quotations of essay corruption

• Quote of the Day
• Picture Quotes

Corruption Quotes

Standart top banner.

Now more than ever the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption.

When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President. I'm beginning to believe it.

In India, the corrupt accuse the corrupt of being corrupt and the corrupt investigate the corrupt and absolve the corrupt of being corrupt.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.

Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might endanger the morals of an individual, the former invariably endangers the morals of the entire country.

When people treat corruption as a routine part of the process, you have something far worse than wrongdoing or moral failing. You have a political cancer that breeds cynicism about democratic government and infects all of society.

Corruption is a cancer that steals from the poor, eats away at governance and moral fibre and destroys trust.

To oppose corruption in government is the highest obligation of patriotism.

When you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice, you may know that your society is doomed

When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.

Moral cowardice and intellectual corruption are the natural concomitants of unchallenged privilege.

To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

The duty of youth is to challenge corruption.

Corruption is simply crime without conscience.

If a country is to be corruption free and become a nation of beautiful minds, I strongly feel there are three key societal members who can make a difference. They are the father, the mother and the teacher.

Those who corrupt the public mind are just as evil as those who steal from the public purse.

Among a people generally corrupt liberty cannot long exist.

I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.

Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations.

I think the gap between the rich and the poor is a dangerous phenomenon in Russia and it needs the attention of the state. The only reasonable way to correct the situation today is not to go after big businesses, but to give breathing room to medium and small businesses. That means protecting citizens and small entrepreneurs from arbitrary rule and from corruption. It means investing the revenues from the national natural resources into the national infrastructure, education and health care. And we must learn to do so without shameful theft and embezzlement.

Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.

Corruption and hypocrisy ought not to be inevitable products of democracy, as they undoubtedly are today.

It is said that power corrupts, but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power.

Loathsome canker lives in sweetest bud.

last adds STANDART BOTTOM BANNER

Send report.

• The author didn't say that
• There is a mistake in the text of this quote
• The quote belongs to another author
• Other error

Corruption quotes by:

• Harry Markopolos Accountant
• William Shakespeare Poet
• Thomas Jefferson 3rd U.S. President
• P. J. O'Rourke Satirist
• Edmund Burke Statesman
• Robert Maxwell Media proprietor
• Noam Chomsky Linguist
• Mark Twain Author
• James L. Buckley Former United States Senator
• Michel de Montaigne Writer
• George Richard Marek Author
• Samuel Johnson Writer
• Theodore Roosevelt 26th U.S. President
• Friedrich Nietzsche Philologist
• Mahatma Gandhi Civil rights leader
• Bernard Madoff Stockbroker
• H. L. Mencken Journalist
• Olusegun Obasanjo Former President of Nigeria
• Thomas Paine Author

Top Authors

Get Social with AzQuotes

Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends

SIDE STANDART BANNER

• Javascript and RSS feeds
• WordPress plugin
• ES Version AZQuotes.ES
• Submit Quotes
• Privacy Policy

Login with your account

Create account, find your account.

• Discussions
• Reading Challenge
• Kindle Notes & Highlights
• Favorite genres
• Friends’ recommendations
• Account settings

Corruption Quotes

Browse By Tag

• Love Quotes 96.5k
• Life Quotes 76.5k
• Inspirational Quotes 72k
• Humor Quotes 43k
• Philosophy Quotes 29.5k
• Inspirational Quotes Quotes 26.5k
• God Quotes 26k
• Truth Quotes 23.5k
• Wisdom Quotes 23.5k
• Romance Quotes 22.5k
• Poetry Quotes 21.5k
• Death Quotes 19.5k
• Happiness Quotes 18.5k
• Life Lessons Quotes 18k
• Hope Quotes 17.5k
• Faith Quotes 17.5k
• Quotes Quotes 16.5k
• Inspiration Quotes 16.5k
• Spirituality Quotes 15k
• Motivational Quotes 15k
• Religion Quotes 14.5k
• Writing Quotes 14.5k
• Relationships Quotes 14k
• Life Quotes Quotes 14k
• Success Quotes 13.5k
• Love Quotes Quotes 13.5k
• Time Quotes 12.5k
• Motivation Quotes 12k
• Science Quotes 11.5k
• Knowledge Quotes 11k

Welcome back. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account.

corruption Quotes

Recommended quote pages.

• Help Center
• B Board Book Club
• P Picture Book Club
• J Junior Chapter Book Club
• M Middle Grade Book Club
• Gift a Book Club
• B Book Registries
• Beautiful Collections
• C Classrooms
• B Book Fairs
• Schedule Demo

Book Platform

• Find a Book
• Reading App
• Community Editors

Authors & Illustrators

• Get Your Book Reviewed
• Submit Original Work

Follow Bookroo

Corruption Quotes Curator

Copied the quote:, corruption quotes + their meanings/explanations.

Corruption Quotes encapsulates a collection of powerful statements that shed light on the destructive nature of corruption. From renowned figures and thinkers across different eras, these quotes serve as a reminder of the inherent dangers and consequences associated with dishonesty, manipulation, and abuse of power.

They offer a poignant critique of corrupt practices, urging individuals and societies to remain vigilant in their fight against corruption and its corrosive effects on justice, equality, and moral integrity. Through their succinct and thought-provoking words, these quotes inspire us to strive for transparency, accountability, and a world free from the grip of corruption.

Below are various corruption quotes with their meanings/explanations;

“Beware of your contribution to the growing banality of evil lest you yourself become a cog in the machinery of terror.”  - Heather Marsh

As the world continues to reel from the latest terrorist attack, it's important to be aware of the ways that we contribute to the growing banality of evil. The more we allow ourselves to become desensitized to violence and chaos, the more likely it is that we will be drawn into its gravitational pull. We must be vigilant in our actions and thoughts, and refuse to become complicit in the destruction of humanity.

“When self-interest supersedes public service, society collapses under the weight of corruption.”  - Ken Poirot

When people place their own interests above those of their country, they create a system that is no longer fair or accountable. This is what happens when officials are not held accountable for their actions; they become corrupt and the public suffers as a result.

“To survive in a corrupt country, you need to be the son of a king or be king yourself.”  - Bangambiki Habyarimana

In most of the world, being born into a wealthy family is one of the best predictors of a successful life. But in some countries, being born into a powerful family doesn't guarantee you a good life. In fact, it can make your life much harder. That's because in these countries, corruption is rampant and it's always looking for new ways to take advantage of its victims.

“It is not the young people that degenerate; they are not spoiled till those of mature age are already sunk into corruption.”  - Montesquieu

It is often the case that it is the older generation that ruins things for the young. This is not always the case, however. There are plenty of examples of young people who rise to great heights and make a positive impact on society. Sometimes it is those who are considered to be "old" who do more harm than good. In this article, we will be discussing five cases in which young people were actually responsible for saving society from itself.

“Corrupt politicians make the other ten percent look bad.”  - Henry Kissinger

They take advantage of their positions to line their pockets and those of their friends. This inequality is only made worse by the fact that politicians are not held accountable for their actions. Instead, voters are forced to turn to special interest groups in order to hold them accountable. These groups, who often have a financial stake in the outcome, can be very powerful and corrupt.

“There are still those of us who work to overcome corruption and believe it to be possible.”  - Padmé Amidala

The fight against corruption remains a top priority for many individuals, organizations, and governments around the world. Despite its prevalence, many believe that it can and should be defeated. This belief has led to numerous initiatives and programs dedicated to combating corruption. These efforts have had some success, but they are still not enough. Many people remain committed to this cause, and there are still those of us who work to overcome it.

“A mind funded by logic can not be corrupted.”  - Axel Voigtländer

To be able to think logically and make sound decisions, one must have a clear mind. However, if someone's mind is not funded by logic, they can be easily swayed by other factors. This is why it is important for people to learn how to think for themselves and not rely on others for their opinions.

“Governance is corrupted by politicians aspiring to become celebrities and celebrities assuming credence in governing.”  - H. Melvin James

In this climate, it becomes difficult to ascertain who is really in charge. The public can no longer rely on the government to act in their best interests, as they are instead frequently swayed by the whims of those seeking notoriety or fortune. This phenomenon has created a system that is neither effective nor efficient, and it needs to be addressed before it destroys even more fundamental aspects of our society.

“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”  - Friedrich Nietzsche

The saying goes,  “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.”  And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. It is for this reason that looking into the darkness of the soul is something to be avoided at all costs. However, some people feel that enlightenment and understanding come from looking deep within oneself. This can be a risky undertaking, but it can also be rewarding.

“Let every attempt of corrupting you be an unwelcome opportunity, to be honest. Don’t waste it. – Corruption as a Challenge.”  - Lamine Pearlheart

The challenge of living ethically in a corrupt world can be discouraging. However, it is important to remember that corruption as a challenge is an opportunity. It is an opportunity, to be honest, to do what is right, and to stand up for what is right. We must not waste this opportunity.

“Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot long exist.”  - Edmund Burke

Liberty can only exist in a society that is generally corrupt. This is why it is so important for societies to have strong leaders who can keep the people in line. Unfortunately, in many societies, these leaders are corrupt and can't be trusted. This makes it difficult for liberty to survive.

“You don’t necessarily need atomic bombs to destroy a nation. Politicians who value their pockets than the life of citizens always do that every day.”  - Israelmore Ayivor

Politicians always value their pockets more than the lives of citizens, but that doesn't mean they need atomic bombs to destroy a nation. All they need are corrupt officials and greedy businessmen. These people will do anything to make money, even if it means sacrificing the safety of millions of people. This is why it's so important to have honest politicians in charge, who are dedicated to the well-being of their constituents.

“Power attracts the corruptible. Suspect any who seek it.”  - Frank Herbert

Power attracts the corruptible. Suspect any who seek it, because they are likely to become corrupted. This is especially true for those who are in positions of authority. They may use their power to manipulate and control others, which can ultimately lead to their own downfall.

“Pick a leader who is strong and confident, yet humble. Intelligent, but not sly. A leader who encourages diversity, not racism. One who understands the needs of the farmer, the teacher, the welder, the doctor, and the environmentalist - not only the banker, the oil tycoon, the weapons developer, or the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyist.”  - Suzy Kassem

A leader is not born, they are made. Leaders are people who have learned how to inspire others and motivate them to achieve common goals. They must be strong and confident, yet humble. They need to be intelligent, but not sly. Leaders should encourage diversity, not racism. They must also understand the needs of the farmer, the teacher, the welder, and the doctor.

“If corruption had already taken root, then good seeds must be preserved.”  - Toba Beta

In countries where corruption has taken root, it is important to preserve good seeds. Corruption can corrupt the minds of people, making them less likely to work for the common good. It can also lead to a decline in economic growth and development. However, if corruption has already taken root, there is still hope that good seeds can be preserved. This is because corruption often starts with small amounts of bribery.

“All intellectual tendencies are corrupted when they consort with power.”  - Clive James

Many intellectuals have a tendency to become corrupted when they consort with power. This is because they are often given the opportunity to wield influence and make decisions that affect large numbers of people. This can be dangerous because it can lead to the corruption of their ideals and beliefs. This is why it is important for intellectuals to stay independent from power, so that they can maintain their integrity and remain an effective advocate for their beliefs.

“When corruption is the priority, honesty becomes evil.”  - Kangoma Kindembo

Corruption is endemic across many sectors of society, and it is often considered to be a necessary evil. However, when corruption is the priority, honesty becomes evil. This is because dishonesty allows corrupt officials to get away with their crimes, while honest individuals can be persecuted and even killed for speaking out against corruption. In some cases, whistleblowers are even targeted by their own governments in an attempt to silence them.

“Power-lust is a weed that grows only in the vacant lots of an abandoned mind.”  - Ayn Rand

Power-lust is a weed that grows only in the vacant lots of an abandoned mind. It thrives on the absence of control, and it feeds off of our insecurities. It's a weed that will take over if left unchecked, and it can lead to some incredibly destructive decisions. If you're struggling with power lust, there are some things you can do to get rid of it.

“He did not care for the lying at first. He hated it. Then later he had come to like it. It was part of being an insider but it was a very corrupting business.”  - Ernest Hemingway

The more he lied, the more he became desensitized to the fact that what he said could never be verified. Lying became second nature to him and soon he found himself addicted to it.

“A corrupt leader is leading you only because there are more corrupted people to vote for him.”  - Wangnao

In today's world, there are many corrupt leaders who wield power because of the fact that there are more people who are willing to vote for them. This can be seen in countries all over the world, and it is a problem that needs to be addressed. Leaders who are corrupt cannot represent the best interests of their citizens, and they should not be given power.

“Corruption is paid by the poor.”  - Pope Francis

Corruption is a significant problem in many developing countries. It affects the poorest people the most, because they often have to pay bribes to get basic services such as healthcare or education. Corruption hurts the economy because it wastes money and drives businesses away. There are many ways to fight corruption, but it will take a concerted effort on the part of everyone involved.

“Here is a man whose life and actions the world has already condemned – yet whose enormous fortune… has already brought him acquittal!”  - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Marcus Tullius Cicero was a man of great intellect and eloquence who played a pivotal role in the development of Roman law. However, his life and actions have already condemned him by the world. Despite this, Cicero's immense wealth has already allowed him to be acquitted of any charges levied against him. What makes this even more amazing is that Cicero was born into a poverty-ridden family.

“Look at the orators in our republics; as long as they are poor, both state and people can only praise their uprightness; but once they are fattened on the public funds, they conceive a hatred for justice, plan intrigues against the people and attack the democracy.”  - Aristophanes

It is often said that the people are the most important element in a democracy. This is particularly true when it comes to the government of a republic, where the people are supposed to be able to hold their elected officials accountable. However, this is not always the case, as long as the orators are poor. This is because, as long as they are poor, both the state and people can only praise their uprightness.

“A just law is crafted with thoughtful communication and factual debate, a corrupt one is forged to limit such things.”  - C.A.A. Savastano

When it comes to crafting laws, lawmakers must carefully consider the potential consequences of their decisions. A just law is crafted with thoughtful communication and factual debate, while a corrupt one is forged to limit such things. Unfortunately, many laws are passed without careful deliberation, often due to political expediency. This can lead to injustice and inequality, as well as undermine the trust of citizens in their government.

“Wherever there is power, greed, and money, there is corruption.”  - Ken Poirot

In any society, there is always corruption. Whether it be in a small town or a large metropolitan area, there is always someone looking to make a buck at the expense of others. This is especially true in societies that have a lot of power and wealth. In these situations, anyone with enough money and influence can get away with doing whatever they want, regardless of the consequences.

“And the so-called ‘political process’ is a fraud: Our elected officials, like our bureaucratic functionaries, like even our judges, are largely the indentured servants of the commercial interests.”  - Edward Abbey

They are beholden to powerful interests and unable or unwilling to act in the best interests of their constituents. The only way to change this is to overthrow the government and replace it with a system in which the people are sovereign.

“Without strong watchdog institutions, impunity becomes the very foundation upon which systems of corruption are built. And if impunity is not demolished, all efforts to bring an end to corruption are in vain.”  - Rigoberta Menchú

Corruption is often seen as a global problem, but it has a deeply rooted history in many countries. Without strong watchdog institutions, impunity becomes the very foundation upon which systems of corruption are built. And if impunity is not demolished, all efforts to bring an end to corruption are doomed to fail. Corruption can have devastating consequences for individuals and societies, and it needs to be tackled head-on if it is to be eradicated.

“The terrorist in my life is the corrupt government.”  - Steven Magee

The quote is a statement that has a lot of meaning behind it and is something that people can relate to. It speaks to the fact that government can be a big source of disruption and chaos in people's lives. This quote is often used to express dissatisfaction with the way things are going in society and it is often cited as an example of political unrest.

“The duty of youth is to challenge corruption.”  - Kurt Cobain

Youth should challenge corruption and strive to make their communities and countries a better place. Corruption is a problem that affects all societies, but it is especially harmful in developing countries. It can interfere with the economic development of a country, lead to corruption of government officials, and cause social unrest. Youth can combat corruption by being vocal about their concerns and by working to create change in their community.

“Merely by living, man becomes degraded and loses in purity what he gains in power. However clear a spring may be, when it becomes a river it cannot help being polluted by mud and slime.”  - Maurice Druon

In the same way, man can only gain something from sin if he uses it to repent and change his ways. Unfortunately, most people use their sinful lives to gain power over others instead of using their power to help others.

“It is not power that corrupts, but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it, and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it.”  - Aung San Suu Kyi

Power does not corrupt; fear does. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it, and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it. This is demonstrated by the way in which dictators and tyrants use their power to control and manipulate their subjects. The fear of being subjugated leads to a desire for domination, which in turn breeds cruelty and brutality. In extreme cases, this can lead to genocide or world war.

