RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56

THE EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICEFOR THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPT ACTIVITIES BY
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
Sadar Muhammad Raza*
I. INTRODUCTION
Corruption in different forms and shapes
has existed in this World since time
immemorial. It exists in the form of humandeceit, wrong, treachery, unfaithfulness,
intrigue and cunningness that has changed
the destinies of human races, dynasties andkingdoms.

the officials became bold and thetransactions became open, with the resultthat corrupt elements in government,
public, trade and industry went on
becoming powerful, rich and resourceful,controlling and dominating every outlet,
opportunity and activity of life.
II. DEFINITION OF CORRUPTION

When Pakistan came into existence inthe year 1947, the evils of corruption andbribery were of course there, but in a mild
form. As the Nation was fighting forindependence, there was a missionary
spirit in every citizen, particularly the
public servants. Before 1947, the CID used
to have an eye on government officials,
their social contacts, general reputationand efficiency. With the increase of
population and with the increase of theevils, the Special Anti-corruption Police
force was created, which expanded with the
expansion in the government and publiclife. With the passage of time, as is natural
with a nation achieving independence,
there started a struggle for richness, andtherefrom emerged selfishness. The desire
to attain riches and power gave strength
to pulls, fights, cliques and intrigues forpromotion and for holding posts of benefit
among the officials. Such a race for power
and wealth was obviously at the cost ofhonesty and morality.

Bribery or corruption among public
officials has multifarious manifestations
and styles, like paying money to get undue
advantage, creating friendship, causing
undue influence and indulging in praise
and undue respect to get undue advantage;
having underhand connections,
understandings or dealings; to overcharge,
hoard, smuggle or adulterate; to exploit,
swindle, misappropriate or earnfraudulently; to evade any tax orgovernment due; to take any personaladvantage or benefit from power, positionor post; to give undue advantage, benefit
or facility for any consideration monitory
or otherwise; to neglect any duty, wastetime, money and public property; toprejudice, mutilate, misguide and spoil; tointentionally give wrong and unjustified
decisions, opinions, verdicts and comments;
to get favour or remuneration prejudicing
the right of fellow citizens; and hundredsof similar actions and omissions, arecorruption.

In the early stages there was lot of
precaution, secrecy and shyness in thegiving and taking of bribes, but gradually

III. INTERNATIONAL REMEDIES* Judge, Peshawar High Court, Pakistan.

482

With the passage of time and withsociety becoming complex at theinternational level, and with the world
becoming smaller and smaller day by day,

113TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
the octopus of corruption in every country
has gone beyond previous frontiers. The
proceeds of corruption, the payment ofbribes, kick-backs and commissions
obtained through corrupt practices areoften transferred abroad in safe deposits,
away from the public view. Swiss bankaccounts are used for the transfer of illgotten wealth by corrupt officials, as well
as by drug traffickers, arms smugglers andmoney launders. Kickbacks andcommissions are offered by the multinationals and management officials of thedeveloped countries to their counterpartsin developing countries, for the allotmentof contracts or procurement of goods.
The first resolution on corruption ingovernment was adopted in 1990 at the 8th
United Nations Congress on the Preventionof Crime and Treatment of Offenders. The
resolution concedes that the problems ofcorruption in public administration are
universal, which may have deleterious
effects on nations with vulnerable
economies. The resolution known as theresolution of fraudulent enrichment was
passed in 1992 by the United Nations
Human Rights Commission and consideredsuch corruption to be a human rights
problem. The Council of Europe introduced
a framework for mutual legal assistancewhich provides for mutual assistance toeach other in identifying persons andseizing evidence, so as to combat
corruption. This procedure, having been
adopted by the Commonwealth countries
in 1986, attempted to facilitate the quick
disposal of cases and punishment ofoffenders. In terms of combating
corruption, provisions have been
incorporated concerning the freezing,seizing and forfeiture of proceeds of thecrime corruption. Similar procedures weredevised in the United Nations Convention
against Illicit Trafficking in Narcotics,
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances 1988.
As business, trade and commerce are

