AUTHORITARIAN REGIMES AND CORRUPTION: AN INTRICATE RELATIONSHIP

APA full citation: Charles The Son Holding (2024, July 30). Authoritarian Regimes and Corruption: An Intricate Relationship. EBS I&D Centre. https://www.ebscentre.org/law-and-politicalscience/

Abstract: This article examines the complex relationship between authoritarian regimes and corruption, highlighting the mechanisms through which such political systems foster corrupt practices and the wide-ranging consequences that ensue. Authoritarian regimes are characterized by centralized control, limited political freedoms, restricted civil liberties, and weak democratic institutions, all of which create an environment conducive to corruption. The concentration of power, lack of accountability, extensive economic control, and cultural factors contribute significantly to corrupt activities, including personal enrichment, patronage networks, and regulatory capture. The impacts of corruption in authoritarian contexts are profound, affecting economic development, political stability, and social trust, leading to misallocation of resources, increased inequality, and public discontent. Addressing corruption in these regimes requires a multifaceted approach involving institutional strengthening, enhanced transparency, international pressure, civil society engagement, and economic reforms. Despite the inherent challenges, these strategies are essential for promoting accountability, improving governance, and enhancing the well-being of citizens under authoritarian rule.

Keywords: accountability, authoritarian regime, corruption, centralized control, political freedoms, democratic institutions

Article - Authoritarian Regimes and Corruption.pdf

Download PDF • 257KB

---

Foreword

Corruption is often seen as an inevitable byproduct of authoritarian regimes. Defined broadly as the abuse of power for personal gain, corruption in these political systems can manifest in various forms, from bribery and embezzlement to favoritism and nepotism. The inherent characteristics of authoritarian regimes—centralized power, limited political pluralism, and constrained civil liberties—create fertile ground for corrupt practices to thrive. This article explores the intricate relationship between authoritarianism and corruption, examining the underlying mechanisms, consequences, and potential pathways to mitigating corruption in such contexts.

The intimate relationship between corruption and authoritarianism

As a main bulk of characteristics of Authoritarian Regimes, they are marked by the concentration of political power in a single authority or a small group of elites. Among their key features: (a) Centralised Control, where the Power is consolidated in the hands of a few, often leading to unchecked authority; (b) Limited Political Freedom, which opposition parties and dissent are suppressed, reducing accountability; (c) Restricted Civil Liberties, where freedom of speech, assembly, and the press are typically curtailed and manipulated by political institutions; (d) Absence of Democratic Institutions, in addition to all compromised factors related to the weaknesses on rule of law, leading to a weak judicial and legislative branches that lack independence from the executive.

These characteristics inherently limit transparency and accountability, creating an environment where corrupt practices can flourish. Corruption then is settled in Authoritarian Regimes by a very rich and strong pack of mechanisms fostered solely by the authoritarian power. Here, democracy and rule of law are two state-manipulated ventriloquists that simply serve to convince the people that they have power in running the government, which in fact never happens.

Therefore, the concentration of power significantly contributes to corruption. Leaders with unchecked authority can engage in corrupt activities without fear of reprisal. For instance, leaders siphon off state resources for personal gain as well as to distribute state resources to loyalists to maintain support and stability (patronage networks).

The nefarious effects on public corruption won't end here, as politicians are also empowered - by the lack of accountability – to use state-owned enterprises for personal or political gains.

This way, the lack of accountability and transparency develops a shade area where the suppression of political opposition and media restricts avenues for accountability. With limited checks and balances, corrupt activities go unchallenged.

Fact is, anti-corruption agencies, but not only, are often controlled by the regime, limiting their effectiveness (suppressing investigations) and media outlets are censored or co-opted, preventing the exposure of corrupt practices, leading to a true censorship.

As an economic actor, States led by authoritarian regimes often exert significant control over the economy, which can be a major source of corruption. We can quickly cite several related activities that mixes corruption practices and the State as a true player in this role. For instance, businesses may bribe officials to receive favorable regulations or avoid penalties (regulatory capture), as well as when the State control over key industries leading to rent-seeking behaviors (monopoly power).

If we look deep into the society, cultural factors may also play a role in perpetuating corruption in some authoritarian regimes. That means the corruption acts are multiplied as a good manner acts, and they can comprehend a common and acceptable behaviour from either politicians and civil society (e.g., gift-giving traditions, where practices perceived as culturally acceptable can be exploited for corrupt purposes; and loyalty over merit, or when it emphasises on loyalty to the regime over meritocracy triggers the institutionalization of corruption.

Nefarious effects of corruption

As above-mentioned, the nefarious consequences of corruption in authoritarian regimes are far-reaching and multifaceted. They shall include an economic-impacted approach when we understand that the corruption distorts economic development by deterring investment (e.g., foreign and domestic investors may avoid corrupt markets), or even when resources are diverted from productive uses to corrupt activities (misallocation of resources). Another fact would be whether the wealth becomes concentrated in the hands of the corrupt elite leading to a true and unfair wealth distribution, increasing potentially the social and economical inequality, therefore the multiplying the criminality.