“People’s indifference is the best breeding ground for corruption to grow.”  - Delia Ferreira

People's indifference is the best breeding ground for corruption to grow. Corruption is an inherent part of any society, but it can also be a huge problem when it starts to take over. When people don't care about what's going on in their government, it's easier for corrupt officials to get away with doing whatever they want. This is why education is so important; by teaching people about the dangers of corruption, they can start to make a difference.

“Only the man who wishes to be corrupted will fall into evil ways.”  - Tamora Pierce

Many people believe that if you wish to be corrupted, you will eventually fall into evil ways. Certainly this is true in the world of crime and corruption. However, there are also individuals who wish to be corrupted and want to learn about the dark side of life. These individuals may find themselves in dangerous situations, but they are also likely to be successful in their endeavors.

“The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the state.”  - Tacitus

 That is a truth that can be seen in every country in the world. Every government needs to have laws in order to function, but too many laws make it difficult for people to obey them. This creates a situation where people are forced to choose between obeying the law and protecting their own interests.

“All the things of the wild have their proper uses. Only misuse makes them evil.”  - Ellis Peters

The misuse of natural resources can have devastating consequences, but there are many ways to use them sustainably. For example, you can use plants to clean water and air, create medicines, or build shelter. By using the right tools and understanding how to use them, we can preserve nature and its resources for future generations.

“To oppose corruption in government is the highest obligation of patriotism.”  - G. Edward Griffin

There is no question that corruption in government is a major problem across the globe. It harms not only the average citizen, but also the economy as a whole. There are many ways to combat this issue, and one of the most important is patriotism. Those who oppose corruption in government should have the highest obligation to do so, because it is not just a personal issue – it is also an economic one.

“Power in the hands of the reformer is no less potentially corrupting than in the hands of the oppressor.”  - Derrick Bell

In the hands of the oppressor, power is a tool used to manipulate and control those under their rule. In the hands of the reformer, power is also a tool that can be used to improve the lives of those under their rule. However, because power is inherently corrupting, the reformer's power is no less potentially corrupting than that of the oppressor.

“Corruption ultimately guilts the corrupt, and it hardens the innocent who suffer as a result of it. It isn’t the young who corrupt the old, rather it’s the inverse. The aim of the old should be to ensure that the young grow up incorruptible.”  - Justin K. McFarlane Beau

The aim of the old should be to enliven their successors so that they might not have to experience the same thing that they went through themselves. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Corruption can lead to generations of suffering and injustice.

“Procrastination is also a subtle act of corruption-it corrupts valuable time.”  - Dr. Amit Abraham

Procrastination is a problem that many people struggle with. It can be difficult to get started on tasks, and it's easy to put things off. Procrastination can be a subtle act of corruption corrupts valuable time. It can rob you of opportunities, energy, and motivation. If you're struggling with procrastination, there are ways to overcome it. You can start by taking a step back and assessing the situation.

“To curb corruption, one must be courageous to confront and complain against the corrupt.”  - Amit Kalantri

In order to curb corruption and make the government more accountable, it is necessary to be courageous enough to confront and complain against the corrupt. This is especially important in countries with a history of impunity for corrupt officials. Whistleblowers and journalists who expose corruption are often persecuted by the government or threatened with violence, but they are essential in fighting against graft.

“The corruption of the best things gives rise to the worst.”  - David Hume

The corruption of the best things gives rise to the worst. This is evident in the world today, where people are constantly fighting for control over scarce resources. In order to get what they want, corrupt leaders and officials will do anything, including stealing from their own people. This has led to widespread poverty and inequality, which in turn has created a breeding ground for terrorism and other forms of violence.

“Corruption is a cancer, a cancer that eats away at a citizen’s faith in democracy, diminishes the instinct for innovation and creativity.”  - Joe Biden

Corruption is a cancer, a cancer that eats away at a citizen's faith in democracy, and diminishes the instinct for innovation and creativity. It also undermines the foundation of any society - trust. Corruption erodes social cohesion and weakens critical institutions. It can even lead to violence and unrest. In short, corruption is a serious problem that needs to be addressed urgently.

“If absolute power corrupts absolutely, where does that leave God?”  - George Deacon

It has been said that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And if that's the case, where does that leave God? It may be tempting to think of a deity as just another human with all the same vulnerabilities. But if we're honest with ourselves, we know that's not really how it is. We can't imagine what it would be like to have unlimited power, and so we can't really understand what it's like for a deity to possess that kind of authority.

“It is true that nobody is above the law, but power can make somebody invisible.”  - Toba Beta

 This quote is often used to emphasize the importance of following the law and ensuring that everyone is held accountable for their actions. However, in some cases, power can make somebody invisible.

“When two brothers are busy fighting, an evil man can easily attack and rob their poor mother. Mankind should always stay united, standing shoulder to shoulder so evil can never cheat and divide them.”  - Suzy Kassem

 When brothers fight, it is easy for an intruder to take advantage of the situation and rob or hurt the mother. We need to be watchful of our own and support one another in order to keep ourselves safe.

“I will not let anyone walk through my mind with their dirty feet.”  - Mahatma Gandhi

 This quote is often used to illustrate how someone feels about being invaded mentally or emotionally. The sentiment is that thoughts and emotions are something to be respected and should not be treated inappropriately.

“It is the duty of youths to war against indiscipline and corruption because they are the leaders of tomorrow.”  - Ifeanyi Enoch Onuoha

The youth have a responsibility to create a better tomorrow for their families and society as a whole. They must rise up against those who would destroy their communities and corrupt their leaders.

“As long as politics is the shadow of big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance.”  - John Dewey

If you look closely at the world around us, it's easy to see how politics and big business have become intertwined. The same people who run big businesses also often hold positions of power in government. As long as politics is the shadow of big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance of how these industries operate. This reality has led to widespread corruption, and it will continue to do so unless we start to take a different approach.

“The hand that pockets the corrupt coin places it in the collection plate seeking absolution.”  - Stewart Stafford

The hand that pockets the corrupt coin places it in the collection plate seeking absolution. The act of donation feels good, but the individual knows that their hand is stained with corruption. The justification they offer themselves is that they are simply doing what is best for their community. This line of thinking ultimately serves to legitimize corruption and keep it in place.

Other Quotes

Courage Quotes Cousin Quotes Coward Quotes Cowboy Quotes

10 quotes about corruption and transparency (Vol 2)

After the success of our first edition , we’ve gathered more inspirational quotes about corruption and transparency for you. we hope you find them as inspiring and empowering as we do.

Transparency Int’l

Voices for Transparency

• “There can be no faith in government if our highest offices are excused from scrutiny — they should be setting the example of transparency.” — Edward Snowden.

When did he say it? In a Q&A organised by The Guardian between the NSA whistleblower and the readers of the newspaper.

2. “Anyone who wants to tackle corruption must be willing to go all the way. There are no shortcuts. ” — Oby Ezekwesili.

When did she say it? In a roundtable on anti-corruption with Transparency International Nigeria, CISLAC, in Abuja (2018).

3. “ The evil of corruption reaches into every corner of the world. It lies at the heart of the most urgent problems we face — from economic uncertainty, to endemic poverty, to the ever-present threat of radicalisation and extremism. ” — David Cameron.

When did he say it? At the Anti-Corruption Summit in London back in 2016.

4. “ The truth will always be our shield against corruption. ” — Oprah Winfrey.

When did she say it? Those were Oprah’s powerful words of wisdom for the 2018 graduating ceremony at the University of Southern California’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. You can watch the full speech here .

5. “If corruption is a disease, transparency is a central part of its treatment.” — Kofi Annan.

When did he say it? In a video message for Transparency International’s 20th Anniversary in 2013.

6. “A lack of transparency results in distrust and a deep sense of insecurity.” — Dalai Lama

When did he say it? In an interview with The Telegraph back in 2012.

7. “Radical Transparency. There is no going backwards. We must ensure that greater transparency will drive the prevention and uncovering of corruption in the years ahead.” — Jim Yong Kim, President of the World Bank.

When did he say it? In the opening r emarks at the Anti-Corruption Summit 2016 in London.

8. “Fighting corruption is not an end in itself. But there is a fight for social justice, for peace and for security.” — Huguette Labelle, chair of the International Anti-Corruption Conference council and former chair of Transparency International.

When did she say it? At the closing ceremony of the 18th International Anti-Corruption Conference in Copenhagen.

9. “The corruption of the best things gives rise to the worst.” — David Hume.

When did he say it? This idea appears in his book The Natural History of Religion .

10. “Corruption in the form of bribery and misuse of public funds is a major obstacle to democracy and economic development in many of the world’s poor countries.” — Ulla Tørnæs, Denmark’s Minister for Development Cooperation.

When did she say it? These words were part of the video message that the minister used to announce in Panama that the 18th IACC would take place in Copenhagen, Denmark.

We hope these quotes also inspired you. Is there another quote about corruption or transparency we have missed? Share it with us here or in a tweet! You can find us as @anticorruption .

Written by Transparency Int’l

Transparency International is the global coalition fighting against corruption. Follow us @anticorruption

More from Transparency Int’l and Voices for Transparency

10 quotes about corruption and transparency to inspire you

From jennifer lawrence to pope francis, many have expressed their ideas about corruption and its devastating effects. here are some notable….

Why do DRC citizens report such high levels of corruption?

Picture a sinking ship in which a large group of people is fighting for a few, increasingly torn life jackets. something similar is….

Corruption Watch profile

The terrible consequences of police corruption in South Africa

By sabeehah motala.

The 5 best Netflix series about corruption (that aren’t House of Cards)

Everyone knows house of cards as the netflix show about corruption, but over the last few years, the popular streaming service has produced…, recommended from medium.

Hazel Paradise

How I Create Passive Income With No Money

Many ways to start a passive income today.

Sufyan Maan, M.Eng

ILLUMINATION

What Happens When You Start Reading Every Day

Think before you speak. read before you think. — fran lebowitz.

Staff Picks

Stories to Help You Level-Up at Work

Self-Improvement 101

Productivity 101

You Become What You Focus On

The following quote is 2000 years old, but it seems to be relevant to today’s world:.

Project Transcend

7 Powerful Dark Psychology Books You Need To Know About

Unmasking the mind: 5 essential dark psychology books for understanding human behavior.

Karolina Kozmana

Common side effects of not drinking

By rejecting alcohol, you reject something very human, an extra limb that we have collectively grown to deal with reality and with each….

What I Learned From Thinking Fast And Slow

Quite possibly the single most important book ever written for data scientists, decision makers, and everyone else..

Text to speech

How to Stop Corruption Essay: Guide & Topics [+4 Samples]

Corruption is an abuse of power that was entrusted to a person or group of people for personal gain. It can appear in various settings and affect different social classes, leading to unemployment and other economic issues. This is why writing an essay on corruption can become a challenge.

Our specialists will write a custom essay specially for you!

One “how to stop corruption” essay will require plenty of time and effort, as the topic is too broad. That’s why our experts have prepared this guide. It can help you with research and make the overall writing process easier. Besides, you will find free essays on corruption with outlines.

• ✍️ How to Write an Essay
• 💰 Essay Examples
• 🤑 How to Stop Corruption Essay
• 💲 Topics for Essay

✍️ How to Write an Essay on Corruption

Before writing on the issue, you have to understand a few things. First , corruption can take different forms, such as:

• Bribery – receiving money or other valuable items in exchange for using power or influence in an illegal way.
• Graft – using power or authority for personal goals.
• Extortion – threats or violence for the person’s advantage.
• Kickback – paying commission to a bribe-taker for some service.
• Cronyism – assigning unqualified friends or relatives to job positions.
• Embezzlement – stealing the government’s money.

Second , you should carefully think about the effects of corruption on the country. It seriously undermines democracy and the good name of political institutions. Its economic, political, and social impact is hard to estimate.

Let’s focus on writing about corruption. What are the features of your future paper? What elements should you include in your writing?

Just in 1 hour! We will write you a plagiarism-free paper in hardly more than 1 hour

Below, we will show you the general essay on corruption sample and explain each part’s importance:

You already chose the paper topic. What’s next? Create an outline for your future writing. You’re better to compose a plan for your paper so that it won’t suffer from logic errors and discrepancies. Besides, you may be required to add your outline to your paper and compose a corruption essay with headings.

At this step, you sketch out the skeleton:

• what to write in the introduction;
• what points to discuss in the body section;
• what to put into the conclusion.

Take the notes during your research to use them later. They will help you to put your arguments in a logical order and show what points you can use in the essay.

For a long-form essay, we suggest you divide it into parts. Title each one and use headings to facilitate the reading process.

Receive a plagiarism-free paper tailored to your instructions. Cut 15% off your first order!

🔴 Introduction

The next step is to develop a corruption essay’s introduction. Here, you should give your readers a preview of what’s coming and state your position.

• Start with a catchy hook.
• Give a brief description of the problem context.
• Provide a thesis statement.

You can always update and change it when finishing the paper.

🔴 Body Paragraphs

In the body section, you will provide the central points and supporting evidence. When discussing the effects of this problem in your corruption essay, do not forget to include statistics and other significant data.

Every paragraph should include a topic sentence, explanation, and supporting evidence. To make them fit together, use analysis and critical thinking.

Get an originally-written paper according to your instructions!

Use interesting facts and compelling arguments to earn your audience’s attention. It may drift while reading an essay about corruption, so don’t let it happen.

🔴 Quotations

Quotes are the essential elements of any paper. They support your claims and add credibility to your writing. Such items are exceptionally crucial for an essay on corruption as the issue can be controversial, so you may want to back up your arguments.

• You may incorporate direct quotes in your text. In this case, remember to use quotation marks and mark the page number for yourself. Don’t exceed the 30 words limit. Add the information about the source in the reference list.
• You may decide to use a whole paragraph from your source as supporting evidence. Then, quote indirectly—paraphrase, summarize, or synthesize the argument of interest. You still have to add relevant information to your reference list, though.

Check your professor’s guidelines regarding the preferred citation style.

🔴 Conclusion

In your corruption essay conclusion, you should restate the thesis and summarize your findings. You can also provide recommendations for future research on the topic. Keep it clear and short—it can be one paragraph long.

Don’t forget your references!

Include a list of all sources you used to write this paper. Read the citation guideline of your institution to do it correctly. By the way, some citation tools allow creating a reference list in pdf or Word formats.

💰 Corruption Essay Examples

If you strive to write a good how to stop a corruption essay, you should check a few relevant examples. They will show you the power of a proper outline and headings. Besides, you’ll see how to formulate your arguments and cite sources.

✔️ Essay on Corruption: 250 Words

If you were assigned a short paper of 250 words and have no idea where to start, you can check the example written by our academic experts. As you can see below, it is written in easy words. You can use simple English to explain to your readers the “black money” phenomenon.

Another point you should keep in mind when checking our short essay on corruption is that the structure remains the same. Despite the low word count, it has an introductory paragraph with a thesis statement, body section, and a conclusion.

Now, take a look at our corruption essay sample and inspire!

✔️ Essay on Corruption: 500 Words

Cause and effect essay is among the most common paper types for students. In case you’re composing this kind of paper, you should research the reasons for corruption. You can investigate factors that led to this phenomenon in a particular country.

Use the data from the official sources, for example, Transparency International . There is plenty of evidence for your thesis statement on corruption and points you will include in the body section. Also, you can use headlines to separate one cause from another. Doing so will help your readers to browse through the text easily.

Check our essay on corruption below to see how our experts utilize headlines.

🤑 How to Stop Corruption: Essay Prompts

Corruption is a complex issue that undermines the foundations of justice, fairness, and equality. If you want to address this problem, you can write a “How to Stop Corruption” essay using any of the following topic ideas.

The writing prompts below will provide valuable insights into this destructive phenomenon. Use them to analyze the root causes critically and propose effective solutions.

How to Prevent Corruption Essay Prompt

In this essay, you can discuss various strategies and measures to tackle corruption in society. Explore the impact of corruption on social, political, and economic systems and review possible solutions. Your paper can also highlight the importance of ethical leadership and transparent governance in curbing corruption.

Here are some more ideas to include:

• The role of education and public awareness in preventing corruption. In this essay, you can explain the importance of teaching ethical values and raising awareness about the adverse effects of corruption. It would be great to illustrate your essay with examples of successful anti-corruption campaigns and programs.
• How to implement strong anti-corruption laws and regulations. Your essay could discuss the steps governments should take in this regard, such as creating comprehensive legislation and independent anti-corruption agencies. Also, clarify how international cooperation can help combat corruption.
• Ways of promoting transparency in government and business operations. Do you agree that open data policies, whistleblower protection laws, independent oversight agencies, and transparent financial reporting are effective methods of ensuring transparency? What other strategies can you propose? Answer the questions in your essay.