becoming increasingly global, the effects ofbribery can no longer be restricted to theconfines of a particular country. In 1994,
the Organization of Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) recommended
six different areas of reform for its member
countries.
These included thecriminalization of bribery; terminating thesystem of tax deductibility for foreign
bribes; changing the banking laws to makebanks the instrument of fighting
corruption, rather than being an
instrument of corruption. Such
recommendations asked the Member
States to take specific steps to deter,prevent and combat the bribery of foreign
public officials in connection withinternational public transactions, andfurther to report to each other on the efforts
and meaningful steps which they havetaken in reviewing/reforming their laws
and procedures, to realize the objectives of
the recommendations.
IV. NATIONAL REMEDIESThe Constitution of Pakistan contains
specific provisions for disqualification of
public representatives who indulge incorrupt practices. Article 62 provides thata person intending to become a public
representative should be of good character,must abstain from major sins and berighteous, honest and trustworthy(Ameen). Article 63 provides that a person
found guilty of corrupt or illegal practicewould be disqualified from or from being
elected as a member of the legislature.
Honesty, selflessness, resistance toinfluence against their official conduct ordecisions, are the necessary ingredients of
the oaths prescribed for the president,
governor, prime minister, chief ministers,
federal/provincial ministers and membersof parliament/provincial assemblies.
Eradication of social evils and thepromotion of social justice are sanctioned
by Article 37 of the Constitution, while

483

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
Article 38 guarantees the promotion of thesocial and economic wellbeing of the people.
This is so because corrupt and illegal
actions affect the citizen’s right to life andthe enjoyment of the quality life enshrinedin Article 9 of the Constitution. Our
Supreme Court in Shehla Zia vs. Water andPower Development Authority (PLD 1994
SC 693) and Employees P.I.C. vs. Ministryof Housing and Works (1994 SCMR 1548)
held the view that the right to life does not
simply mean vegetative or animal
existence, but the enjoyment of allamenities and facilities essential for
quality of life and a dignified existence.
Corrupt practices are also violative of
Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution, as
any loss of national resources amounts todepriving people of their right to enjoy
property rights. It is thus obvious that theConstitution of Pakistan does notcountenance any corrupt deed or practiceby public representatives, state officials ora member of the public. Laws exist which
criminalize corrupt practices and prescribe
stringent punishment for infringement.
V. LEGISLATIVE MEASURESAGAINST CORRUPTION
A. Pakistan Penal Code 1860
Section 161-171 of the Pakistan Penal
Code (PPC) contains a specific chapter
related to offences committed by or in
relation to public servants. Offering or
taking gratification or anything valuable
without consideration are declared as penal
offences, punishable with imprisonment aswell as fine. Sections 171A-171-J of the
PPC provide for offences relating toelections. Thus, the grant or acceptance ofa bribe, with a view to induce the exerciseof electoral right, undue influence or
personation at elections, and illegal
payment in connection with an election, aredeclared as actionable wrongs, punishable
by imprisonment as well as fine.

484

B. The Prevention of Corruption Act
1947
This Act provides for the prevention ofbribery and corruption by a public servant.
A public servant who accepts or obtains, oragrees to accept or attempts to obtain, any
gratification, or anything valuable without
consideration or for inadequate
consideration, or dishonestly or
fraudulently misappropriates or converts
for their own use any public property
entrusted to their care, or by corrupt orillegal means or by otherwise abusing theirposition, obtains any valuable thing or
pecuniary advantage, or if s/he or any of
their dependents, are in possession ofassets/property for which s/he cannot givereasonable account, or possesses property
dis-proportionate to known sources ofincome, shall be guilty of criminal
misconduct, punishable withimprisonment as well as fine. Thoughstringent, the law provides for an adverse
presumption against the public servant if
it is proved that the public servant acceptedor obtained any gratification or valuable
thing, or the same was given or offered tothem. A similar adverse presumption isdrawn against them if his/her property/
assets are found to be disproportionate totheir known sources of income, thepresumption being that s/he had acquired
such property/assets illegally or throughcorrupt means. In case there is any prima
facie evidence against such a public
servant, the burden shifts on them to provethat s/he is not guilty, i.e did not acquire
the property/assets by illegal and corrupt
means. The punishment prescribed for theoffending public servant is imprisonment
for and upto seven years, as well as fine.
C. Public and Representative Office(Disqualification) Act 1949 (Proda)
This Act provided for the debarring of
public and representative office holders
found guilty of misconduct. Misconduct
includes bribery, corruption, robbery,

113TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
favouritism, nepotism, wilful maladministration, wilful mis-application or
diversion of public money or any otherabuse of official power, position or any
abetment thereof. The Act applies to theprime minister, chief ministers, federal/provincial ministers, parliamentary
secretary and members of the federal/provincial legislature. References for thispurpose are filed by the Governor Generalor Governor in the Federal Court or a twomember tribunal established for the
purpose. The jurisdiction of other courts
is ousted. Persons found guilty of
misconduct are debarred from holding
public office or availing representative
capacity for a period upto ten years.
D. Effective Bodies (Disqualification)
Order, 1959 (EBDO)This law applies to persons holding any
office, post or position including
membership of any elective body (federal/provincial assembly or local government
institutions), or in connection with theaffairs of the federation/province.
In this law, misconduct includes all theoffences mentioned in PRODA, in addition
to indulgence in subversive activities, thepreaching of any doctrine or the doing of
any act which contributes to politicalinstability; abuse of power; any attempt,
act or abetment of such misconduct. The
reference is to be filed by the President or
the governor, and the case is to be decided
by a tribunal consisting of three members
appointed by the President or the governor,
as the case may be. The punishment
prescribed is disqualification from holding
membership of an elective body for a periodof seven years. Persons who are dismissed,
removed or retired from service on a charge
other than inefficiency, or are detained
under the preventive detention law called
the Secrecy of Pakistan Act 1952, orconvicted for any offence and sentenced to
imprisonment for more than two years,

were also to be declared disqualified. The
accused person may volunteer to retire
from public life, in which case s/he stands
disqualified but is not proceeded against.
In case the person is found guilty, thetribunal, besides declaring him/her as
disqualified, may also oblige him/her tomake good any loss which s/he may havecaused by their misconduct. Again, thejurisdiction of the ordinary court is ousted.
E. Holders of Representative Office(Prevention of (Misconduct) Act
1976)
This Act provides for the prevention of
misconduct amongst the holders ofrepresentative offices, like federal/provincial ministers, ministers of state,parliamentary secretaries and members ofparliament or provincial assembly. The
Prime Minister and chief ministers are
excluded from the domain of this law.
Misconduct is defined as accepting or
obtaining any illegal gratification,
anything valuable without consideration or
for an inadequate consideration;
dishonestly and fraudulently
misappropriating public property bycorrupt, dishonest or illegal means;obtaining any valuable thing or pecuniary
advantage and possessing pecuniary
resources or property disproportionate to
known sources of income. An adverse
presumption is to be drawn against suchholders of representative office. Offences
are triable exclusively by a bench of theHigh Court, comprising of two judges.
References are to be filed with the approvalof the Prime Minister. The guilty standdisqualified from being or from being
chosen to be a member of parliament/
provincial assembly until the holding of thenext general election.
F. Parliament and Provincial
Assemblies (Disqualification for
Membership) Act 1976
This Act provides for the disqualification

