Basil Fernando, Director, Asian Human Rights Commission & Asian Legal Resource Centre, Hong Kong
The regional consultation on the elimination of corruption and the creating of conditions for transparency, integrity and accountability held in Hong Kong from 11 to 15 January 2010 was an occasion for a number of persons who have been very much concerned with corruption in our region to freely discuss about the situation in their societies. As is usual in a meeting of this sort organised by the Asian Human Rights Commission, it was held with complete openness for participants to share their experiences and points of view sincerely.
Bluffed
The overall impression that emerged throughout the meeting was of a group of Asians who feel that they have been bluffed by their political and legal systems: that the absence of concern about preventing corruption is itself the problem. The theme of the discussion was the prevention of corruption; however, the overarching theme was that the political and legal systems operating in their countries are developed in a manner so as to frustrate any serious attempts to address this problem.
The participants were commonly concerned that the citizens in their countries feel that the prevention of corruption is not at all a concern of their systems and that, in fact, these systems aim to protect the holders of power and influence, and ensure continued possibilities for corruption. Concern for the prevention of corruption seems to be extraneous to these systems.
While they felt strongly about the need to eliminate corruption, they felt that they were in extremely powerless positions because the general policy within the political and legal systems of Asia allows for very great corruption.
Popular consensus
The participants also felt that they represented the feelings of significant sections of their societies in their opposition to corruption. People of Asia are in general opposed to corruption. In fact, the observations at the meeting clearly indicated that there is very strong public opposition.
This conflict between the desire of people to have significant changes to eliminate corruption, and the opposition of the system to any kind of reform that might restrict or limit corruption was one of the predominant problems that emerged through the observations of the participants.
Anger and powerlessness
Popular will is against corruption. On the other hand there is a strong sense of frustration and anger at public incapacity to change political systems and even more so, legal systems, in order to achieve their expectations. The feeling that citizens are powerless against their political systems was perhaps the deepest underlying theme at this gathering.
Most participants seemed to be very concerned about this sense of powerlessness. They were not submissive or were willing to accept this situation of powerlessness; however, at the same time there was a deep underlying confusion as to how to deal with this situation. Some kind of desperate search for alternatives to deal with the political and legal systems of their societies was reflected in the discussion. No clear ideas or beliefs about the prospects for any immediate possibility of a particular strategy emerged. But at the same time there was a strong preoccupation with finding some way through this problem.
Unresolved
The underlying dynamic of the meeting was a belief that change is seriously needed, that society must get rid of corruption, and that the political system has to develop in such a way so as to eliminate it. This was the issue on which there was clear agreement. It was also agreed that legal systems in Asia are backward and that they do not serve the interests of the people at large in dealing with corruption.
The meeting came out with many strong and valid assertions and ideas of how to proceed. At the same time it also left problematic areas where in the societies from which the participants came there seems to be no consensus on how to go forward. There were affirmations based on general agreements for various reforms; however, despite agreeing on these principles the ways in which to bring these principles to reality remain unresolved.