How to Stop Corruption as a Student Essay Prompt

An essay on how to stop corruption as a student can focus on the role of young people in preventing corruption in their communities and society at large. Describe what students can do to raise awareness, promote ethical behavior, and advocate for transparency and accountability. The essay can also explore how instilling values of integrity and honesty among young people can help combat corruption.

Here’s what else you can talk about:

• How to encourage ethical behavior and integrity among students. Explain why it’s essential for teachers to be models of ethical behavior and create a culture of honesty and accountability in schools. Besides, discuss the role of parents and community members in reinforcing students’ moral values.
• Importance of participating in anti-corruption initiatives and campaigns from a young age. Your paper could study how participation in anti-corruption initiatives fosters young people’s sense of civic responsibility. Can youth engagement promote transparency and accountability?
• Ways of promoting accountability within educational institutions. What methods of fostering accountability are the most effective? Your essay might evaluate the efficacy of promoting direct communication, establishing a clear code of conduct, creating effective oversight mechanisms, holding all members of the educational process responsible for their actions, and other methods.

How to Stop Corruption in India Essay Prompt

In this essay, you can discuss the pervasive nature of corruption in various sectors of Indian society and its detrimental effects on the country’s development. Explore strategies and measures that can be implemented to address and prevent corruption, as well as the role of government, civil society, and citizens in combating this issue.

Your essay may also include the following:

• Analysis of the causes and consequences of corruption in India. You may discuss the bureaucratic red tape, weak enforcement mechanisms, and other causes. How do they affect the country’s development?
• Examination of the effectiveness of existing anti-corruption laws and measures. What are the existing anti-corruption laws and measures in India? Are they effective? What are their strengths and weaknesses?
• Discussion of potential solutions and reforms to curb corruption. Propose practical solutions and reforms that can potentially stop corruption. Also, explain the importance of political will and international cooperation to implement reforms effectively.

Government Corruption Essay Prompt

A government corruption essay can discuss the prevalence of corruption within government institutions and its impact on the state’s functioning. You can explore various forms of corruption, such as bribery, embezzlement, and nepotism. Additionally, discuss their effects on public services, economic development, and social justice.

Here are some more ideas you can cover in your essay:

• The causes and manifestations of government corruption. Analyze political patronage, weak accountability systems, and other factors that stimulate corruption. Additionally, include real-life examples that showcase the manifestations of government corruption in your essay.
• The impact of corruption on public trust and governance. Corruption undermines people’s trust and increases social inequalities. In your paper, we suggest evaluating its long-term impact on countries’ development and social cohesion.
• Strategies and reforms to combat government corruption. Here, you can present and examine the best strategies and reforms to fight corruption in government. Also, consider the role of international organizations and media in advocating for anti-corruption initiatives.

How to Stop Police Corruption Essay Prompt

In this essay, you can explore strategies and reforms to address corruption within law enforcement agencies. Start by investigating the root causes of police corruption and its impact on public safety and trust. Then, propose effective measures to combat it.

Here’s what else you can discuss in your essay:

• The factors contributing to police corruption, such as lack of accountability and oversight. Your paper could research various factors that cause police corruption. Is it possible to mitigate their effect?
• The consequences of police corruption for community relations and public safety. Police corruption has a disastrous effect on public safety and community trust. Your essay can use real-life examples to show how corruption practices in law enforcement undermine their legitimacy and fuel social unrest.
• Potential solutions, such as improved training, transparency, and accountability measures. Can these measures solve the police corruption issue? What other strategies can be implemented to combat the problem? Consider these questions in your essay.

💲 40 Best Topics for Corruption Essay

Another key to a successful essay on corruption is choosing an intriguing topic. There are plenty of ideas to use in your paper. And here are some topic suggestions for your writing:

• What is corruption? An essay should tell the readers about the essentials of this phenomenon. Elaborate on the factors that impact its growth or reduce.
• How to fight corruption ? Your essay can provide ideas on how to reduce the effects of this problem. If you write an argumentative paper, state your arguments, and give supporting evidence. For example, you can research the countries with the lowest corruption index and how they fight with it.
• I say “no” to corruption . This can be an excellent topic for your narrative essay. Describe a situation from your life when you’re faced with this type of wrongdoing.
• Corruption in our country. An essay can be dedicated, for example, to corruption in India or Pakistan. Learn more about its causes and how different countries fight with it.
• Graft and corruption. We already mentioned the definition of graft. Explore various examples of grafts, e.g., using the personal influence of politicians to pressure public service journalists . Provide your vision of the causes of corruption. The essay should include strong evidence.
• Corruption in society. Investigate how the tolerance to “black money” crimes impact economics in developing countries .
• How can we stop corruption ? In your essay, provide suggestions on how society can prevent this problem. What efficient ways can you propose?
• The reasons that lead to the corruption of the police . Assess how bribery impacts the crime rate. You can use a case of Al Capone as supporting evidence.
• Literature and corruption. Choose a literary masterpiece and analyze how the author addresses the theme of crime. You can check a sample paper on Pushkin’s “ The Queen of Spades ”
• How does power affect politicians ? In your essay on corruption and its causes, provide your observations on ideas about why people who hold power allow the grafts.
• Systemic corruption in China . China has one of the strictest laws on this issue. However, crime still exists. Research this topic and provide your observations on the reasons.
• The success of Asian Tigers . Explore how the four countries reduced corruption crime rates. What is the secret of their success? What can we learn from them?
• Lee Kuan Yew and his fight against corruption. Research how Singapore’s legislation influenced the elimination of this crime.
• Corruption in education. Examine the types in higher education institutions. Why does corruption occur?
• Gifts and bribes . You may choose to analyze the ethical side of gifts in business. Can it be a bribe? In what cases?
• Cronyism and nepotism in business . Examine these forms of corruption as a part of Chinese culture.
• Kickbacks and bribery. How do these two terms are related, and what are the ways to prevent them?
• Corporate fraud. Examine the bribery, payoffs, and kickbacks as a phenomenon in the business world. Point out the similarities and differences.
• Anti-bribery compliance in corporations. Explore how transnational companies fight with the misuse of funds by contractors from developing countries.
• The ethical side of payoffs. How can payoffs harm someone’s reputation? Provide your point of view of why this type of corporate fraud is unethical.
• The reasons for corruption of public officials .
• Role of auditors in the fight against fraud and corruption.
• The outcomes of corruption in public administration .
• How to eliminate corruption in the field of criminal justice .
• Is there a connection between corruption and drug abuse ?
• The harm corruption does to the economic development of countries .
• The role of anti-bribery laws in fighting financial crimes.
• Populist party brawl against corruption and graft.
• An example of incorrigible corruption in business: Enron scandal .
• The effective ways to prevent corruption .
• The catastrophic consequences of corruption in healthcare .
• How regular auditing can prevent embezzlement and financial manipulation.
• Correlation between poverty and corruption .
• Unethical behavior and corruption in football business.
• Corruption in oil business: British Petroleum case.
• Are corruption and bribery socially acceptable in Central Asian states?
• What measures should a company take to prevent bribery among its employees?
• Ways to eliminate and prevent cases of police corruption .
• Gift-giving traditions and corruption in the world’s culture.
• Breaking business obligations : embezzlement and fraud.

These invaluable tips will help you to get through any kind of essay. You are welcome to use these ideas and writing tips whenever you need to write this type of academic paper. Share the guide with those who may need it for their essay on corruption.

This might be interesting for you:

• Canadian Identity Essay: Essay Topics and Writing Guide
• Nationalism Essay: An Ultimate Guide and Topics
• Human Trafficking Essay for College: Topics and Examples
• Murder Essay: Top 3 Killing Ideas to Complete your Essay

🔗 References

• Public Corruption: FBI, U.S. Department of Justice
• Anti-Corruption and Transparency: Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
• United Nations Convention against Corruption: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
• Corruption Essay: Cram
• How to Construct an Essay: Josh May
• Essay Writing: University College Birmingham
• Structuring the Essay: Research & Learning Online
• Insights from U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre: Medium
• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to LinkedIn
• Share to email

Do you have to write an essay for the first time? Or maybe you’ve only written essays with less than 1000 words? Someone might think that writing a 1000-word essay is a rather complicated and time-consuming assignment. Others have no idea how difficult thousand-word essays can be. Well, we have...

To write an engaging “If I Could Change the World” essay, you have to get a few crucial elements: The questions that define this paper type: What? How? Whom? When? Where? The essay structure that determines where each answer should be; Some tips that can make your writing unique and original. Let us...

Why do you want to be a pharmacist? An essay on this topic can be challenging, even when you know the answer. The most popular reasons to pursue this profession are the following:

How to write a film critique essay? To answer this question, you should clearly understand what a movie critique is. It can be easily confused with a movie review. Both paper types can become your school or college assignments. However, they are different. A movie review reveals a personal impression...

Are you getting ready to write your Language Proficiency Index Exam essay? Well, your mission is rather difficult, and you will have to work hard. One of the main secrets of successful LPI essays is perfect writing skills. So, if you practice writing, you have a chance to get the...

Dengue fever is a quite dangerous febrile disease that can even cause death. Nowadays, this disease can be found in the tropics and Africa. Brazil, Singapore, Taiwan, Indonesia, and India are also vulnerable to this disease.

For high school or college students, essays are unavoidable – worst of all, the essay types and essay writing topics assigned change throughout your academic career. As soon as you’ve mastered one of the many types of academic papers, you’re on to the next one. This article by Custom Writing...

Even though a personal essay seems like something you might need to write only for your college application, people who graduated a while ago are asked to write it. Therefore, if you are a student, you might even want to save this article for later!

If you wish a skill that would be helpful not just for middle school or high school, but also for college and university, it would be the skill of a five-paragraph essay. Despite its simple format, many students struggle with such assignments.

Reading books is pleasurable and entertaining; writing about those books isn’t. Reading books is pleasurable, easy, and entertaining; writing about those books isn’t. However, learning how to write a book report is something that is commonly required in university. Fortunately, it isn’t as difficult as you might think. You’ll only...

A descriptive essay is an academic paper that challenges a school or college student to describe something. It can be a person, a place, an object, a situation—anything an individual can depict in writing. The task is to show your abilities to communicate an experience in an essay format using...

An analysis / analytical essay is a standard assignment in college or university. You might be asked to conduct an in-depth analysis of a research paper, a report, a movie, a company, a book, or an event. In this article, you’ll find out how to write an analysis paper introduction,...

Thank you for these great tips now i can work with ease cause one does not always know what the marker will look out fr. So this is ever so helpfull keep up the great work

This article was indeed helpful a whole lot. Thanks very much I got all I needed and more.

I can’t thank this website enough. I got all and more that I needed. It was really helpful…. thanks

Really, it’s helpful.. Thanks

Really, it was so helpful, & good work 😍😍

Thanks and this was awesome

I love this thanks it is really helpful

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

The causes and effects of corruption, and how to combat corruption, are issues that have been very much on the national and international agendas of politicians and other policymakers in recent decades (Heidenheimer and Johnston 2002; Heywood 2018). Moreover, various historically influential philosophers, notably Plato ( The Republic ), Aristotle ( The Politics ), Machiavelli ( The Prince and The Discourses ), Hobbes ( The Leviathan ) and Montesquieu ( The Spirit of the Laws ), have concerned themselves with political corruption in particular, albeit in somewhat general terms (Sparling 2019; Blau 2009). For these philosophers corruption consisted in large part in rulers governing in the service of their own individual or collective—or other factional—self-interest, rather than for the common good and in accordance with the law or, at least, in accordance with legally enshrined moral principles. They also emphasized the importance of virtues, where it was understood that the appropriate virtues for rulers might differ somewhat from the appropriate virtues for citizens. Indeed, Machiavelli, in particular, famously or, perhaps, infamously argued in The Prince that the rulers might need to cultivate dispositions, such as ruthlessness, that are inconsistent with common morality. [ 1 ] And Plato doubted that the majority of people were even capable of possessing the requisite moral and intellectual virtues required to play an important role in political institutions; hence his rejection in The Republic of democracy in favor of rule by philosopher-kings. Moreover, these historically important political philosophers were concerned about the corruption of the citizenry: the corrosion of the civic virtues. This theme of a corrupt citizenry, as opposed to a corrupt leadership or institution, has been notably absent in contemporary philosophical discussion of the corruption of political institutions until quite recently. However, recently the corruption of political institutions and of the citizenry as a consequence of the proliferation of disinformation, propaganda, conspiracy theories and hate speech on social media, in particular (Woolley and Howard 2019), has become an important phenomenon which philosophers have begun to address (Lynch 2017; Cocking and van den Hoven 2018; Miller and Bossomaier 2023: Ch. 4). Social media bots are used inter alia to automatically generate disinformation (as well as information), propagate ideologies (as well as non-ideologically based opinions), and function as fake accounts to inflate the followings of other accounts and to gain followers. The upshot is that the moral right of freedom to communicate has frequently not been exercised responsibly; moral obligations to seek and communicate truths rather than falsehoods have not been discharged, resulting in large-scale social, political and, in some cases, physical harm. One key set of ethical issues here pertains to an important form of institutional corruption: corruption of the democratic process. For instance, revelations concerning the data firm Cambridge Analytica’s illegitimate use of the data of millions of Facebook users to influence elections in the U.S. and elsewhere highlighted the ethical issues arising from the use of machine learning techniques for political purposes by malevolent foreign actors. The problem here is compounded by home-grown corruption of democratic institutions by people who wilfully undermine electoral and other institutional processes in the service of their own political and personal goals. For instance, Donald Trump consistently claimed, and continues to claim, that the 2020 U.S. presidential election which he demonstrably lost involved massive voter fraud. The problem has also been graphically illustrated in the U.S. by the rise of home-grown extremist political groups fed via social media on a diet of disinformation, conspiracy theories, hate speech, and propaganda; a process which led to the violent attack in January 2021 on the Capitol building which houses the U.S. Congress.

In the modern period, in addition to the corruption of political institutions, the corruption of other kinds of institutions, notably market-based institutions, has been recognised. For example, the World Bank (1997) some time back came around to the view that the health of economic institutions and progress in economic development is closely linked to corruption reduction. In this connection there have been numerous anti-corruption initiatives in multiple jurisdictions, albeit this is sometimes presented as politically motivated. Moreover, the Global Financial Crisis and its aftermath have revealed financial corruption, including financial benchmark manipulation, and spurred regulators to consider various anti-corruption measures by way of response (Dobos, Pogge and Barry 2011). And in recent decades there have been ongoing efforts to analyze and devise means to combat corruption in in police organizations, in the professions, in the media, and even in universities and other research-focused institutions.

While contemporary philosophers, with some exceptions, have been slow to focus on corruption, the philosophical literature is increasing, especially in relation to political corruption (Thompson 1995; Dobel 2002; Warren 2006; Lessig 2011; Newhouse 2014; Philp and David-Barrett 2015; Miller 2017; Schmidtz 2018; Blau 2018; Philp 2018; Thompson 2018; Sparling 2019; Ceva & Ferretti 2021). For instance, until relatively recently the concept of corruption had not received much attention, and much of the conceptual work on corruption had consisted in little more than the presentation of brief definitions of corruption as a preliminary to extended accounts of the causes and effects of corruption and the ways to combat it. Moreover, most, but not all, of these definitions of corruption were unsatisfactory in fairly obvious ways. However, recently a number of more theoretically sophisticated definitions of corruption and related notions, such as bribery, have been provided by philosophers. Indeed, philosophers have also started to turn their minds to issues of anti-corruption, e.g., anti-corruption systems (often referred to as “integrity systems”), and in doing so theorizing the sources of corruption and the means to combat it.

1. Varieties of Corruption

2.1.1 personal corruption and institutional corruption, 2.1.2 institutional corrosion and structural corruption, 2.1.3 institutional actors and corruption, 2.2 causal theory of institutional corruption, 2.3.1 proceduralist theories of political corruption, 2.3.2 thompson: individual versus institutional corruption, 2.3.3 lessig’s dependence corruption, 2.3.4 ceva & ferretti: office accountability, 3. noble cause corruption, 4. integrity systems, 5. conclusion, other internet resources, related entries.

Consider one of the most popular of the standard longstanding definitions, namely, “Corruption is the abuse of power by a public official for private gain”. [ 2 ] No doubt the abuse of public offices for private gain is paradigmatic of corruption. But when a bettor bribes a boxer to “throw” a fight this is corruption for private gain, but it need not involve any public office holder; the roles of boxer and bettor are usually not public offices.

