessarily because of the pawns who physically take bribes, but by the intellectually dishonest who justify and support it with full knowledge that it is wrong and by our collective acquiescence as a society to a morbid value set that is simply unethical. This is not a moral judgment meant to denounce materialism or the desire to promote self-interest. For there is nothing wrong with being driven by material comforts, or considerations of wealth or fame so long as the means are fair. But we need to engender a culture that celebrates fame and fortune when it is the product of personal work and ability. And such value structure then needs to be braced by laws that prevent looters from stealing a fortune or gate-crashing their way into fame and power. The big picture is not meant to justify that there is no work to be done immediately. To stem the rot we need to undo instruments such as the NRO that make stark the gulf between law and the justice it is meant to produce, and prevent the (un)-Accountability Bill from becoming law which is based on the depraved yet simple idea that when all other elites have been molesting this country and getting away with it, why shouldn’t politicians be able to make hay while the sun shines.

No one piece of legislation will rid us of the looters and their corrupt ways and not the mightiest court will be able to prevent the abuse of public office until such time that we as a nation refuse to abide by a value set that remains tolerant toward social and intellectual corruption practiced in the name of need, loyalty and expediency. So long as we are willing to justify access to power acquired through dishonesty in any form – intellectual, social or financial – or access to patronage dispensed by the holders of such power in the name of necessity and ground reality, we will continue to feed the roots that bear the evil fruits of corruption. The logic of necessity that an ordinary citizen uses to justify an ill-gotten favour from a local policeman or politician is the same logic used in the highest echelons of power to rationalize manifest abuse of authority. Unless we refute this logic of necessity that defines our ethic of success collectively as a nation, corruption will continue to thrive and it will become harder to locate men and women of ability and integrity in public life.

Email: [email protected]
Our corrupt ways

9

Either you do not know and is ignorant of the report of TI or you are lying (actually, you should know as that report was discussed on this forum extensively). I also saw TI report where they gave data to show that corruption during Musharraf period was negligible compared to period of NS and BB.

10

Totally agree with you Spock. I am particularly fond of Babar's writings, the guy is very impressive !

Getting to know a potential spouse in different cultures
11

Re: Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

What you think doesnt matter, nor do your heaps of pro-mqm-musharraf rubbish which no one reads… What matters is this:

Musharraf regime more corrupt than govts of Sharif, Bhutto

Islamabad, Sept 19: President Pervez Musharraf’s regime in Pakistan is more corrupt than the previous governments of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, according to a survey by a corruption watchdog.

In the survey conducted by Transparency International’s Pakistan chapter, a whopping 67% respondents said the government formed by Musharraf after the 2002 elections was corrupt. The figure was 33% for the military government headed by Musharraf between 1999-2002.

Only 10 per cent of those questioned said that the first term headed by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif government between 1990-93 was corrupt, but 34 per cent thought his second term between 1996-99 was corrupt, the results of the survey published in the Daily Times here today said.

Similarly only eight per cent of the people thought that first term of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto government between 1988-90 was corrupt but 48 per cent said her second term in office between 1993-96 was corrupt.

Questioned about corruption in government departments, the respondents were of the opinion that in per capital terms, citizens had to pay higher bribes to customs, followed by the land department, judiciary, taxation, power, education, health, police and railways.

The watchdog’s 2006 report was based on a sample of 4000 urban and semi-urban citizens in all four provinces of the country.

Bureau Report

12

TI mentioned 3 reports ... separate from each other.

Report 1: Report one compared six periods ... Ayub, Bhutto, Zia, BB, NS, and Musharraf. ... total = 100 percent. Only around 3 percent said that Mush period was corrupt in report one, whereas around 43 percent said that NS period was corrupt, similarly another around 48 percent said that BB period was corrupt.

Report 2: Since BB and NS period was comparable, TI did research and published report (report two) to find corruption between these two, and also if corruption of these two was higher in their first period or second. Thus, TI report (report two) compared BB (period one), BB (period two), NS (period one), NS (Period two) ... total = 100 percent (that relates to around 91 percent who said that BB and NS period were most corrupt). TI found that BB period two was most corrupt (48 percent), NS period two came next (34), than NS period one (10 percent) and BB period one (8 percent)= 100 percent

Report 3: Then TI made another report (report three) to see comparative corruption between Mush period one and Mush period two ... total = 100 percent. This 100 percent was for 3 percent that said that Musharraf period was most corrupt and is nothing to do with 91 percent who said that NS + BB periods were most corrupt.

Now, if you know to read data than you would understand, but if you (or anyone) are ignorant and do not know statistical data ... then it is not my fault.

13

Here is complete reports from ‘Transparency’ own website… so no chance for any Ignorant, Liars, Corrupts, Thugs, or people on Liar Nawaz payroll, that they can twist the figures and claim lies:

Actually, there are many ignorant and liars in Pakistan, even in media, plus many were on payroll of corrupts like Nawaz too. Thus, when TI released their corruption report with figures, these ignorant and liars tried to twist TI report figures. Their twisting became so annoying that TI had to come out to clarify their report for these ignorant and liars. Here is TI clarification of their report for ignorant and liars. Please read it (note, I am not giving reference to liars and ignorant writing in media, but my reference is directly from the website of Transparency International, so you or anyone cannot say that the reference is wrong).

