Lebanon has dropped 19 places on a list of 146 countries ranked according to perceptions of corruption by Transparency International, an international non-governmental organization devoted to combating corruption. Lebanon’s separately-listed corruption index score also dropped, from 3.0 to 2.7 on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 indicating no corruption. Lebanon’s rank of 97 ties it with Algeria, Macedonia, Nicaragua, Serbia and Montenegro. Lebanon was first listed in 2003; this year, a further 13 countries were added to the list.
“These results are quite dramatic,” warned Transparency International Regional Executive Director Charles Adwan. “In the past year, we have moved from one corruption scandal to another, with no serious way of legally dealing with them. There is no faith in a judiciary that should be the main safety net against corruption, but is in fact politicized.”
“Everyone knows that certain ministers and parliamentarians are corrupt, but nothing is done,” he added. The problem is aggravated, observers note, by the fact that Lebanon’s government and politicians talk publicly about cracking down on corruption, raising expectations which are then dashed. “When you disappoint expectations, the perception of corruption is heightened,” explained Adwan.
Economists warn that the perception of corruption in Lebanon is creating a barrier to investment. “Investment is far below its potential. Most investors are Lebanese expatriates and other Arabs. They are investing for emotional, not economic, reasons,” stated Adwan. “Many Western investors initially interested in Lebanon change their minds after being extorted by local politicians.”
Observers say they expect Lebanon’s corruption rating to drop further unless a number of practical steps are taken immediately. All agree that laws covering access to information and conflicts of interest should be passed as soon as possible. Politicians must be freely elected so that they can be held accountable by the electorate, while the independence and integrity of the judiciary must be strengthened. Lastly, the public sector must be seen to shed inefficient and “dead wood” employees.