One response to this is to distinguish public corruption from private corruption, and to argue that the above definition is a definition only of public corruption. But if ordinary citizens lie when they give testimony in court, this is corruption; it is corruption of the criminal justice system. However, it does not involve abuse of a public office by a public official. And when police fabricate evidence out of a misplaced sense of justice, this is corruption of a public office, but not for private gain.

In the light of the failure of such analytical-style definitions it is tempting to try to sidestep the problem of providing a theoretical account of the concept of corruption by simply identifying corruption with specific legal and/or moral offences. However, attempts to identify corruption with specific legal/moral offences are unlikely to succeed. Perhaps the most plausible candidate is bribery; bribery is regarded by some as the quintessential form of corruption (Noonan 1984; Pritchard 1998; Green 2006). But what of nepotism (Bellow 2003)? Surely it is also a paradigmatic form of corruption, and one that is conceptually distinct from bribery. The person who accepts a bribe is understood as being required to provide a benefit to the briber, otherwise it is not a bribe; but the person who is the beneficiary of an act of nepotism is not necessarily understood as being required to return the favor.

In fact, corruption is exemplified by a very wide and diverse array of phenomena of which bribery is only one kind, and nepotism another. Paradigm cases of corruption include the following. The commissioner of taxation channels public monies into his personal bank account, thereby corrupting the public financial system. A political party secures a majority vote by arranging for ballot boxes to be stuffed with false voting papers, thereby corrupting the electoral process. A police officer fabricates evidence in order to secure convictions, thereby corrupting the judicial process. A number of doctors close ranks and refuse to testify against a colleague who they know has been negligent in relation to an unsuccessful surgical operation leading to loss of life; institutional accountability procedures are thereby undermined. A sports trainer provides the athletes he trains with banned substances in order to enhance their performance, thereby subverting the institutional rules laid down to ensure fair competition (Walsh and Giulianotti 2006). It is self-evident that none of these corrupt actions are instances of bribery.

Further, it is far from obvious that the way forward at this point is simply to add a few additional offences to the initial “list” consisting of the single offence of bribery. Candidates for being added to the list of offences would include nepotism, police fabricating evidence, cheating in sport by using drugs, fraudulent use of travel funds by politicians, and so on. However, any such list needs to be justified by recourse to some principle or principles. Ultimately, naming a set of offences that might be regarded as instances of corruption does not obviate the need for a theoretical, or quasi-theoretical, account of the concept of corruption.

As it happens, there is at least one further salient strategy for demarcating the boundaries of corrupt acts. Implicit in much of the literature on corruption is the view that corruption is essentially a legal offence, and essentially a legal offence in the economic sphere. Accordingly, one could seek to identify corruption with economic crimes, such as bribery, fraud, and insider trading.

But many acts of corruption are not unlawful. Bribery, a paradigm of corruption, is a case in point. Prior to 1977 it was not unlawful for U.S. companies to offer bribes to secure foreign contracts; indeed, elsewhere such bribery was not unlawful until much later. [ 3 ] So corruption is not necessarily unlawful. This is because corruption is not at bottom simply a matter of law; rather it is fundamentally a matter of morality.

Secondly, corruption is not necessarily economic in character. An academic who plagiarizes the work of others is not committing an economic crime or misdemeanor; and she might be committing plagiarism simply in order to increase her academic status. There might not be any financial benefit sought or gained.

We can conclude that many of the historically influential definitions of corruption, as well as attempts to circumscribe corruption by listing paradigmatic offences, fail. They fail in large part because the class of corrupt actions comprises an extremely diverse array of types of moral and legal offences undertaken in a wide variety of institutional contexts including, but by no means restricted to, political and economic institutions.

However, in recent times progress has been made. Philosophers, at least, have identified corruption as fundamentally a moral, as opposed to legal, phenomenon. Acts can be corrupt even though they are, and even ought to be, legal. Moreover, it is evident that not all acts of immorality are acts of corruption; corruption is only one species of immorality.

An important distinction in this regard is the distinction between human rights violations and corruption (see the entry on human rights ). Genocide is a profound moral wrong; but it is not corruption. This is not to say that there is not an important relationship between human rights violations and corruption; on the contrary, there is often a close and mutually reinforcing nexus between them (Pearson 2001; Pogge 2002 [2008]; Wenar 2016; Sharman 2017). Consider the endemic corruption and large-scale human rights abuse that have taken place in authoritarian regimes, such as that of Mobutu in Zaire, Suharto in Indonesia and Marcos in the Philippines (Sharman 2017). And there is increasing empirical evidence of an admittedly sometimes complex, but sometimes not so complex, causal connection between corruption and the infringement of both negative rights (such as the right not to be tortured, suffer arbitrary loss of one’s freedom, or have one’s property stolen) and positive rights, e.g., subsistence rights (such as the right to a sufficient supply of clean water to enable life and health); there is evidence, that is, of a causal relation between corruption and poverty. Consider corrupt authoritarian leaders in developing countries who sell the country’s natural resources cheaply and retain the profits for themselves and their families and supporters (Pogge 2002 [2008]: Chapter 6; Wenar 2016). As Wenar has forcefully argued (Wenar 2016), in the first place this is theft of the property (natural resources) of the people of the countries in question (e.g., Equatorial Guinea) by their own rulers (e.g., Obiang) and, therefore, western countries and others who import these resources are buying stolen goods; and, in the second place, this theft maintains these human rights-violating rulers in power and ensures that their populations continue to suffer in conditions of abject poverty, disease etc.

Thus far, examples of different types of corrupt action have been presented, and corrupt actions have been distinguished from some other types of immoral action. However, the class of corrupt actions has not been adequately demarcated within the more general class of immoral actions. To do so, a definition of corrupt actions is needed.

An initial distinction here is between single one-off actions of corruption and a pattern of corrupt actions. The despoiling of the moral character of a role occupant, or the undermining of institutional processes and purposes, would typically require a pattern of actions—and not merely a single one-off action. So a single free hamburger provided to a police officer on one occasion usually does not corrupt, and is not therefore an act of corruption. Nevertheless, a series of such gifts to a number of police officers might corrupt. They might corrupt, for example, if the hamburger joint in question ended up with (in effect) exclusive, round the clock police protection, and if the owner intended that this be the case.

Note here the pivotal role of habits (Langford & Tupper 1994). We have just seen that the corruption of persons and institutions typically requires a pattern of corrupt actions. More specifically, corrupt actions are typically habitual. Yet, as noted by Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics , one’s habits are in large part constitutive of one’s moral character; habits make the man (and the woman). The coward is someone who habitually takes flight in the face of danger; by contrast, the courageous person has a habit of standing his or her ground. Accordingly, morally bad habits —including corrupt actions—are extremely corrosive of moral character, and therefore of institutional roles and ultimately institutions. Naturally, so-called systemic corruption would typically involve not simply the habitual performance of a corrupt action by a single individual but the habitual performance of a corrupt action by many individuals in an institution or, conceivably, an entire society or polity. Moreover, this pattern of individuals engaged in the performance of habitual corrupt actions might have a self-sustaining structure that gives rise to a collective action problem, if the pattern is to be broken. Consider widespread bribery in relation to competitive tenders for government contracts. Bribes are paid by competing companies in order to try influence the outcome of the tender process. Any firm that chooses not to pay a bribe is not given serious consideration. Thus, not to engage in corruption is to seriously disadvantage one’s company. Even those who do not want to engage in bribery do so. This is a collective action problem (Olson 1965).

Notwithstanding the habitual nature of most corrupt actions there are some cases in which a single, one-off action would be sufficient to corrupt an instance of an institutional process. Consider a specific tender. Suppose that one bribe is offered and accepted, and the tendering process is thereby undermined. Suppose that this is the first and only time that the person offering the bribe and the person receiving the bribe are involved in bribery. Is this one-off bribe an instance of corruption? Surely it is, since it corrupted that particular instance of a tendering process.

Ontologically speaking, there are different kinds of entities that can be corrupted. These include human beings, words of a language, artefacts, such as computer discs, and so on. However, our concern in this entry is with the corruption of institutions since this is the main focus of the philosophical and, for that matter, the non-philosophical, literature. Of course, institutions are comprised in large part of institutional roles occupied by human beings. So our focus on institutional corruption brings with it a focus on the corruption of individual human beings. (I refer to the corruption of individual human beings as personal corruption.) However in the case of institutional corruption, the focus on the corruption of human beings (personal corruption) is on human beings qua institutional actors (and on those who interact with institutional role occupants qua institutional role occupants)(Miller 2017: 65).

The upshot of this is that there are three sets of distinctions in play here. Firstly, there is the distinction between institutional corruption and non-institutional corruption—the latter being the corruption of entities other than institutions, e.g., corruption of artefacts. Secondly, there is the distinction between personal and non-personal corruption—the former being the corruption of human beings as opposed to, for instance, institutional processes. Thirdly, with respect to personal corruption, there is the distinction between the corruption of persons qua institutional actors and non-institutional personal corruption. Non-institutional personal corruption is corruption of persons outside institutional settings. Personal corruption pertains to the moral character of persons, and consists in the despoiling of their moral character. If an action has a corrupting effect on a person’s character, it will typically be corrosive of one or more of a person’s virtues. These virtues might be virtues that attach to the person qua human being, e.g., the virtues of compassion and fairness in one’s dealings with other human beings. Corrosion of these virtues amounts to non-institutional personal corruption. Alternatively—or in some cases, additionally—these virtues might attach to persons qua occupants of specific institutional roles, e.g., impartiality in a judge or objectivity in a journalist. Corrosion of these virtues amounts to institutional personal corruption, i.e., corruption of a person qua institutional role occupant.

In order to provide an adequate account of institutional corruption we need a serviceable notion of an institution: the thing corrupted. For our purposes here it is assumed that an institution is an organization or structure of organizations that reproduces itself (e.g., by training and recruitment processes) and is comprised of a structure of institutional roles defined in terms of tasks (Harré 1979; Giddens 1984; Miller 2010). Accordingly, the class of institutions is quite diverse and includes political institutions, (e.g., legislatures), market-based institutions, (e.g., corporations), institutions of learning, (e.g., universities), security agencies, (e.g., police and military organizations), and so on. Importantly, as we noted above, the various different types of, and even motives for, institutional corruption vary greatly from one kind of institution to another.

Note that in theorizing institutional corruption the distinction between an entire society or polity, on the one hand, and its constituent institutions, on the other, needs to be kept in mind. A theory of democracy, for instance, might be a theory not only of democratic government in the narrow sense of the legislature and senior members of the executive, but also of the public administration as a whole, the judiciary, the security agencies (police and military), civil society and so on. Obviously, a theory of the corruption of democratic political institutions (in the narrow sense of the legislature and the senior members of the executive) might not be generalizable to other sorts of institution within a democracy, e.g., to security agencies or market-based institutions. Moreover, fundamental differences regarding the specific form that a democracy ought to take, e.g., between those of a republican persuasion (Pettit 1997; Sandel 2012) and libertarians (Nozick 1974; Friedman 1970), might morph into disputes about what counts as institutional corruption. For instance, on one view market-based institutions exist to serve the common good, while on another they exist only to serve the individual self-interest of the participants in them. Thus on the latter, but not the former, view market intervention by the government in the service of the common good might be regarded as a species of corruption. Further, a theory of the corruption of democracy, and certainly of the corruption of one species of democracy such as liberal democracy, is not necessarily adequate for the understanding of the corruption of many of institutions within a democracy and, in particular, those institutions, such as military and police institutions, hierarchical bureaucracies and market-based institutions, which are not inherently democratic either in structure or purpose, notwithstanding that they exist within the framework of a democratic political system, are shaped in various ways by that framework and, conversely, might be necessary for the maintenance of that framework.

2. Institutional Corruption

2.1 general features of institutional corruption.

Our concern here is only with institutional corruption. Nevertheless, it is plausible that corruption in general, including institutional corruption frequently, if not typically, involves the despoiling of the moral character of persons and in particular, in the case of institutional corruption, the despoiling of the moral character of institutional role occupants qua institutional role occupants. To this extent institutional corruption involves personal corruption and, thereby, connects institutional corruption to moral character. If the moral character of particular institutional role occupants, (e.g., police detectives), consists in large part of their possession of certain virtues definitive of the role in question (e.g., honesty, independence of mind, impartiality) then institutional corruption will frequently involve the displacement of those virtues in these role occupants by corresponding vices, (e.g., dishonesty, weak mindedness, bias); that is, institutional corruption will frequently involve institutional personal corruption.

As noted above, the relationship between institutional corruption and personal corruption is something that has been emphasized historically, e.g., by Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli. However, some recent theorists of structural corruption have tended to downplay this relationship. Lessig’s notion of dependence corruption (Lessig 2011), in particular, evidently decouples structural corruption from (institutional) personal corruption (see section 2.3.3 below).

Personal corruption, i.e., the state of having been corrupt ed , is not the same thing as performing a corrupt action, i.e., being a corrupt or . Typically, corruptors are themselves corrupted, but this is not necessarily the case. Consider, for example, a parent who pays a one-off bribe to an immigration official in order to be reunited with her child. The parent is a corruptor by virtue of performing a corrupt action, but she is not necessarily corrupted by her, let us assume, morally justifiable action.

Does personal corruption imply moral responsibility for one’s corrupt character? This issue is important in its own right but it also has implications for our understanding of structural corruption. Certainly, many, if not most, of those who are corrupted are morally responsible for being so. After all, they do or should know what it is to be corrupt and they could have avoided becoming corrupt. Consider, for instance, kleptocrats, such as Mobuto and Marcos, who have looted billions of dollars from the public purse (Sharman 2017), or senior members of multi-national corporations who have been engaged in ongoing massive bribery in China and elsewhere (Pei 2016). These kleptocrats and corporate leaders are not only corruptors, they are themselves corrupt; moreover, they are morally responsible for being in their state of corruption.

However, there appear to be exceptions to the claim that personal corruption necessarily or always brings with it moral responsibility for one’s corrupt character, e.g., adolescents who have been raised in criminal families and, as a result, participate in the corrupt enterprises of these families. These individuals perform actions which are an expression of their corrupt characters and which also have a corrupting effect.

What of the moral responsibility of corruptors for their corrupt actions? It is plausible that many, if not most, corruptors are morally responsible for their corrupt actions (e.g., the legions of those rightly convicted of corruption in criminal courts—and therefore, presumably, morally responsible for their actions—in jurisdictions around the world), but there appear to be exceptions, e.g., those who are coerced into offering bribes.

One school of thought in the theory of social institutions that might well reject the view that corruptors are necessarily or even typically morally responsible (or, therefore, blameworthy) for their corrupt actions is structuralism (Lévi-Strauss 1962 [1966]) and especially structural Marxism (Althusser 1971). According to the latter view institutional structure and, in particular, economic class-based relations largely determine institutional structures and cultures, and regularities in the actions of institutional actors. On this anti-individualist conception neither institutional corrosion nor institutional corruption—supposing the two notions can be distinguished (see below)—are ultimately to be understood by recourse to the actions of morally responsible individual human agents. Strong forms of structuralism are inconsistent with most contemporary philosophical accounts of institutional corruption, not the least because these accounts typically assume that institutions have an inherently normative—rather than merely ideological—dimension. However there are echoes of weaker forms of structuralism in some of these accounts when it comes to the issue of the moral responsibility of human persons for institutional corruption. One influential contemporary theorist of corruption who apparently does not accept the view that corruptors are necessarily or always morally responsible (or, therefore, blameworthy) for their corrupt actions is Lessig (Lessig 2011) (see section 2.3.3 below).

The upshot of our discussion of (institutional) personal corruption and moral responsibility is as follows. We now have, at least notionally, a fourfold distinction in relation to corruptors: (1) corruptors who are morally responsible for their corrupt action and blameworthy; (2) corruptors who are morally responsible for their corrupt action but not blameworthy; (3) corruptors who are not morally responsible for having a corrupt character, but whose actions: (a) are expressive of their corrupt character, and; (b) have a corrupting effect; (4) corruptors who do not have a corrupt character and are neither morally responsible nor blameworthy for their corrupt actions, yet whose actions have a corrupting effect, e.g., by virtue of some form of structural dependency for which individual human persons are not morally responsible.