[You should also understand the need for clarification, that happened because of ignorant and Liars that Pakistan has in abundance, such that they even tried to twist TI report, hence need by TI for clarification]

http://www.transparency.org.pk/media/NCPS/Clarification%20NCPS.JPG

From above clarification: Comparison of corruption in Pakistan during six different Pakistan governments (that is government of Ayub Khan, Bhutto, Zia-ul-Haq, BaiNazeer, Nawaz and Musharraf) was provided in the National Corruption Perception Survey 2002 (by Transparency) and are given below. We have to realise that since President Musharraf decided to ditch Taliban in his fight against terrorism, huge protest was going on in Pakistan against President Musharraf during survey period (2002), still such result was remarkable achievement for his government.

Out of 100 percent surveyed:

48.7 percent of the people considered that Benazir Bhutto period was the most corrupt.
43.03 percent of the people considered that Nawaz Shareef period was the most corrupt.

**In contrast to those two above period **
Only 3.17 percent of the people considered that Musharraf period is the most corrupt.

Now regarding report 2 and report 3: (again from TI own web site … so that no twisting of figures are possible)

Report 2: compare corruption during different period of NS and BB, that is NS(1), NS(2), BB(1) and BB(2) = 100 percent.

Report 3: compares corruption during Musharraf period 1 (before election) and period 2 (after 2002 election) = 100 percent.

Actually it is this report that gave opportunity to corrupts, thugs, ignorant and liars to twist the figures by taking figures from data 3 (for report 3) and comparing it with figures in data 2 (for report 2) … and thus need for above clarification by TI arisen.

http://www.transparency.org.pk/documents/National%20Corruption%20Perception%20Survey%202006.pdf

Read from page 30 (if you want to, you can read complete report):

Question (report one … comparison of BB(1), NS(1), BB(2), NS (2) periods = 100 percent … figures is not comparing with Musharraf period (because Musharraf period was too clean to compare with corrupts): In Pakistan, which government was/is most corrupt? (This is for comparative corruption perception of NS and BB government both periods)

This question does not compare corruption of Nawaz and BaiNazeer government with President Musharraf government as it was done in 2002 when different government periods were compared with respect to each other. This question is asked to compare four periods of NS and BB government, with respect to each other. Separately, this same question was used to compare two period of President Musharraf government (pre election 2002 period and after election 2002 period).

Out of 100 percent, the result came out was:

Nawaz Shareef 96-99: 34 percent (3.4 times more corrupt than his first period of 90-93)
Bai-Nazeer 93-96: 48 percent (6 times more corrupt than her first period of 88 -90)
Nawaz Shareef 90-93 (first period): 10 percent
Bai-Nazeer 88 -90 (first period): 8 percent

Result shows that in their second period, both NS and BB government became more corrupt.

Regarding period under Musharraf government = 100 percent … (nothing to do with corrupt period of NS and BB), result was that 67.31 percent perceived that Musharraf government is more corrupt today (2002-2006 or after election) than President Musharraf first period (1999-2002 or before election).

Question: What about the present government? (This is regarding President Musharraf first and second period = 100)

President Musharraf 1999 – 2002: 32.69 percent
President Musharraf 2002 – 2006: 67.31 percent (twice more corrupt than his first period 99-02)

The result is remarkable. Because even when assemblies were working, corruption that became negligible after President Musharraf came to power, did not rise that much. When only 3 percent of the population perceived that Pakistan was more corrupt under President Musharraf (1999-2002) with respect to 91.73 percent that perceived that Pakistan under either BB or NS government were most corrupt, this low level of perception of corruption under President Musharraf government (3 percent) did not increased that much even when assemblies came into existence, considered to be full of past corrupt politicians. It shows that there is good check by President over politicians that would like to do corruption.

14

Re: Transparency’s corruption report anti-Pakistan: Fouzia

Stop posting long gibberish heaps and manipulating things with crayons…

Musharraf’s regime was stated as being more corrupt by TI and this didn’t even take into account 2007 when Musharraf’s popularity was down to less than 5%, even OBL was more popular than him! **3% ppl in Pakistan think Musharraf was corrupt hahahhahahahahaha that has to be a joke, esp after the NRO (the absolute zenith of corruption)… Also, we take the word of authentic news source over your long heaps… we all know your ‘numbers’ are a bunch of lies which never add up.

This is another article:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/06/09/27/10070399.html

**Transparency International is a Berlin-based anti-corruption watchdog organisation that publishes an annual Corruption Perceptions Index based on “the opinions of business people and country analysts”. The latest Pakistan national survey indicates that 67.3 per cent of respondents view the present government, with Musharraf as president and with the parliament elected in 2002, as the most corrupt government to hold power since 1988.

While perceptions of corruption under civilian governments could be the result of media influence, the **67.3 per cent that view the Musharraf-Shaukat Aziz regime as most corrupt have more likely formed their opinion on the basis of personal experience
**

Aaj kya pakaaya/khaaya