The dichotomisation fallacy of public and private corruption and the quantification dilemma

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the concept of corruption and dirty money. Corruption is amorphous and lacks a congruent definition. It is mainly divided into public and private corruption. This divide, is unnecessary, given the fact that both cause incalculable damage to the markets and lager society. Globalisation has necessitated liberalisation and resulted in amalgamating both public and private ventures. This, as a result, has made it more difficult to stick to this. Pronouncements from International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the Law Commission’s attitude not to segregate between private and public bribery prior to the legislation of United Kingdom Bribery Act 2010, has added greater impetus to the debate. Attempts to quantify the amount of corruption and money laundering, has equally, hit a dead end. The figures being bandied about are all estimates or “guesstimates” that cannot stand the empirical test. As a result, the conjectures have strong potentials to continue for a longer time. The purpose of this paper is to bring to the fore the need to jettison the long-held perception that public and private corruption should be seen in different lights.Design/methodology/approachThis paper relies substantially on both primary and secondary sources in the analysis.FindingsIndicatively, the facts tilt towards the conclusion that it is impossible to actually ascertain the quantifiable amount of money that is involved in corruption and the money laundering process. It is an illusion.Originality/valueThe paper provides the platform that the time is ripe for both public and private corruption to be seen as the same thing, as they both unleash catastrophic consequences on society. The issues of globalisation and liberalisation make this inevitable.