Naturally, in the case of institutional corruption typically greater institutional damage is being done than simply the despoiling of the moral character of the institutional role occupants. Specifically, institutional processes are being undermined, and/or institutional purposes subverted. A further point is that the undermining of institutional purposes or processes typically requires the actions of multiple agents; the single action of a single agent is typically not sufficient. The multiple actions of the multiple agents in question could be a joint action(s) or they could be individual actions taken in aggregate. A joint action is one in which two or more agents perform a contributory individual action in the service of a common or collective end (Miller 2010: Chapter 1) or, according to some theorists, joint intention (Bratman 2016: Chapter 1). For instance, motivated by financial gain, a group of traders within the banking sector might cooperate with one another in order to manipulate a financial benchmark rate, such as LIBOR (London Interbank Borrowing Rate) (Wheatley 2012).

However, arguably, the undermining of institutional processes and/or purposes is not a sufficient condition for institutional corruption. Acts of institutional damage that are not performed by a corruptor and also do not corrupt persons might be thought to be better characterized as acts of institutional corrosion . Consider, for example, funding decisions that gradually reduce public monies allocated to the court system in some large jurisdiction. As a consequence, magistrates might be progressively less well trained and there might be fewer and fewer of them to deal with the gradually increasing workload of cases. This may well lead to a diminution over decades in the quality of the adjudications of these magistrates, and so the judicial processes are to an extent undermined. However, given the size of the jurisdiction and the incremental nature of these changes, neither the magistrates, nor anyone else, might be aware of this process of judicial corrosion, or even able to become aware of it (given heavy workloads, absence of statistical information, etc.). At any rate, if we assume that neither the judges nor anyone else can do anything to address the problem then, while there has clearly been judicial corrosion, arguably there has not been judicial corruption. Why is such corrosion not also corruption?

For institutional corrosion to constitute corruption, it might be claimed (Miller 2017: Chapter 3), the institutional damage done needs to be avoidable; indeed, it might also be claimed that the relevant agents must be capable of being held morally responsible for the damage, at least in the generality of cases. So if the magistrates in our example were to become aware of the diminution in the quality of their adjudications, could cause additional resources to be provided and yet chose to do nothing, then arguably the process of corrosion might have become a process of corruption.

An important question that arises here is whether or not institutional corruption is relative to a teleological or purpose-driven conception of institutions and, relatedly, whether the purposes in question are to be understood normatively. Arguably, the institutional purposes of universities include the acquisition of new knowledge and its transmission to students; moreover, arguably, knowledge acquisition is a human good since it enables (indirectly), for instance, health needs to be met. However, it has been suggested that the purposes of political institutions, in particular, are too vague or contested to be definitive of them (Ceva & Ferretti 2017; Warren 2004). One response to this is to claim that governments are in large part meta-institutions with the responsibility to ensure that society’s other institutions realize their distinctive institutional purposes. On this view, an important purpose of governments is provided, in effect, by the purposes of other fundamental institutions. For instance, an important purpose of governments might be to ensure market-based institutions operate in a free, fair, efficient and effective manner (Miller 2017: 14.1).

Naturally, there are many different kinds of entities which might causally undermine institutions, including other collective entities. However, collectivist accounts of institutions go beyond the ascription of causal responsibility and, in some cases, ascribe moral responsibility. Firstly, such collectivist accounts of institutions ascribe intentions, beliefs and so on to organizations and other collective entities per se. Secondly, this ascription of mindedness to collective entities leaves the way open to ascribe moral agency to these entities (French 1979; List & Pettit 2011). On such collectivist accounts corruptors include collective entities; indeed, corruptors who are morally responsible for their corrupt actions. Thus Lockheed Corporation, on this view, was a moral agent (or, at least, an immoral agent) which corrupted the Japanese government (a second moral agent) by way of bribery. Other theorists, typically referred to as individualists, reject minded collective entities (Ludwig 2017; Miller 2010). Accordingly to individualists, only human agents are possessed of minds and moral agency. [ 4 ] Thus collective entities, such as organizations, do not have minds and are not per se moral agents. Accordingly, it is only human agents who culpably perform actions that undermine legitimate institutional processes or purposes.

An important related issue that arises at this point pertains to the human agents who perform acts of corruption. Are they necessarily institutional actors? It might be thought that this was not the case. Supposing a criminal bribes a public official in order to get a permit to own a gun. The criminal is not an institutional actor and yet he has performed an act of institutional corruption. However, in this example the public official has accepted the bribe and she is an institutional actor. So the example does not show that institutional corruption does not necessarily involve the participation of an institutional actor. What if the criminal offered the bribe but it was not accepted? While this may well be a crime and is certainly an attempt at institutional corruption, arguably, it is not an actual instance of an act of institutional corruption but rather a failed attempt. Moreover, it is presumably not an instance of institutional corruption because the institutional actor approached refused to participate in the attempted corrupt action. Let us pursue this issue further.

As we saw in section 1 , corruption, even if it involves the abuse of public office, is not necessarily pursued for private gain. However, according to many definitions of corruption institutional corruption necessarily involves abuse of public office. Moreover, our example of an attempted bribe to secure a gun permit involves a public official. However, we have canvassed arguments in section 1 that contra this view acts of corruption might be actions performed by persons who do not hold public office, e.g., price-fixing by market actors, a witness who gives false testimony in a law court. At this point in the argument we need to invoke a distinction between persons who hold a public office and persons who have an institutional role. CEOs of corporations do not hold public office but they do have an institutional role. Hence a CEO who embezzles his company’s money is engaged in corruption. Again, citizens are not necessarily holders of public offices, but they do have an institutional role qua citizens, e.g., as voters. Hence a voter who breaks into the electoral office and stuffs the ballot boxes with falsified voting papers in order to ensure the election of her favored candidate is engaged in corruption, notwithstanding the fact that she does not hold public office.

The causal theory of institutional corruption (Miller 2017) presupposes a normative teleological conception of institutions according to which institutions are defined not only as organizations or systems of organizations with a purpose(s), but organizations or systems of organizations the purpose(s) of which is a human good. The goods in question are either intrinsic or instrumental goods. For instance, universities are held to have as their purpose the discovery and transmission of knowledge, where knowledge is at the very least an instrumental good. (For criticisms see Thompson 2018 and Ceva & Ferretti 2021.)

If a serviceable definition of the concept of a corrupt action is to be found—and specifically, one that does not collapse into the more general notion of an immoral action—then attention needs to be focused on the moral effects that some actions have on persons and institutions. An action is corrupt only if it corrupts something or someone—so corruption is not only a moral concept, but also a causal or quasi-causal concept. That is, an action is corrupt by virtue of having a corrupting effect on a person’s moral character or on an institutional process or purpose. If an action has a corrupting effect on an institution, undermining institutional processes or purposes, then typically—but not necessarily—it has a corrupting effect also on persons qua role occupants in the affected institutions.

Accordingly, an action is corrupt only if it has the effect of undermining an institutional process or of subverting an institutional purpose or of despoiling the character of some role occupant qua role occupant. In light of the possibility that some acts of corruption have negligible effects, such as a small one-off bribe paid for a minor service, this defining feature needs to be qualified so as to include acts that are of a type or kind that tends to undermine institutional processes, purposes or persons ( qua institutional role occupants)—as well as individual or token acts that actually have the untoward effects in question. Thus qualified, the causal character of corruption provides the second main feature of the causal theory of institutional corruption, the first feature being the normative teleological conception of institutions. I note accounts predicated on these two assumptions have ancient origins, notably in Aristotle (Hindess 2001).

In keeping with the causal account, an infringement of a specific law or institutional rule does not in and of itself constitute an act of institutional corruption. In order to do so, any such infringement needs to have an institutionally undermining effect , or be of a kind that has a tendency to cause such an effect, e.g., to defeat the institutional purpose of the rule, to subvert the institutional process governed by the rule, or to contribute to the despoiling of the moral character of a role occupant qua role occupant. In short, we need to distinguish between the offence considered in itself and the institutional effect of committing that offence. Considered in itself the offence of, say, lying is an infringement of a law, rule, and/or a moral principle. However, the offence is only an act of institutional corruption if it has some institutionally undermining effect, or is of a kind that has such a tendency, e.g., it is performed in a courtroom setting and thereby subverts the judicial process.

A third feature of the causal theory of institutional corruption pertains to the agents who cause the corruption. As noted in section 2.1.3 , there are many different kinds of entities which might causally undermine institutions, including other collective entities. However, it is an assumption of the causal theory of corruption that only human agents are possessed of minds and moral agency. Accordingly, on the causal theory it is only human agents who culpably perform actions that undermine legitimate institutional processes or purposes.

A fourth and final feature of the causal theory also pertains to the agents who cause corruption. It is a further assumption of the causal theory that the human agents who perform acts of corruption (the corruptors) and/or the human agents who are corrupted (the corrupted) are necessarily institutional actors (see discussion above in section 2.1.3 ). More precisely, acts of institutional corruption necessarily involve a corruptor who performs the corrupt action qua occupant of an institutional role and/or someone who is corrupted qua occupant of an institutional role .

In light of the above discussion the following normative theory of corruption suggests itself: the causal theory of institutional corruption (Miller 2017: Chapter 3).

An act x (whether a single or joint action) performed by an agent (or set of agents) A is an act of institutional corruption if and only if:

• x has an effect, or is an instance of a kind of act that has a tendency to have an effect, of undermining, or contributing to the undermining of, some institutional process and/or purpose (understood as a collective good) of some institution, I , and/or an effect of contributing to the despoiling of the moral character of some role occupant of I , agent (or set of agents) B , qua role occupant of I ;
• A is a role occupant of I who used the opportunities afforded by their role to perform x , and in so doing A intended or foresaw the untoward effects in question, or should have foreseen them;
• B could have avoided the untoward effects, if B had chosen to do so. [ 5 ]

Note that (2) (a) tells us that A is a corruptor and is, therefore, either (straightforwardly) morally responsible for the corrupt action, or A is not morally responsible for A ’s corrupt character and the corrupt action is an expression of A ’s corrupt character.

Notice also that the causal theory being cast in general terms, i.e., the undermining of institutional purposes, processes and/or persons ( qua institutional role occupants), can accommodate a diversity of corruption in a wide range of institutions in different social, political and economic settings, past and present, and accommodate also a wide range of mechanisms or structures of corruption, including structural relations of dependency, collective action problems and so on.

A controversial feature of the causal account is that organizations that are entirely morally and legally illegitimate, such as criminal organizations, (e.g., the mafia), are not able to be corrupted (Lessig 2013b). For on the causal account the condition of corruption exists only relative to an uncorrupted condition, which is the condition of being a morally legitimate institution or sub-element thereof. Consider the uncorrupted judicial process. It consists of the presentation of objective evidence that has been gathered lawfully, of testimony in court being presented truthfully, of the rights of the accused being respected, and so on. This otherwise morally legitimate judicial process may be corrupted, if one or more of its constitutive actions are not performed in accordance with the process as it ought to be. Thus to present fabricated evidence, to lie under oath, and so on, are all corrupt actions. In relation to moral character, consider an honest accountant who begins to “doctor the books” under the twin pressures of a corrupt senior management and a desire to maintain a lifestyle that is only possible if he is funded by the very high salary he receives for doctoring the books. By engaging in such a practice he risks the erosion of his moral character; he is undermining his disposition to act honestly.

2.3 Theories of Political Corruption

Let us term theories of corruption which focus on the undermining of institutional procedures or processes, as opposed to institutional purposes, proceduralist theories of institutional corruption. Mark Warren has elaborated a proceduralist theory of the corruption of democracies, in particular; a theory which he terms “duplicitous exclusion” (Warren 2006). (Relatedly and more recently, Ceva & Ferretti speak of bending public rules in the service of “surreptitious agendas” as definitive of corruption (Ceva & Ferretti 2017: 6), although in a recent work they have shifted to a notion of corruption in terms of lack of accountability (Ceva & Ferretti 2018; Ceva & Ferretti 2021). See discussion below in 2.3.4.)

Democratic political institutions are characterized by equality (in some sense) with respect to these processes. Warren offers a particular account of democratic equality and derives his notion of corruption of democratic political institutions from this. According to Warren, democracies involve a norm of equal inclusion such that

every individual potentially affected by a collective decision should have an opportunity to affect the decision proportional to his or her stake in the outcome. (Warren 2004: 333)

Corruption of democracies occurs under two conditions: (1) this norm is violated and; (2) violators claim to be complying with the norm (Warren 2004: 337). Warren contrasts his theory of duplicitous exclusion with what he terms “office-based” accounts (Warren 2004:329–32).The latter might be serviceable for administrative agencies and roles but is, according to Warren, inadequate for democratic representatives attempting to “define the public interest” (Warren 2006: 10) and relying essentially on the political process, rather than pre-existing agreement on specific ends or purposes, to do so. This latter point is made in one way of another by other theorists of modern representative democracies, such as Thompson (2013) and Ceva & Ferretti (2017: 5), and is an objection to teleological accounts (such as the causal account— section 2.2 above).

Warren’s other necessary condition for the corruption of institutions, namely duplicity, resonates with the emphasis in the contemporary anti-corruption literature and, for that matter, in much public policy on transparency; transparency can reveal duplicity and thereby thwart corruptors. Moreover, the duplicity condition—and the related surreptitious agenda condition of Ceva & Ferretti—is reminiscent of Plato’s ring of Gyges (Plato Gorgias ); corruption is something done under a cloak of secrecy and typically involves deception to try to ensure the cloak is not removed. Unquestionably, corruption often flourishes under conditions of secrecy. Moreover, corruptors frequently seek to deceive by presenting themselves a committed to the standards that they are (secretly) violating. But contra Warren—and, for that matter, Ceva & Ferretti—corruption does not necessarily or always need to be hidden in order to flourish. Indeed, in polities and institutions suffering from the most serious and widespread forms of corruption at the hands of the very powerful, there is often little or no need for secrecy or deception in relation to the pursuit of corrupt practices; corruption is out in the open. Consider Colombia during the period of the drug lord, Pablo Escobar’s, “reign”; the period of the so-called “narcocracy”. His avowed and well-advertised policy was “silver or lead”, meaning that politicians, judges, journalists and so on either accepted a bribe or risked being killed (Bowden 2012). Against this it might be suggested that at least corruption in democracies always involves hiding one’s corrupt practices. Unfortunately, this seems not to be the case either. As Plato pointed out long ago in The Republic , democracies can suffer a serious problem of corruption among the citizenry and when this happens all manner of corrupt practices on the part of leaders and others will not only be visible, they will be tolerated, and even celebrated.

Warren’s theory is evidently not generalizable to many other institutions, namely, those that are not centrally governed by democratic norms and, in particular, by his norm of equal inclusion. Consider, for instance, military institutions. Most important decisions made by military personal in wartime—as opposed to those made by their political masters, such as whether to go to war in the first place—are made in the context of a hierarchical structure; they are not collective decisions, if the notion of a collective decision is to be understood on a democratic model of decision-making, e.g., representative democracy. Moreover, with respect to, for instance, the decision to retreat or stand and fight a combatant does not and cannot reasonably expect to have “an opportunity to affect the decision proportional to her stake in the outcome”. The combatant’s personal stake might be very high; his life is at risk if he stands and fights and, therefore, he might prefer to retreat. However, military necessity in a just war might dictate that he and his comrades stand and fight and, therefore, they are ordered to do so by their superiors back at headquarters and, as virtuous combatants, they obey. I note that Machiavelli contrasts combatants possessed of the martial virtues with corruptible mercenaries who only fight for money and who desert when their lives are threatened (Machiavelli The Prince : Chapter 12).

Thompson’s groundbreaking and influential theory of institutional corruption takes as its starting point a distinction between what Thompson refers to as individual corruption and institutional corruption. When an official accepts a bribe in return for providing a service to the briber, this is individual corruption since the official is accepting a personal benefit or gain in exchange for promoting private interests (Thompson 2013: 6). Moreover, the following two conditions evidently obtain: (i) the official intends to provide the service (or, at least, intends to give the impression that he will provide the service) to the bribee; (ii) the official and the bribee intentionally create the link between the bribe and the service, i.e., it is a quid quo pro . By contrast, institutional corruption involves political benefits or gains, e.g., campaign contributions (that do not go into the political candidates’ own pockets but are actually spent on the campaigns) by public officials under conditions that tend to promote private interests (Thompson 2013: 6). The reference to a tendency entails that there is some kind of causal regularity in the link between acceptance of the political benefits and promotion of the private interests (including greater access to politicians than is available to others (Thompson 2018)). However, the officials in question do not intend that there be such a link between the political benefits they accept and their promotion of the private interests of the provider of the political benefits. Rather

the fact that an official acts under conditions that tend to create improper influence is sufficient to establish corruption, whatever the official’s motive. (Thompson 2013: 13)

I note that in the case of institutional corruption and, presumably, individual corruption (in so far as it involves the bribery of public or private officials) the actions in question must undermine some institutional process or purpose (and/or perhaps institutional role occupant qua role occupant). Thus Thompson says of institutional corruption:

It is not corrupt if the practice promotes (or at least does not damage) political competition, citizenship representation, or other core processes of the institution. But it is corrupt if it is of a type that tends to undermine such processes and thereby frustrate the primary purposes of the institution. (Thompson 2013: 7)

While Thompson has provided an important analysis of an important species of institutional corruption, his additional claim that officials who accept personal benefits in exchange for promoting private interests, i.e., a common form of bribery, is not a species of institutional corruption is open to question (and a point of difference with the causal theory). As mentioned in section 1 , this species of bribery of institutional actors utilizing their position—whether that position be one in the public sector or in the private sector—can be systemic and, therefore, extremely damaging to institutions. Consider the endemic bribery of police in India with its attendant undermining of the provision of impartial (Kurer 2005; Rothstein & Varraich 2017), obligatory (Kolstad 2012) and effective police services, not to mention of public trust in the police. Some police stations in part of India are little more than unlawful “tax” collection or, better, extortion agencies; local business people have to pay the local police if they are to guarantee effective police protection, truck drivers have to pay bribes to the police at transport checkpoints, if they are to transit expeditiously through congested areas, speeding tickets are avoided by those who pay bribes, and so on. Moreover, endemic bribery of this kind is endemic in many police forces and other public sector agencies throughout so-called developing countries, even if it is no longer present in most developed countries.