485

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
of a person holding the office of federal/p r o v i n c i a l m i n i s t e r, m e m b e r s o f
p a r l i a m e n t / p r o v i n c i a l a s s e m b l y,parliamentary secretary, attorney generaland advocate general. Misconduct includes
all those Acts already defined in the former
laws. Cases are decided by a division benchof the High Court, comprised of not lessthan two judges. References are filed forthis purpose by the Prime Minister or Chief
Minister, with the prior approval of thisPrime Minister. Persons who volunteer toretire from public life are not tried, butstand disqualified. Persons found guiltyof the offence stand disqualified from beingor from being chosen to be a member ofparliament/provincial assembly, until theholding of the next general election.
G. Holders of Representative
Offices (Punishment for
Miscomduct) Order, 1977 (PPO 16
of 1977)
This law was promulgated during
Martial Law in 1977, providing severe
punishment. It applies to the president,
governor, prime minister, chief ministers,
federal/provincial ministers, ministers ofstate, advisors, parliamentary secretary,
members of parliament/provincial
assembly, attorney general and advocate
general. It defines misconduct as before.
Offences are triable by Special Courts
consisting of a judge of the High Court, withthe right of appeal to the Supreme Court.
The punishment prescribed isdisqualification for/up to seven years frombeing elected as a member of parliament/
provincial assembly. Persons convicted forany of the offences listed in the schedule,e.g offences under the Income Laws,
Foreign Exchange Regulation, Official
Secrets Act, Customs Act, Pakistan Arms
Ordinance etc are also disqualified for aperiod of seven years from being elected asa member of parliament/provincial
assembly.

486

H. Parliament and Provincial
Assemblies (Disqualification for
Membership) Order 1977 (PPO 17
of 1977)
This law is applicable to the persons andmisconduct as defined in the laws
mentioned previously. Offences are triable
by Special Courts consisting of a judge ofthe High Court, with the right of appeal to
the Supreme Court. The reference is filedby the president or the governor, and thepunishment prescribed is disqualification
for/up to seven years from being elected asa member of parliament/provincial
assembly. The jurisdiction of the othercourts is barred.
I. Martial Law Regulation No. 21(MLR 21)
Promulgated in September 1977, itapplies to persons who remained membersof the national assembly, senate or aprovincial assembly during the period from
December 1970 to July 1977. Suchmembers were required to submit detailed
statements of their properties and assets
to the Martial Law Administration. Aftermaking an investigation as to thecorrectness of the statements, it wasdetermined whether such property orassets were acquired by lawful or unlawfulmeans. Furnishing false or incorrect
information was made punishable withimprisonment for/up to seven years, as wellas with fines, and the possible forfeiture of
the whole or a part of the property andassets. An option was given to members tovoluntarily surrender lawfully acquired
property/assets, in which case no further
action was to be taken. Any failure to
surrender such property/assets waspunishable with imprisonment for/up to
fourteen years, in addition to fine andforfeiture of all or any part of the property.
A person found to be in possession ofproperty/assets disproportionate to known
sources of income stood disqualified frombeing elected as a member of parliament

113TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
or provincial assembly.
J. The Representation of People Act
1976
This deals with the conduct of elections
to the national/provincial assemblies. The
emphasis is on the conduct of elections
through a fair and impartial manner,prohibiting any use of illegal or corrupt
practices. The law placed an embargo on
persons from contesting elections who have
either written-off any loan or havedefaulted in the payment of a loan, taxes
or utility expenses like telephone,electricity, gas and water charges.
A successful candidate is to submit astatement of the assets and liabilities inrespect of themself, their spouse and any
dependent family members. Any candidate
to the election can inspect such a statement
furnished by another candidate. All
members of parliament/provincial
assembly are required to submit a yearlystatement of their assets and liabilities.
A candidate returned to an assembly isrequired to submit a statement of expenses
incurred in connection to their election
compaign. A ceiling of one million rupees
is fixed for the election to national assemblyand six lacs rupees (six hundred thousand)for provincial assembly. Candidates foundto have incurred expenses beyond theprescribed limit stand disqualified for aperiod of five years.
K. Ehtesab Act 1997
For the effective administration of
criminal justice, in order to check corrupt
activities, the promulgation of the Ehtesab
Act 1997, was a milestone in the history of
the laws of accountability in Pakistan.
The public clamour for accountability
became louder as the media revealed
scandals and stories of the plunder ofnational wealth by public representatives

