The rapidly-growing economic sector in Asia offers many opportunities for growth in business and similar areas, but doing business in Asia is not without difficulties. Many nations in Asia and the Indian subcontinent are still developing or in transitional economic and social stages, and with rapid development and massive change often comes corruption in government. Sri Lanka and the Maldives, both island nations in the Indian Ocean, are undergoing massive but wildly different economic and social changes along with their development. However, both nations are facing issues with governmental corruption and human rights abuses that often go along with rampant government corruption. Singapore, conversely, has managed to mostly eliminate corruption from its government; this discussion will center on Singapore as a model for eliminating corruption in developing and transitional nations.
Sri Lanka and the Maldives have vastly different histories, and as a result, are facing very different types of corruption in government. A number of studies have been done on the violence that has occurred in Sri Lanka, and the potential solutions to the violence that occurs on a daily basis (Buscaglia, 2001). The partisan violence that occurs in Sri Lanka is certainly motivated in part by the corruption of the standing Sri Lankan government; however, although corruption and violence are intertwined closely in Sri Lanka, solving the problem of governmental corruption may not solve the problem of violence in Sri Lanka (Buscaglia, 2001). Sri Lanka is the oldest existing democracy in Asia, which makes it unique and an interesting study in corruption and governmental influence (Buscaglia, 2001).
The Maldives, conversely, are not prone to violence in the same way that Sri Lanka is; however, the two nations are analogous in many ways, making them excellent nations for a comparative study. Both nations are island nations in the Indian Ocean with deeply religious roots, and both governments are highly corrupt, although both governments also claim to be representative of the population (Buscaglia, 2001).
Singapore, conversely, has a tight hold over the corruption and actions of the individuals within its government. The low levels of corruption in Singapore are directly in contrast to the high levels of corruption in the Maldives and Sri Lanka. The comparison is particularly apt, however, because of the analogous nature of the nations. All three are island nations with representative governments and general geographic similarities.
Reduction in corruption in the area is a complex issue, and experts do not have a consensus as to why certain areas become more corrupt than others. However, a fear of being caught and punished by the legal system is a powerful deterrent, and the level fear of being caught by the legal system that a corrupt official feels is heavily dependent upon the efficacy of the legal system in the nation itself (Olkin and Pande, 2012). Similarly, the research suggests that certain types of law systems, particularly common law systems, are less likely to face rampant corruption than other systems (Treisman, 2000). The Maldives and Sri Lanka both have hybridized legal systems, which increase the risk for corruption, while Singapore has a common law system that is based heavily on the British system.
The research will center upon the ways in which the Singapore system has been used to all but eliminate corruption in government and the law-enforcement system, and the policies that can be extended to Sri Lanka and the Maldives in an attempt to alleviate the high levels of corruption that plague the systems there.
In addition, Singapore will be used as a model for cultural stability in the region, and the problems of human rights violations in the search to eliminate corruption will be thoroughly addressed. The analysis will be both quantitative and qualitative, taking into account current statistics and literature that exists surrounding each nation and the levels of corruption that exist within the nation. Culture and economic issues will be examined in the literature review, and potential pitfalls of applying the Singapore model to each nation will be thoroughly and completely addressed.
References
Buscaglia, E. (2001). Judicial Corruption in Developing Countries: Its Causes and Economic Consequences. [report] Vienna: United Nations.
Hors, I. (2000). Fighting corruption in the developing countries. The Observer, April.
Khan, M. (2006). Governance and Anti-Corruption Reforms in Developing Countries: Policies, Evidence and Ways Forward. [report] New York: United Nations.
Muttreja, V. (2012). Effects of Wages of Government Officials on Corruption in Developing Countries. Masters. Duke University Durham.
Olkin, B., and Pande, R. (2012). Corruption in Developing Countries. [report] Boston: Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab’s Governance Initiative.
Quah, J. (1996). Corruption in Asia with Special Reference to Singapore: Patterns and Consequences.Asian Journal of Public Administration.
Treisman , D. (2000). The Causes of Corruption: A Cross-national Study. Journal of Public Economics,, 76 (3), pp.399-457.
Vinod, H. (2013). Open Economy and Financial Burden of Corruption: Theory and Application to Asia. [report] New Brunswick.