Thompson invokes the distinction between systemic and episodic services provided by a public official in support of his distinction between individual and institutional corruption. By “systemic” Thompson means that the service provided by the official

is provided through a persistent pattern of relationships, rather than in episodic or one-time interactions. (The particular relationships do not themselves have to be ongoing: a recurrent set of one-time interactions by the same politician with different recipients could create a similar pattern.) (Thompson 2013: 11)

However, as our above example of bribery of police in India makes clear, Thompson’s individual corruption can be, and often is, systemic in precisely this sense. In more recent work Thompson has drawn attention to mixed cases involving, for instance, both a personal and a political gain—the political gain not necessarily being a motive—and suggested that if the dominant gain is political rather than personal then it is institutional corruption or perhaps a mix of individual and institutional corruption (Thompson 2018). Fair enough. However, this does not remove the objection that systemic bribery (for instance) involving only personal gain (both as a motive and an outcome) are, nevertheless, cases of institutional corruption.

Thompson uses the case of Charles Keating to outline his theory (Thompson 1995 and 2013). Keating was a property developer who made generous contributions to the election campaigns of various U.S. politicians, notably five senators, and then at a couple of meetings called on a number of these to do him a favor in return. Specifically, Keating wanted the senators to get a regulatory authority to refrain from seizing the assets of a subsidiary of a company owned by Keating. The chair of the regulatory authority was replaced. However, two years later the assets of the company in question were seized and authorities filed a civil racketeering and fraud suit against Keating accusing him of diverting funds from the company to his family and to political campaigns. Thompson argues that the Keating case involved: (1) the provision or, at least, the appearance of the provision of an improper service on the part of legislators (the senators) to a constituent (Keating), i.e., interfering with the role of a regulator on his behalf; (2) a political gain in the form of campaign contributions (from Keating to the senators), and; (3) a link or, at least, the appearance of a link between (1) and (2), i.e., the tendency under these conditions for the service to be performed because of the political gain.

Accordingly, the case study involves at least the appearance of corrupt activity on the part of the senators. Moreover, Thompson claims that such an appearance might be sufficient for institutional corruption in that damage has been done to a political institution by virtue of a diminution in public trust in that institution. Thus the appearance of a conflict of interest undermines public trust which in turn damages the institution. The appearance of a conflict of interest arises when legislators use their office to provide a questionable “service” to a person upon whom they are, or have been, heavily reliant for campaign contributions. Evidently, on Thompson’s account of institutional (as opposed to individual) corruption it is not necessary that the legislators in these kinds of circumstance ought to know that their actions might well have the appearance of a conflict of interest, ought to know that they might have a resulting damaging effect, and ought to know, therefore, that they ought not to have performed those actions. Certainly, the senators in the Keating case ought to have known that they ought not to perform these actions. However, the more general point is that it is not clear that it would be a case of corruption, if it were not the case that the legislators in question ought to have known that they ought not to perform the institutionally damaging actions in question. On the causal account ( section 2.2 above), if legislators or other officials perform institutionally damaging actions that they could not reasonably be expected to know would be institutionally damaging then they have not engaged in corruption but rather incidental institutional damage (and perhaps corrosion if the actions are ongoing).

As outlined above, Thompson has made a detailed application of his theory to political institutions and, especially to campaign financing in the U.S.. However, he views the theory as generalizable to institutions other than political ones. It is generalizable, he argues, in so far as “public purposes” can be replaced by “institutional purposes” and “democratic process” with “legitimate institutional procedures” (Thompson 2013: 5). Certainly, if the theory is to be generalizable then it is necessary that these replacements be made. The question is whether making these replacements is sufficient. Moreover, the particular species of institutional corruption that he has identified and analyzed might exist in other institutions but do so alongside a wide range of other species to which his analysis does not apply—including, but not restricted to, what he refers to as individual corruption. Thompson has recently identified some other forms of institutional corruption to which he claims his theory applies (Thompson 2018). For instance, the close relationship that might obtain between corporations and their auditing firms. The salient such relationships are those consisting of auditing firms undertaking profitable financial consultancy work for the very corporations which they are auditing; hence the potential for the independent auditing process to be compromised. These relationships certainly have the potential for corruption. However, they do not appear to be paradigms of institutional corruption in Thompson’s sense since, arguably, undertaking such consultancy work is not prima facie an integral function of auditing firms qua auditors in the manner in which, for instance, securing campaign finance is integral to political parties competing in an election (to mention Thompson’s paradigmatic example of institutional corruption).

Newhouse has attempted to generalize Thompson’ theory, but in doing so also narrows it. Newhouse argues that Thompson’s theory is best understood in terms of breach of organizational fiduciary duties (Newhouse 2014). An important underlying reason for this, says Newhouse, is that Thompson’s (and, for that matter, Lessig’s) account of institutional corruption presuppose that institutions have an “obligatory purpose” (Newhouse 2014: 555) Fiduciary duties are, of course, obligatory. Moreover, they are widespread in both the public and private sector; hence the theory would be generalized. On the other hand, there are many institutional actors who do not have fiduciary duties. Thus if Newhouse is correct in thinking that Thompson’s theory of institutional corruption provides a model for breach of organizational fiduciary duty and only for breach of organizational fiduciary duty, the ambition to generalize Thompson’s theory will remain substantially unrealized.

Lawrence Lessig has argued that the U.S. democratic political process and, indeed, Congress itself, is institutionally corrupt and that the corruption in question is a species of what he calls “dependency corruption” (Lessig 2011 and 2013a). Lessig argues that although U.S. citizens as a whole vote in the election of, say, the U.S. President, nevertheless, the outcome is not wholly dependent on these citizens as it should be in a democracy or, at least, as is required by the U.S. Constitution. For the outcome is importantly dependent on a small group of “Funders” who bankroll particular candidates and without whose funding no candidate could hope to win office. Accordingly, there are really two elections. In the first election only the Funders get to “vote” since only they have sufficient funds to support a political candidate. Once these candidate have been “elected” then there is a second election, a general election, in which all the citizens get to vote. However, they can only vote on the list of candidates “pre-selected” by the Funders. Lessig’s account of the U.S. election is complicated, but not vitiated, by the existence of a minority of candidates, such as Bernie Sanders, who rely on funding consisting of small amounts of money from a very large number of Funders. It is further complicated but not necessarily vitiated by the rise of demagogues such as Donald Trump who, as mentioned above, can utilise social media and computational propaganda to have an electoral influence much greater than otherwise might have been the case (Woolley and Howard 2019).

On Lessig’s view there are two dependencies in play, namely, the dependency of the outcome of the election on the citizenry and the dependency of this outcome on the Funders. However, these two dependencies are inconsistent. Therefore, the question that now arises is which dependency is legitimate. Clearly, the dependency on the citizenry as a whole is legitimate since this is what the Constitution clearly intended. Since these funders are not representative of the U.S. citizenry the dependency on the Funders is illegitimate and a corruption of the democratic process in the U.S..

Lessig states that his notion of dependency corruption cuts across Thompson’s notions of individual and institutional corruption (Lessig 2013a: 14). Regarding the relation to Thompson’s notion of institutional corruption: On the one hand, dependence corruption involves a tendency, as does Thompson’s notion of institutional corruption (see above section 2.3.2 ). On the other hand, on Thompson’s theory, a politician, or set of politicians, can receive campaign contributions from Funders and further their private interests without being dependent on them. So in this respect Thompson’s notion of institutional corruption is wider than Lessig’s notion of dependence corruption. Regarding the relation to Thompson’s notion of individual corruption: A politician, or set of politicians, may come to depend on personal benefits from Funders. This is dependence corruption but on Thompson’s theory it is presumably individual corruption. (Although, perhaps, it might not be individual corruption in Thompson’s sense, if it involves a regularity and hence tendency).

Lessig offers a plausible analysis of the corruption of the U.S. electoral system by the Funders. Two related questions now arise. Is Lessig’s theory of dependence corruption correct? Is the notion of dependence corruption generalizable to institutions other than political institutions and, if so, to what extent?

The extent to which Lessig’s notion of dependence corruption is generalizable is ultimately an empirical question; it is a matter of seeking to apply it widely and waiting on the outcome (see, for instance, Light’s analysis of corruption in the pharmaceutical industry (Light, Lexchin, & Darrow 2013)). However, as mentioned above in the comparison of Lessig’s account with that of Thompson, Lessig does not see his dependence account as entirely generalizable.

Unlike the causal account of corruption (see section 2.2 above), Lessig’s notion of institutional corruption commits him only to normatively neutral institutional purposes (Lessig 2014; Lessig 2013b: 14) rather than to morally good or otherwise valuable institutional purposes. Accordingly, by Lessig’s lights, to say of a university that it has as a fundamental purpose to educate (to some objectively acceptable, minimum standard) is merely to say that this is a de facto fundamental purpose. Therefore, being market-based it could change its order of priorities; i.e., it would be perfectly entitled to prioritize profit over educational standards, just as, for instance, a retail store is perfectly entitled to prioritize profit over its standards of service to its customers.

According to Lessig, dependence corruption does not necessarily involve corrupt persons. As we have seen, Lessig’s favored example of dependence corruption is the dependency of the outcome of U.S. elections on a small group of large funders of those campaigning for political office rather than on the American people. Lessig suggests that those who engage in dependence corruption could be “good souls” (Lessig 2011: 17). Here we need to keep in mind distinctions between being evil and being corrupt, and between being corrupt and being morally responsible for one’s corruption. A corrupt person is not necessarily an evil person. After all, as we have seen, a corrupt person might only be corrupt qua institutional actor. Thus a corrupt police officer might be a good father and husband. Moreover, corruption admits of degrees. So a corrupt police officer might be a so-called grass-eater rather than a so-called meat-eater; their corrupt character might only manifest itself in relatively minor forms of corruption, e.g., minor bribe-taking, rather than in major forms of corruption, e.g., on-selling large quantities of heroin seized from drug dealers.

What of moral responsibility and corruption? Consider Lessig’s own favored example of dependence corruption. Surely, moral responsibility for corruption of the U.S. electoral system can be assigned to U.S. legislators, in particular, as well as the Funders who finance campaigns in the expectation (presumably) of favorable legislation if their candidates are elected. Lessig distinguishes between

responsibility for changing individual behavior within the system and responsibility for changing the system itself. (Lessig 2013a: 15)

According to Lessig

the sin of a Congressman within such a system is not that she raises campaign money. It is that she doesn’t work to change the corruption that this dependence upon a small set of funders produced. (Lessig 2013a: 15)

So apparently direct participation in the corruption of the electoral system by legislators and (?) Funders is not a sin. Lessig’s claim here might be that the corruptors of the U.S. electoral system are not engaged in sinful acts because they are not morally responsible for this wrongdoing. This claim is open to question. The actions of the legislators and Funders (and, for that matter, the lobbyists) that are constitutive of dependence corruption (offering and receiving (directly and indirectly) campaign funds) are avoidable and the legislators and Funders are, or ought to be, aware of the institutional damage being done by their combined actions. Moreover, in suggesting that the legislators have a moral responsibility to change the system, Lessig, in effect, concedes as much. How could they have a moral responsibility to change the system if they were not aware of it and their role in it?

What might be influencing Lessig at this point is the degree of the moral responsibility, specifically, full and partial responsibility. It is the combined effect of the many individual actions of a large number of legislators (and Funders and lobbyists) that does the institutional damage. Therefore, each only makes a small causal contribution and each, therefore, only has a small share in the moral responsibility for the outcome. Moreover, in relation to changing the system, there is a need for joint action; it is a joint moral responsibility involving shared partial individual responsibility. Thus legislators could, and know they could, jointly act to enact campaign finance reform to address the problem of dependency by, for example, restricting campaign contributions. Accordingly, the moral responsibility in play is a species of collective responsibility; specifically, joint moral responsibility (Miller 2010: Chapter 4).

Ceva & Ferretti understand political corruption widely to include not only the corruption of politicians but of public officials in general, including police officers, members of the professions, such as doctors and teachers, and others in the public sector. They define political corruption in terms of two individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions: “There must be a public official who (1) acts in her institutional capacity as an officeholder (office condition) (2) for the pursuit of an agenda whose rationale may not be vindicated as coherent with the terms of the mandate of her power of office (mandate condition)” (Ceva & Ferretti 2021: 19). The first condition, namely that political corruption involves a public official who acts in her institutional capacity, is familiar (see above). What of condition (2), the mandate condition?

The mandate condition concerns the motive or reason guiding the office holder’s action; the action is performed for the pursuit of an agenda with a rationale. So the officeholder’s action considered in itself might or might not be an exercise of a constitutive institutional right or duty of the office in question. But what is this rationale that would render the action corrupt? The rationale in question is one that “may not be vindicated as coherent with the terms of the mandate of her power of office”. The key notion here is that of coherence with the mandate of the powers of office. Here the powers of office are presumably simply the institutional rights and duties constitutive of an office, e.g., the right of legislators to vote on legislation, the duty not to take bribes. So, in summary, corruption involves the performance of an action(s) the motivating reason for which does not cohere with the mandate authorizing an office holder’s rights and duties qua office holder.

Ceva & Ferretti further argue that the relations between organizational roles generate a deontic dimension. For instance, they say: “Office accountability governs the institutional relations between office holders. As participants in these relations, officeholders are established with the authority to require that one another ‘gives an account’ of their actions” (Ceva & Ferretti 2021: 25). They provide the example of a physician: “By following this course of action, the physician is also in the position of justifying her conduct to her colleagues with reference to the terms of her power mandate, thus fulfilling office accountability. By her action, the physician is accountable not only to the other doctors…but also to the hospital staff” (Ceva & Ferretti 2021:26).

Ceva & Ferretti also address the question, What is wrong with corruption? In doing so they offer a distinctive theory. According to them political corruption is inherently wrong (as opposed to wrong by virtue of its consequences) because it is “a specific form of interactive injustice consisting in a violation of the duty of office accountability” (Ceva & Ferretti 2021: 122). Thus, it turns out that political corruption is inherently wrong because it is unjust. More specifically, political corruption involves an action by an institutional member which is unjust to his colleagues since each member owes it to every other member to do his duty.

A question might arise at this point in relation to the scope of the notion of an institution that Ceva & Ferretti’s employ in their account of political corruption (understood as corruption of public institutions). For instance, are those who are entitled to vote in a democracy themselves institutional role occupants of the institution of government? Are patients in a public hospital themselves role occupants of the hospital or students in a public school role occupants of the school? Ceva & Ferretti deploy an account of a public institution according to which the answer to these questions is in each case in the negative. For on their account of the corruption of public institutions there must be an officeholder possessed of a mandate who engages in corruption. But citizens, hospital patients and school students are not office holders with mandates. Indeed, citizens are the source of the mandate as, arguably (supposing there is a mandate), are patients and if not students, at least their parents (on the students’ behalf). One untoward consequence of this view is that evidently citizens, patients and students cannot themselves directly engage in acts of corruption (understood as corruption of public institutions) or, at least, if they can their actions would fall outside Ceva & Ferretti’s theory of institutional corruption.