and public officials. Repeatedly raised by
the political parties, vehemently stressedby the pressure groups and the public atlarge, the demand for accountability
became more pronounced. The government
responded by introducing a bill called theFifteenth Constitutional (Amendment)
Bill, 1996. It sought to enforce theaccountability of public representatives,
public servants etc. It provided for thecreation of a special committee ofparliament to send references against
corrupt persons to court, to be decided by a
two-member bench of the High Court. The
punishment prescribed included
imprisonment for/up to seven years and theimposition of a fine. Such persons also
stand disqualified from being or from being
chosen to be a member of parliament/
provincial assembly for a period of five
years. The bill proposed the constitutionof an Ehtesab (Accountability)
Commission, consisting of a serving judgeof the Supreme Court as chairman, and twoserving or retired judges of the Supreme
Court or High Court as members, to try
and decide cases of misconduct.
Due to acrimony and confrontation
among the government and the opposition,
no consensus could be reached inparliament on either of the two bills, andconsequently no legislation could beenacted.
The newly installed care-taker
government responded to public pressure
for accountability by promulgating an
ordinance called the Ehtesab(Accountability) Ordinance 1997. Just
before the ordinance promulgated by thecare-taker government could lapse (in 120days), the government quickly moved andadopted the Ehtesab (Accountability) Act
1997.
With some variations, the Act borrowed
the provisions of the Ordinance; it applies

487

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
to the holders of a public office, including aformer president or governor, present or
past prime minister/chief minister, federal/provincial ministers, ministers of state,advisors, consultants, political secretarie,
special assistants or holders of a post or
an office with equal rank or status,
secretary, members of parliament/
provincial assembly, speakers, deputy
speakers of the national/provincial
assembly, chairmen and deputy chairmenof the senate, attorney general and law
officers of the federal government, auditor
general, advocate general, additional
advocate general and assistant advocate
general.
The law also applies to a public servantof the federal/provincial government or a
local council in basis pay scale (BPS-18)
and above or equivalent thereof incorporations, banks, financial institutions.
The Law is further extended to chairman/
vice chairman of Zilla (District) councils,
municipal committees, municipal
corporations or metropolitan corporations.
The law is also made applicable to theholders of an office or post in BPS-17 or
below, if such an officer is found to be
involved in the commission of an offencewith the public servants earlier mentioned.
The Law excluded the institution of the
judiciary and the members of armed forces,
except when a person who is a member ofany such force is holding or has held anequivalent post or office in any pubic
corporation, bank, financial institution or
any other institution.
There is no material deviation in thedefinition of corruption or corrupt practices
as given in the previous laws. They also
provide for a presumption against theaccused, in that it is presumed that theproperty/assets are illegally acquired if theaccused cannot satisfactorily account forthem or if they are disproportionate to
known sources of income.

488

The Ehtesab (Accountability) Act assigns
the responsibility of conducting enquiry
into and investigating exclusively theEhtesab (Accountability) Cell; to becompleted within one month and its
findings to be communicated to the Chief
Ehtesab (Accountability) Commissioner.
The Ehtesab (Accountability) Cell isheaded by a chairman who is appointed by
the governor.
It provides for the establishment of theEhtesab (Accountability) Commission,
headed by the Chief Ehtesab(Accountability) Commissioner, appointed
by the Federal Government in consultation
with the leader of the opposition in the
National Assembly and the Chief Justiceof Pakistan. Qualifications forappointment as Chief Ehtesab(Accountability) Commissioner, requires
the person to be a serving or retired judgeof the Supreme Court. S/he is appointed
for a period of four years and cannot be
removed except by the Supreme Judicial
Council, on the grounds and as per theprocedure prescribed in Article 209 of theConstitution.
Reference against the accused isinitiated by the Chief Ehtesab(Accountability) Commissioner either onreceipt of a reference from the federal/provincial government or on a complaint
from any citizen or on his/her own accord.
On completion of an enquiry, the Ehtesab(Accountability) Cell communicates thefindings to the Chief Ehtesab(Accountability) Commissioner, who
evaluates the evidence and decides
whether or not to refer the case to court.
These offences are non-bailable and no
court, other than the High Court, has
jurisdiction to grant bail. Bail is not
permissible if there are reasonable grounds
for belief that the accused is prima facie
guilty.

113TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
On voluntary return of the property, thetrial proceedings are discontinued but theaccused is required to resign from office andthe court may impose an additional fine orp e n a l t y.
The Chief Ehtesab(Accountability) Commissioner (CEC) cangrant a pardon to an accomplice, subject toapproval by the federal government. The
Law applies not only to the recipient ofillegal gratification and/or pecuniary
advantage but also to the one who gives oroffers the same. In case a complaint
succeeds up to the final stage, thecomplainant may be entitled to suchrewards as may be determined by the court.
However, in case the complaint is proved
to be false, malafide or made for someulterior motive, the complainant may bepunished with imprisonment for/up to
three years, as well as by fine.
This law is most likely to achieve its
object in eradicating corruption fromsociety, provided the machinery thereof(constituted by the government itself) is notpartisan and discriminatory with thepotential to be abused and misused against
opponents, dissenters and non-conformists,and provided it is given effect from a yearthat includes the period of the ruling
government as well. The Law Commissionof Pakistan has recommended that the Lawof Accountability should be amended andmade applicable with effect from 14th
August 1947, the day the country came into
existence, and that it should not grant
immunity to certain incumbent holders of
public office or the functionaries of certain
institutions like the army and the judiciary.
The immunity of the judiciary is not thatalarming because it has its own system ofa c c o u n t a b i l i t y, p r o v i d e d i n t h eConstitution.
L. Wafaqi Mohtasib (Federal
Ombudsman)
The institution of Wafaqi Mohtasib(Ombudsman) was established in 1993 inorder to check the excesses of the officialsof various departments, without resorting
to lengthy judicial processes. The public
was to have quick and inexpensive redressof their grievances, seek rectification ofwrongs and get compensation for acts ofmalfeasance/misfeasance on the part of agovernment agency or its officials. The
Mohtasib (Ombudsman) has been given
powers to investigate complaints against
any office of the federal government, except
the judiciary and the armed forces. Its
functions include diagnosing,investigating, redressing and rectifying
acts of injustice or mal-administration.
D u r i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n / e n q u i r y, t h eombudsman is not bound to strictly follow
judicial procedure. S/he may choose andadopt any appropriate procedure and may
also seek the settlement of disputes
through any informal method, e.g
conciliation. Against the orders of the
Ombudsman, a representation can be filed
before the President of Pakistan.
VI. CONCLUSION
The discussion so far has brought us tothe conclusion that the levels of corruption
are of two kinds. One is at the higher/
government level and the other is among
the lower strata of government officials.
Notwithstanding the plethora of criminal
laws for the prevention and punishment ofcorruption among public representatives
and government servants, the results havenot been very encouraging. Hardly any
prominent figure has been convicted. The
reason for such dismal failure may be
scribed to the selective, rather vindictive,u s e o f t h e l a w, b y t h e s u c c e s s i v egovernment against their opponents.
Unfortunately, the process of accountability
could never acquire the level of legitimacy
and credibility which the people expected.
Lack of political will to initiate the processof accountability and apply the law inearnest, without fear or favour, has

489

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
resulted in a situation where corruption is
not only tolerated but allowed to spread.
I cannot avoid recalling the words of a
Chinese sage philosopher, Confucius, who
said in the middle of the sixth century,
before Jesus, that;“If a ruler is himself upright, his
people will do their duty withoutorders; but if he himself be not
upright, although he may order, they
will not obey”.

and to reduce the gap between the rich andthe poor. Such a yawning gap between thetwo gives impetus to the race for money
and hence, corruption. Lack of education
is another factor that leads to corruption.
Lack of nationalistic feelings have been
observed to be the most powerful factor
which makes public servants irresponsible,
less honourable and more greedy. If allthese factors are universally available, itwould be much easier to identify the
culprit, investigate the crime and to takethe guilty to task.