As we looked into the economical aspects, we shall not forgot the political instability built by corruption acts, that would lead into several negative results such as: (a) an eroding legitimacy on which public trust in the regime diminishes; (b) a fuelling of opposition, where corruption scandals can galvanize opposition movements; (c) a strong presence of intra-elite conflict, where a competition for corrupt gains can lead to factionalism within the elite.

Corruption also affects social structures when considering that public funds are embezzled causing a damage to the quality of public services. Such embezzlement phenomenon also fosters the erosion on trust of public institutions that remains discredited by both businesses (private institutions) and fellow citizens.

In its highest core, corruption often goes hand-in-hand with human rights abuses as the lack of integrity and ethics leads to attorcities against both fundamental rights and human rights to reach the so-desired personal enrichment 

Hopeful Approach in Mitigating Corruption in Authoritarian Regimes

Mitigating corruption in authoritarian regimes is challenging but not impossible. Potential strategies include the strengthening of public institutions by: (a) establishing judicial independence to hold corrupt officials accountable (independent judiciary); (b) ensuring these agencies operate without political interference (empowering anti-corruption agencies).

Another major tool that will assist consistently in fighting corruption is the enhancing on transparency in both public and private levels, by implementing policies that promote transparency in government operations (open government initiatives) as well as the development of a whistleblower protection programme, on which individuals who expose corrupt activities have for granted their protection and anonimate.

The Politics of Shame, an International Pressure Approach

Another very sensitive but indispensible tool to assist the correction of corruption behaviour is the strenghtning of international policies where third party States can build a pressure scenario by setting sanctions and incentives - leveraging international sanctions against corrupt officials while providing incentives for reforms – that will promote, or force, corrupt States to behave appropriately in the international diplomatic scenario. A global cooperation could also lead to an engagement in international anti-corruption frameworks and agreements.

Other Anti-Corruption Measures

As tackling corruption is well-known as a duty of all people, it is also an important step that civil society in general engages in this though mission, either by encouraging the role of non-governmental organizations in monitoring and exposing corruption (supporting NGOs), or even by advocating for freer media to investigate and report on corruption (media freedom, freedom of speech).

Rescuing the economic matters, statutory economy reforms are needed to enhance the anticorruption policy results. For instance, limiting state control over the economy to reduce opportunities for corruption and promoting a competitive business environment to reduce rent-seeking behaviors can be dealt as the true and unbiased binom "Reducing State Control/ Encouraging Competition".

Conclusion

The relationship between authoritarian regimes and corruption is complex and deeply rooted in the structural characteristics of such political systems. While authoritarian regimes provide an environment conducive to corrupt practices, addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach that includes strengthening institutions, enhancing transparency, applying international pressure, engaging civil society, and implementing economic reforms. Although challenging, these efforts are crucial for fostering accountability, improving governance, and ultimately enhancing the well-being of citizens living under authoritarian rule. 

Carlos I. Filho

References

Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Crown Business, 2012.

Aidt, Toke S. "Corruption, Institutions, and Economic Development." Oxford Review of Economic Policy, vol. 25, no. 2, 2009, pp. 271-291.

Andvig, Jens Chr., and Karl Ove Moene. "How Corruption May Corrupt." Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 13, no. 1, 1990, pp. 63-76.

Brinkerhoff, Derick W. "Assessing Political Will for Anti-Corruption Efforts: An Analytical Framework." Public Administration and Development, vol. 20, no. 3, 2000, pp. 239-252.

Diamond, Larry. "Thinking About Hybrid Regimes." Journal of Democracy, vol. 13, no. 2, 2002, pp. 21-35.

Geddes, Barbara. Authoritarian Breakdown: Empirical Test of a Game Theoretic Argument. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, 1999.

Hellman, Joel S., et al. "Seize the State, Seize the Day: State Capture, Corruption, and Influence in Transition." World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2444, 2000.

Kaufmann, Daniel, and Pedro C. Vicente. "Legal Corruption." Economics & Politics, vol. 23, no. 2, 2011, pp. 195-219.

Lambsdorff, Johann Graf. The Institutional Economics of Corruption and Reform: Theory, Evidence and Policy. Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan A. Way. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Mauro, Paolo. "The Effects of Corruption on Growth, Investment, and Government Expenditure: A Cross-Country Analysis." Corruption and the Global Economy, edited by Kimberly Ann Elliott, Institute for International Economics, 1997, pp. 83-107.

Rose-Ackerman, Susan. Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform. Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Schedler, Andreas. The Politics of Uncertainty: Sustaining and Subverting Electoral Authoritarianis. Oxford University Press, 2013.

Treisman, Daniel. "The Causes of Corruption: A Cross-National Study." Journal of Public Economics, vol. 76, no. 3, 2000, pp. 399-457.

Transparency International. "Corruption Perceptions Index 2023." Transparency International, 2023.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The United Nations Convention against Corruption: Implementing Anti-Corruption Policies and Practices. United Nations, 2004.