At any rate, to return to the question of the wrongness of corruption, we saw above that on Ceva & Ferretti’s view this consists in corruption being a form of interactive injustice. Accordingly, interactive justice goes hand in glove with office accountability. On this view a teacher who fails students who do not provide her with sexual favors, and gives high marks to those who do, is performing corrupt actions by virtue of her unjust treatment of her teaching colleagues. Ceva & Ferretti argue that the normative source (relevant to the inherent wrongness of corrupt actions) of the principle of impartiality in the practice of the assessment by teachers of their students’ work lies in the role-based relations that the teacher has with her fellow teachers (and other school staff) (Ceva & Ferretti 2021: 98). So this teacher’s action is not corrupt by virtue of the injustice done to the students (although Ceva & Ferretti agree that it would be unfair to the students), but rather by virtue of the injustice done to the teacher’s colleagues. Contrary to Ceva & Ferretti it could reasonably be claimed that the primary form of institutional corruption involved here lies in the corruption of the teacher-student relationship (and its harmful consequences). More generally, Ceva & Ferretti’s theory of political corruption evidently privileges relationships between office holders at the expense of those whom they serve.

As we saw earlier, in the paradigm cases corrupt actions are a species of morally wrong, habitual, actions. What of the motive for corrupt actions? We saw above that there are many motives for corrupt actions, including desires for wealth, status, and power. However, there is apparently at least one motive that we might think ought not to be associated with corruption, namely, acting for the sake of the good. Here we need to be careful. For sometimes actions that are done for the sake of the good are, nevertheless, morally wrong actions. Indeed, some actions that are done out of a desire to achieve the good are corrupt actions, namely, acts of so-called noble cause corruption.

This is not the place to provide a detailed treatment of the phenomenon of noble cause corruption (Kleinig 2002; Miller 2016: Chapter 3). Rather let us simply note that even in cases of noble cause corruption—contra what the person who performs the action thinks—it may well be the case that the corrupt action morally ought not to be performed; or at least the corrupt action is pro tanto morally wrong, even if it is morally permissible all things considered. Accordingly, the person who performs it may well be deceiving him or herself, or be simply mistaken when they judge that the action morally ought to be performed. So their motive, i.e., to act for the sake of what is right, has a moral deficiency. They are only acting for the sake of what they believe is morally right, but in fact it is not morally right; their belief is a false belief. So we can conclude that corrupt actions are habitual actions that are at the very least pro tanto morally wrong and quite possibly morally wrong all things considered, and therefore in all probability not motivated by the true belief that they are morally right.

Here there are more complex excuses and justifications available for what might first appear to be an act of noble cause corruption. Perhaps a police officer did not know that some form of evidence was not admissible. The police officer’s false belief that an action is right (putting forward the evidence in a court of law) was rationally dependent on some false non-moral belief (that the evidence was admissible); and the police officer came to hold that non-moral belief as a result of a rational process (he was informed, or at least misinformed, that the evidence was admissible by a senior officer). This would incline us to say that the putative act of noble cause corruption was not really an act of corruption—although it might serve to undermine a morally legitimate institutional process—and therefore not an act of noble cause corruption. This intuition is consistent with the causal account of corruption in particular. The police officer in question did perform an action that undermined a legitimate criminal justice process. However, his action was not corrupt because he is not a corruptor. He did not intend to undermine the process, he did not foresee that the process would be undermined, and (let us assume) he could not reasonably have been expected to foresee that it would be undermined. Nor is his action the expression of a corrupt character.

Earlier, it was suggested that acts of noble cause corruption are pro tanto morally wrong and that this is typically contra what the actor believes. However, it is conceivable that some acts of noble cause corruption are morally justified all things considered. Perhaps the act of noble cause corruption while wrong in itself , nevertheless, was morally justified from an all things considered standpoint. If so, we might conclude that the action was not an act of corruption (and therefore not an act of noble cause corruption). Alternatively, we might conclude that it was an act of corruption, but one of those few acts of corruption that was justified in the circumstances. Perhaps both options are possibilities.

Suppose an undercover police officer offers a “bribe” to a corrupt judge for the purpose, supposedly, of getting the judge to pass a lenient sentence on a known mafia crime boss. The police officer is actually engaged in a so-called “sting” operation as part of an anti-corruption strategy. The judge accepts the bribe and is duly convicted of a criminal offence and jailed. (Let us also assume that the judge is already so corrupt that he will not be further corrupted by being offered the bribe.) The police officer offers the bribe for the purpose of achieving a moral good, i.e., convicting a corrupt official. However, we are disinclined to call this a case of corruption. Presumably the reason for this is that in this context the “bribe” does not have a corrupting effect; in particular, it does not succeed in undermining the judicial process of sentencing the crime boss. So this is a case in which a prima facie act of noble cause corruption turns out not be an act of corruption, and therefore not an act of noble cause corruption. A less straightforward case is the one where the action does have a corrupting effect. Consider two possibilities: (i) The sting is continued for a while (to catch other corrupt judges) and paid for (by bribes) verdicts are temporarily enforced during the sting; (ii) The process of considering and accepting the money offered by the disguised police officer further despoils the judge’s character but has no further effect on court proceedings (because the judge is arrested within minutes). In both cases, arguably, the officer conducting the sting operations committed an act of corruption.

What of morally justified acts of noble cause corruption. Suppose someone bribes an immigration official in order to ensure that his friend—who is ineligible to enter Australia—can in fact enter Australia, and thereby have access to life-saving hospital treatment. This act of bribery is evidently an act of institutional corruption; a legitimate institutional process has been subverted. However, the person acted for the sake of doing what he believed to be morally right; his action was an instance of noble cause corruption. Moreover, from an all things considered standpoint—and in particular, in the light of the strength of the moral obligations owed to close friends when their lives are at risk—his action may well be morally justified. Accordingly, his act of corruption may well not have a corrupting effect on himself. Plausibly, this explains any tendency we might have not to describe his action as an action of corruption. But from the fact that the person was not corrupted it does not follow that the act did not corrupt. Moreover, it does not even follow that some person or other was not corrupted. Clearly, in our example, the immigration official was corrupted and, therefore, the action was pro tanto morally wrong, even if the action was morally right all things considered.

In this section the following propositions have been advanced: (a) the phenomenon of noble cause corruption is a species of corruption, and it is seen to be so by the lights of the causal account of corruption in particular; (b) conceivably, some acts of noble cause corruption are morally justified all things considered; (c) instances of structural corruption favored by Lessig and/or Thompson are potentially cases of noble cause corruption, but this is not necessarily the case.

Thus far our concern has been with theorizing institutional corruption. Indeed, most of the philosophical work undertaken to date has consisted in such theorizing. However, there are some salient exceptions to this. For instance, Pogge has suggested undermining the international borrowing privileges of authoritarian governments who have removed democratic governments (Pogge 2002 [2008]: Chapter 10); Wenar (2016) argues for the enforcement of property rights (popular resource sovereignty) in relation to the resources curse; Lessig (Lessig 2011) has elaborated a raft of specific measures to reform the system of campaign contributions in the U.S.; Alexandra and Miller (2010) have outlined ways to utilize reputational devices in some sectors in which reputational loss hurts the “bottom line” (see also Brennan & Pettit 2005 for an account of the theoretical underpinnings of such practical reforms).

However, at a more general level there is an apparent need on the part of philosophers to conceptualize the notion of an anti-corruption system or, more broadly, an integrity system for institutions (Klitgaard 1988; Pope 1997; Anechiarico & Jacobs 1998; Klitgaard et al. 2000; Preston & Sampford 2002; Baker 2005; Miller 2017). An integrity system is an institutional arrangement the purpose of which is to promote ethical attitudes and behavior and, crucially, to prevent or, at least, reduce institutional corruption. For instance, an integrity system for a police organization might consist of a set of laws and regulations, an internal affairs department comprised of corruption investigators, an external oversight body, professional reporting mechanisms, an enforceable code of ethics, a complaints and discipline process, and so on. The contribution of philosophers to integrity systems has been threefold. Firstly, they have offered synoptic or “birds-eye” views of the architecture of such systems and in so doing determined whether they are fit for normative institutional purpose. Naturally, this work presupposes theories of the normative institutional purposes of the institutions in question (Lessig 2011; Thompson 1995). Secondly, they have addressed a variety of ethical issues that have arisen in the design and implementation of integrity systems and their various institutional components. Consider, for instance, the range of ethical issues that arise in relation to anti-corruption systems for police organizations, e.g., entrapment, privacy/surveillance (Miller 2016). Thirdly, they have identified the underlying causal and/or rational basis of the corruption and, in light of this, designed appropriate anti-corruption measures. (Pogge 2002 [2008]: Chapter 6; Lessig 2011); van den Hoven, Miller, & Pogge 2017). An important set of structural problems facilitating corruption are collective action problems, e.g., regulatory arbitrage in the global financial system and tax havens (Obermayer & Obermaier 2016; Rothstein & Varraich 2017). One kind of solution proposed is that of an enforceable cooperative scheme at the international level (Eatwell & Taylor 2000).

Integrity systems can be thought of as being either predominantly reactive or predominantly preventive, albeit the distinction is somewhat artificial since there is always a need for both reactive elements, e.g., investigations of corrupt actions, and preventive elements, e.g., ethics training and transparency mechanisms. Reactive systems are fundamentally linear. They frame laws and regulation that set out a series of offences, wait for transgressions, investigate, adjudicate and take punitive measures. In many areas, including institutional corruption, resources are limited and, thus, ethically informed decisions have to be made in relation to the prioritization of corrupt activity to be investigated and to what extent. This ethical problem is to be distinguished from the problem of under-resourcing motivated by a desire to hamstring anti-corruption initiatives. Moreover, both problems are to be distinguished from the debate between those who favor increased laws and regulations to combat, for instance, financial corruption, and those who argue for a decrease in such laws and regulations since they unnecessarily increase the cost of doing business.

Preventive institutional mechanisms for combating corruption can be divided into four categories. Mechanisms designed to reduce the motivation to engage in corruption, e.g., ethics education programs; mechanisms to reduce the capacity of those motivated to engage in corruption, e.g., legislation to downsize oligopolies to prevent cartels (Rose-Ackerman 1999), exploitation of the lack of trust between corruptors (Lambsdorff 2007), democratization and the separation of powers (“power corrupts” (Acton 1887 [1948: 364]) to reign in powerful, corrupt governments (Johnston 2014); mechanisms to eliminate or reduce the opportunity to engage in corruption, e.g., conflict of interest provisions; mechanisms to expose corrupt behavior, e.g., oversight bodies, media organizations (Pope 1997; Spence et al. 2011).

It is self-evident that there is need for both reactive and preventive elements if an integrity system is to be adequate. This point obtains whether or not the integrity system in question pertains to a single organization, an industry, an occupational group, or an entire society. However, the reactive and preventive elements need to cohere in an overall holistic integrity system (Miller 2017). A further point often overlooked is that if an integrity system is to be effective it presupposes a framework of accepted social norms in the sense of socially accepted moral principles. Social norms provide the standards which determine what counts as corruption. Moreover, in so doing they determine whether or not such behavior will be tolerated or not. Revealing corruption has very little effect if the wider community to whom the corruption is revealed are tolerant or otherwise accepting of it.

Corruption is a highly diverse phenomenon, including bribery, nepotism, false testimony, cheating, abuse of authority and so on. Moreover, corruption takes different forms across the spectrum of institutions giving rise to political corruption, financial corruption, police corruption, academic corruption and so on. The causal theory of corruption is a sustained attempt to provide an account which accommodates this diversity. In doing so it emphasizes the causal as well as the normative dimension of institutional corruption. The most influential contemporary philosophical theories of political corruption are those of Dennis Thompson and Lawrence Lessig. Moreover, Lessig’s notion of dependence corruptions looks to be generalizable to a degree to institutions other than political institutions. Likewise the mechanism that lies at the heart of Thompson’s theory may be generalizable to a degree to institutions other than political institutions. However, as they stand, neither of these theories provides a general or comprehensive theory of institutional corruption (and Lessig’s theory, at least, is not intended to do so). The wide diversity of corrupt actions implies that there may well need to be a correspondingly wide and diverse range of specific anti-corruption measures to combat corruption in its different forms, and indeed in its possibly very different contexts. Recent decades have seen the rise of whole systems of anti-corruptions mechanisms encased in what are referred to as integrity systems. Here we can distinguish reactive from preventive elements of an integrity or anti-corruption system and, arguably, an effective integrity system should integrate reactive and preventive elements in an overall holistic system.