In another place, he said:“ When a ruler loves good manners,
his people will not let themselves be
disrespectful; when a ruler loves
justice, his people will not letthemselves be unsubmissive; when aruler loves good faith, his people will
not venture to be insincere.”To give a bribe to a public servant has
been considered a usual thing amongst
under-developed and developing countries
for centuries. As the bribes are paid
secretly, it is really difficult to procure
evidence in order to prove the crime.
Another complicated phenomenon ofcorruption is that both the receiver, as wellas the giver, are happy at the same time,
gaining advantage simultaneously. Suchcrimes are difficult to identify, investigate
and prove.
Experience has shown that the more
stringent the laws, the higher the rate ofpayment. It is therefore necessary thatvarious measures are organized as to makean appeal to the conscience and moralityof the public in general, and of publics e r v a n t s i n p a r t i c u l a r. Tr u e a n dundistorted religious teachings should begiven to the people serving in various
offices of government. Economic policies
should be devised so as to eliminate poverty

490

ANEXURE I
CAUSES OF CORRUPTION
1.
2.
3.
4.

Lack of morals.
Lack of nationalism.
Poverty.
Low salary of investigating officers andjudges.
5. Wide gap between the cross-section ofpeople qua their wealth.
6. S e n s e o f f a l s e s t a n d a r d s a n dcompetition in the race for money.
7. Lack of education and employment
protection for the children of civil
servants.
8. Lack of protection to civil servants after
retirement.
9. High rate of inflation.
10. High rate of population in developing
and underdeveloped countries.
11. Bad customs regarding various social
cultural ceremonies and a sense of false
competition theirabout.
12. Pressure from political high-ups andtheir own superiors.
13. Lack of basic facilities.
14. If one can do wrong under the orders
from an other, why not such dishonesty
for his/her own monetary benefit.
15. Lack of accountability. Those whointerfere, they protect from.
16. Uncertainty about the future.

113TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
CAUSES OF LACK OF CONVICTION
1. Sub-standard investigation
2. Lack of protection to the complainant
and witnesses.
3. Low education of the investigating
officers.
4. Insufficient training of investigating
officers.
5. Complicated record of offences relating
to accounts.
6. Lack of competence among publicprosecutors.
7. Incompetent people appointed as publicprosecutors.
8. Good lawyers not inclined to work inpublic agencies.
9. Witnesses transferred, influenced or
won-over.
10. Interest lost - matter forgotten by the
public.
11. Public not vigilant nor reactive.
SOLUTIONS

between the rich and poor completely
eliminated.
9. Complete legal and physical protection
to complainants and witnesses.
10. Strict laws be enforced to eliminate
extravagant expenditure on social
customs.
11. A l l p o l i t i c a l i n t e r f e r e n c e b e
discouraged, taken serious notice of andpolitical authorities be subject to
impeachment without delay.
12. Means of communication be improved
so that witnesses are served on time toappear in court.
13. Number of courts to be increased, atleast to double the existing number.
14. Strict action to be taken against
lawyers at the court level, as well as
Bar Council level, who are found using
delaying tactics and thus impeding thecourse of justice.
15. Highly educated officers, academicallyas well as technically, be apointed as
investigating officers.

1. Extensive teachings about honesty,
morality, nationalism, good conscience,
humanity and religion to children fromthe day they attain understanding.
2. Enhancement of the salaries ofinvestigating officers, publicprosecutors and court staff.
3. Enhancement of the salaries of judges
and magistrates, and provide them freebasic facilities of life like accomodation,
conveyance, petrol, healthcare,telehone, gas and electricity.
4. Provide club and other cultural
facilities to judges where they do nothave to mix with other people.
5. Full retirement benefits to judges, as
they have during service.
6. No allurement, i.e, judges expectationof political and other jobs after
retirement.
7. Equip the police and court officers withthe most modern electronic devices andthorough training thereof.
8. Fair economic standards with the gap

491