• Abed, George T. and Sanjeev Gupta (eds.), 2003, Governance, Corruption, and Economic Performance , Washington DC: International Monetary Fund.
• Aßländer, Michael S. and Sarah Hudson (eds.), 2017, Handbook of Business and Corruption , Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.
• Acton, Lord [John Emerich Dalberg Acton], 1887 [1948], Letter to Mandell Creighton, 5 April 1887, printed in Acton’s Essays on Freedom and Power , Gertrude Himmelfarb (ed.), Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, pp. 358–367.
• Alexandra, Andrew and Seumas Miller, 2010, Integrity Systems for Occupations , London: Routledge.
• Althusser, Louis, 1971, Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays ( Lénine et las philosophie ), Ben Brewster (trans.), London: New Left Books.
• Anechiarico, Frank and James B. Jacobs, 1998, The Pursuit of Absolute Integrity: How Corruption Control Makes Government Ineffective , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Aristotle [fourth century BCE], The Politics , any edition.
• –––, Nicomachean Ethics , any edition.
• Baker, Raymond W., 2005, Capitalism’s Achilles Heel: Dirty Money and How to Renew the Free-Market System , Indianapolis: Wiley.
• Bellow, Adam, 2003, In Praise of Nepotism: A History of Family Enterprise from King David to George W. Bush , New York: Doubleday.
• Blau, Adrian, 2009, “Hobbes on Corruption”, History of Political Thought, 30(4): 596–616.
• –––, 2018, “Cognitive Corruption and Deliberative Democracy”, Social Philosophy and Policy, 35(2): 198–220.
• Bowden, Mark, 2012, Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World’s Greatest Outlaw , New York: Atlantic Books.
• Bratman, Michael E., 2016, Shared Agency: A Planning Theory of Acting Together , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199897933.001.0001
• Brennan, Geoffrey and Philip Pettit, 2005, The Economy of Esteem: An Essay on Civil and Political Society , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/0199246483.001.0001
• Ceva, Emanuela and Maria Paola Ferretti, 2017, “Political Corruption”, Philosophy Compass , 7(2): 1–10. doi:10.1111/phc3.12461
• –––, 2018, “Political Corruption, Individual Behavior and the Quality of Institutions”, Politics, Philosophy & Economics , 17(2):216–231. doi:10.1177/1470594X17732067
• –––, 2021, Political Corruption , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Cocking, Dean and Jeroen van den Hoven, 2018, Evil Online , Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.
• Cohen, Elliott D. (ed.), 2005, News Incorporated: Corporate Media Ownership and Its Threat to Democracy , Amherst, New York: Prometheus.
• Crank, John and Michael A. Caldero, 2004, Police Ethics: The Corruption of Noble Cause , Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing.
• Dobel, J. Patrick, 2002, Public Integrity , Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
• Dobos, Ned, Christian Barry, and Thomas Pogge (eds.), 2011, Global Financial Crisis: The Ethical Issues , London: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230306950
• Eatwell, John and Lance Taylor, 2000, Global Finance at Risk: The Case for International Regulation , New York: New Press.
• Elliott, Deni and Edward H. Spence, 2018, Ethics for a Digital Era , Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118968888
• Friedman, Milton, 1970, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”, New York Times Magazine , 13 September 1970.
• French, Peter A., 1979, “The Corporation as a Moral Person”, American Philosophical Quarterly , 16(3): 207–15
• Giddens, Anthony, 1984, The Constitution of Society , Cambridge, UK: Polity.
• Green, Stuart P., 2006, Lying, Cheating and Stealing: A Moral Theory of White-Collar Crime , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199225804.001.0001
• Harré, Rom, 1979, Social Being: A Theory for Social Psychology , Oxford: Blackwell.
• Heidenheimer, Arnold J. and Michael Johnston (eds.), 2002, Political Corruption: Concepts and Contexts , third edition, London: Transaction Publishers.
• Heywood, Paul (ed.), 2018, Routledge Handbook of Political Corruption, London: Routledge.
• Hindess, Barry, 2001, “Good Government and Corruption”, in Larmour and Wolanin 2001: 1–10.
• Johnston, Michael, 2014, Corruption, Contention, and Reform: The Power of Deep Democratization , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139540957
• Kleinig, John, 2002, “Rethinking Noble Cause Corruption” International Journal of Police Science and Management , 4(4): 287–314. doi:10.1350/ijps.4.4.287.10877
• Klitgaard, Robert E., 1988, Controlling Corruption , Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Klitgaard, Robert, Ronald Maclean-Abaroa, and H. Lindsey Parris, 2000, Corrupt Cities: A Practical Guide to Cure and Prevention , Oakland, CA: ICS Press.
• Kolstad, Ivar, 2012, “Corruption as a Violation of Distributed Ethical Obligations” Journal of Global Ethics , 8(2–3): 239–250. doi:10.1080/17449626.2012.716076
• Kurer, Oskar, 2005, “Corruption: An Alternative Approach to its Definition and Measurement”, Political Studies , 53(1): 222–39. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00525.x
• Lambsdorff, Johann, Graf, 2007, Institutional Economics of Corruption and Reform: Theory, Evidence and Reform , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511492617
• Langford, John W. and Allan Tupper (eds.), 1994, Corruption, Character and Conduct: Essays on Canadian Government Ethics , Toronto: Oxford University Press.
• Larmour, Peter and Nick Wolanin (eds.), 2001, Corruption and Anti-Corruption , Canberra: Asia Pacific Press.
• Lessig, Lawrence, 2011, Republic Lost: How Money Corrupts—and a Plan to Stop it , New York: Twelve. [ Lessig 2011 available online ]
• –––, 2013a, “Institutional Corruptions”, Edward J. Safra Working Papers 1. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2233582
• –––, 2013b, “‘Institutional Corruption’ Defined”, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics , 41(3): 553–555. doi:10.1111/jlme.12063
• –––, 2014, “What an Originalist Would Understand ‘Corruption’ to Mean”, California Law Review , 102(1): 1–24. doi:10.15779/z38df8d
• Lévi-Strauss, Claude, 1962 [1966], La pensée sauvage , Paris: Plon. Translated as The Savage Mind , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Light, Donald W., Joel Lexchin, and Jonathan J. Darrow, 2013, “Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Myth of Safe and Effective Drugs”, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics , 14(3): 590–600. doi:10.1111/jlme.12068
• Lynch, Michael, 2017, The Internet of Us , New York: Liveright.
• List, Christian and Philip Pettit, 2011, Group Agency: The Possibility, Design, and Status of Corporate Agents , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199591565.001.0001
• Ludwig, Kirk, 2017, From Plural to Institutional Agency: Collective Action II , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Machiavelli, Niccolò, 1532, The Prince ( Il Principe ), any edition.
• –––, c.1517, Discourses on Livy ( Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio ), any edition.
• Miller, Seumas, 2010, Moral Foundations of Social Institutions: A Philosophical Study , New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511818622
• –––, 2016, Corruption and Anti-Corruption in Policing: Philosophical and Ethical Issues , Dordrecht: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46991-1
• –––, 2017, Institutional Corruption: A Study in Applied Philosophy , New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781139025249
• Miller, Seumas, Peter Roberts, and Edward Spence, 2005, Corruption and Anti-Corruption: An Applied Philosophical Approach , New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
• Miller, Seumas and Terry Bossomaier, 2023, Cybersecurity, Ethics and Collective Responsibility, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Montesquieu, 1748, The Spirit of the Laws ( De l’esprit des lois ), any edition.
• Munger, Michael, 2018, “On the Contingent Vice of Corruption ” Social Philosophy and Policy , 35(2): 158–181.
• Newhouse, M.E., 2014, “Institutional Corruption: A Fiduciary Theory” Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy , 23(3): Article 2, URL = < https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cjlpp/vol23/iss3/2 >
• Noonan, John T. Jr, 1984, Bribes , New York: Macmillan.
• Nozick, Robert, 1974, Anarchy, State, and Utopia , New York: Basic Books.
• Nye, Joseph S., 1967, “Corruption and Political Development: A Cost-benefit Analysis”, American Political Science Review , 61(2): 417–427. doi:10.2307/1953254
• Obermayer, Batian and Frederik Obermaier, 2016, Panama Papers. Die Geschichte einer weltweiten Enthüllung , Köln : Kiepenheuer & Witsch. Translated in the same year as The Panama Papers: Breaking the Story of How the Rich & Powerful Hide Their Money , London: Oneworld.
• Olson, Mancur, 1965, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Pearson, Zoe, 2001, “An International Human Rights Approach to Corruption”, in Larmour and Wolanin 2001: 30–61.
• Pei, Minxin, 2016, China’s Crony Capitalism: The Dynamics of Regime Decay , Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Pettit, Philip, 1997, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/0198296428.001.0001
• Philp, Mark, 1997, “Defining Political Corruption”, Political Studies , 45(3): 436–462. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.00090
• –––, 2018, “Corruption of Politics”, Social Philosophy and Policy , 35(2): 73–93.
• Philp, Mark and Elizabeth David-Barrett, 2015, “Realism about Political Corruption ”, Annual Review of Political Science , 18: 387–402.
• Plato [fourth century BCE], Gorgias , any edition.
• –––, The Republic , any edition.
• Pogge, Thomas, 2002 [2008], World Poverty and Human Rights , London: Polity; second edition, 2008.
• Pope, Jeremy, 1997, National Integrity Systems: The TI Source Book , Berlin: Transparency International.
• Preston, Noel and Charles Sampford, 2002, Encouraging Ethics and Challenging Corruption , Sydney: Federation Press.
• Pritchard, Michael S., 1998, “Bribery: The Concept”, Science and Engineering Ethics , 4(3): 281–286. doi:10.1007/s11948-998-0019-9
• Reich, Robert B., 2015, Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few , New York: Alfred A. Knoff
• Resnik, David B., 2007, The Price of Truth: How Money Affects the Norms of Science , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309782.001.0001
• Rose-Ackerman, Susan, 1999, Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences and Reform , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rothstein, Bo and Aiysha Varraich, 2017, Making Sense of Corruption , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781316681596
• Sandel, Michael, J., 2012, What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets , London: Penguin.
• Schmidtz, David (ed.), 2018, Social Philosophy and Policy , 35(2).
• Sharman, J.C., 2017, The Despot’s Guide to Wealth Management: On the International Campaign Against Grand Corruption , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• Sparling, Robert, 2019, Political Corruption , Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Spence, Edward H., Andrew Alexandra, Aaron Quinn, and Anne Dunn, 2011, Media, Markets and Morals , Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Thompson, Dennis F., 1995, Ethics in Congress: From Individual to Institutional Corruption , Washington DC: Brookings Institute.
• –––, 2013, “Two Concepts of Corruption: Individual and Institutional”, Edward J. Safra Working Papers 16. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2304419
• –––, 2018, “Theories of Institutional Corruption”, Annual Review of Political Science , 21: 495–513. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-120117-110316
• Van den Hoven, Jeroen, Seumas Miller and Thomas Pogge (eds.), 2017, Designing-in Ethics , New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9780511844317
• Walsh, Adrian and Richard Giulianotti, 2006, Ethics, Money and Sport , London: Routledge.
• Warren, Mark E., 2004, “What Does Corruption Mean in a Democracy”, American Journal of Political Science , 48(2): 328–343. doi:10.2307/1519886
• –––, 2006, “Political Corruption as Duplicitous Exclusion” PS: Political Science and Politics , 39(4): 803–807. doi:10.1017/S1049096506060975
• Wenar, Leif, 2016, Blood Oil: Tyrants, Violence and the Rules that Run the World , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Wheatley, Martin, 2012, The Wheatley Review of LIBOR, , London: HM Treasury. [ Wheatley 2012 available online ]
• Woolley, Samuel and Philip Howard, 2019, Computational Propaganda, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• World Bank, 1997, Helping Countries Combat Corruption: The Role of the World Bank , Washington DC: World Bank. [ World Bank 1997 available online ]

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Convention Against the Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions , Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 15 February 1999.

ethics: virtue | integrity | moral dilemmas

Copyright © 2023 by Seumas Miller < semiller @ csu . edu . au >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Corruption Quotes

Corruption is a cancer that eats away at the integrity of society.

Corruption thrives in the darkness, but justice brings it into the light.

Corruption is the enemy of progress and development.

Power and corruption go hand in hand, unless we stand up against it.

Corruption is a web that entangles both the corrupt and the innocent.

A society built on corruption will crumble from within.

Corruption is a betrayal of the trust placed in us by the people.

Corruption is the poison that seeps into the veins of society.

Corruption is a silent thief that steals from the pockets of the people.

Corruption is a disease that spreads like wildfire if left unchecked.

Corruption is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, disguising its true nature.

Corruption is like a dark cloud that overshadows the potential of a nation.

Corruption is the ultimate betrayal of public service.

Corruption is a stain on the fabric of society that cannot be easily erased.

Corruption is the enemy of transparency and accountability.

Corruption is the embodiment of greed and selfishness.

Corruption is a roadblock on the path to justice and equality.

Corruption is a cancer that eats away at the moral fiber of a nation.

Corruption can only thrive in the absence of strong institutions and vigilant citizens.

Corruption is a shadow that follows those who succumb to its temptations.

Corruption is a betrayal of the values we hold dear.

Corruption is a tide that washes away the foundations of a just society.

Corruption is a burden that the people should not have to bear.

Corruption is a barrier to economic growth and prosperity.

Corruption is a disease that infects the soul of a nation.

Corruption is the result of a moral deficit within society.

Corruption is a poison that weakens the bonds of trust in a community.

Corruption is a choice that leads to the moral decay of individuals and institutions.

Corruption is an enemy that should be fought relentlessly.

Corruption is a dark cloud that hovers over the hopes and dreams of the people.

Corruption is a cancer that eats away at the heart of democracy.

Corruption is a distortion of justice and fairness.

Corruption is a betrayal of our children’s future.

Corruption is a symptom of a society in decline.

Corruption is a poison that taints the well of public trust.

Corruption is a fire that engulfs the integrity of individuals and institutions alike.

Corruption is a serpent that poisons the waters of progress.

Corruption is a spider’s web that entangles the innocent and the guilty.

Corruption is a specter that haunts the corridors of power.

Corruption is a ghost that lingers long after the guilty have gone.

Corruption is a thief that steals from the pockets of the poor and vulnerable.

Corruption is a virus that spreads through the veins of society.

Corruption is a dark shadow that looms over the prospects of a nation.

Corruption is a disease that can only be cured through collective action.

Corruption is a dagger that stabs at the heart of justice.

Corruption is a Hydra with many heads, each one more insidious than the last.

Corruption is a poison that corrodes the pillars of democracy.

Corruption is a cancer that eats away at the soul of a nation.

Corruption is a serpent that slithers through the halls of power.

Corruption is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, disguising its true intentions.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You may like

Quotes from anthem, unapologetically me quotes, our latest posts.

I am worth my own existence, and no one can deny me that. In the depths of darkness, hope flickers

I am who I am, and I make no apologies for it. I refuse to be anything other than myself,

Alvin Ailey Quotes

I am trying to show the world that we are all human beings and that color is not important. What

The dictator quotes

I am the supreme ruler, and my word is law. Obey me without question, or face the consequences. Freedom is

Most popular posts

How high quotes.

Dreams are like stars, you may never touch them but if you follow them they will lead you to your

Funny and Creative Sayings to Put on Your Dog’s Bandana

100% Bark swag Bad to the bone Chasing my tail in style Dog hair, don’t care Furry and fabulous Eat.

Positive Affirmations, Rule and Inspiring Quotes #3334

You have to take the good with the bad, the happy with the sad. forgive and forget, but never regret..

Write for Us

TheThingsWeSay

Personality Quizzes

ILikeToQuote

Unsubscribe

[email protected]

5 Essays About Corruption

Internationally, there is no legal definition of corruption, but it includes bribery, illegal profit, abuse of power, embezzlement, and more. Corrupt activities are illegal, so they are discreet and done in secrecy. Depending on how deep the corruption goes, there may be many people aware of what’s going on, but they choose to do nothing because they’ve been bribed or they’re afraid of retaliation. Any system can become corrupt. Here are five essays that explore where corruption exists, its effects, and how it can be addressed.

Learn more about anti-corruption in a free course .

Corruption in Global Health: The Open Secret

Dr. Patricia J. Garcia The Lancet (2019)

In this published lecture, Dr. Garcia uses her experience as a researcher, public health worker, and Minister of Health to draw attention to corruption in health systems. She explores the extent of the problem, its origins, and what’s happening in the present day. Additional topics include ideas on how to address the problem and why players like policymakers and researchers need to think about corruption as a disease. Dr. Garcia states that corruption is one of the most significant barriers to global universal health coverage.

Dr. Garcia is the former Minister of Health of Peru and a leader in global health. She also works as a professor and researcher/trainer in global health, STI/HIV, HPV, medical informatics, and reproductive health. She’s the first Peruvian to be appointed as a member to the United States National Academy of Medicine

‘Are women leaders less corrupt? No, but they shake things up”

Stella Dawson Reuters (2012)

This piece takes a closer look at the idea that more women in power will mean less corruption. Reality is more complicated than that. Women are not less vulnerable to corruption in terms of their resistance to greed, but there is a link between more female politicians and less corruption. The reason appears to be that women are simply more likely to achieve more power in democratic, open systems that are less tolerant of corruption. A better gender balance also means more effective problem-solving. This piece goes on to give some examples of lower corruption in systems with more women and the complexities. While this particular essay is old, newer research still supports that more women in power is linked to better ethics and lower corruption levels into systems, though women are not inherently less corrupt.

Stella Dawson left Reuters in 2015, where she worked as a global editor for economics and markets. At the Thomson Reuters Foundation and 100Reporters, she headed a network of reporters focusing on corruption issues. Dawson has been featured as a commentator for BBC, CNB, C-Span, and public radio.

“Transparency isn’t the solution to corruption – here’s why”

David Riverios Garcia One Young World

Many believe that corruption can be solved with transparency, but in this piece, Garcia explains why that isn’t the case. He writes that governments have exploited new technology (like open data platforms and government-monitoring acts) to appear like they care about corruption, but, in Garcia’s words, “transparency means nothing without accountability.” Garcia focuses on corruption in Latin America, including Paraguay where Garcia is originally from. He describes his background as a young anti-corruption activist, what he’s learned, and what he considers the real solution to corruption.

At the time of this essay’s publication, David Riverios Garcia was an Open Young World Ambassador. He ran a large-scale anti-corruption campaign (reAccion Paraguay), stopping corruption among local high school authorities. He’s also worked on poverty relief and education reform. The Ministry of Education recognized him for his achievements and in 2009, he was selected by the US Department of State as one of 10 Paraguayan Youth Ambassadors.

“What the World Could Teach America About Policing”

Yasmeen Serhan The Atlantic (2020)

The American police system has faced significant challenges with public trust for decades. In 2020, those issues have erupted and the country is at a tipping point. Corruption is rampant through the system. What can be done? In this piece, the author gives examples of how other countries have managed reform. These reforms include first dismantling the existing system, then providing better training. Once that system is off the ground, there needs to be oversight. Looking at other places in the world that have successfully made radical changes is essential for real change in the United States.

Atlantic staff writer Yasmeen Serhan is based in London.

“$2.6 Trillion Is Lost to Corruption Every Year — And It Hurts the Poor the Most”

Joe McCarthy Global Citizen (2018)

This short piece is a good introduction to just how significant the effects of corruption are. Schools, hospitals, and other essential services suffer, while the poorest and most vulnerable society carry the heaviest burdens. Because of corruption, these services don’t get the funding they need. Cycles of corruption erode citizens’ trust in systems and powerful government entities. What can be done to end the cycle?

Joe McCarthy is a staff writer for Global Citizen. He writes about global events and environmental issues.

You may also like

16 Inspiring Civil Rights Leaders You Should Know

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Housing Rights

15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger 

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Social Change 101: Meaning, Examples, Learning Opportunities

Rosa Parks: Biography, Quotes, Impact

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Essay on Corruption, Its Causes, and Effects

Causes of corruption: essay introduction, causes of corruption, effects of corruption, conclusion: what are the causes and effects of corruption.

Bibliography

Transparency International defines corruption as an act that abuses the entrusted power for private gain. This means that it violates the rights of individuals that have bestowed power, authority, and legitimacy. Corruption varies in degree and nature depending on the level of its occurrence, people involved, and circumstances that motivate individuals to be corrupt. Modernization has transformed corruption, and people adopt new and complicated ways of concealing their fraudulent activities. This paper presents the causes and effects of corruption in the public and private sector.

Politics is an effective way of ensuring power and resources are shared equally among all individuals from different backgrounds within a specified jurisdiction. However, people have used political activities and offices to advance their gains and neglect the need to be accountable and responsible to the public. The emergence of political elites has created room for corruption to flourish in public and private offices because people no longer respect the need to develop national programs that will benefit citizens. They have diverted the resources of the public to achieve their gains without considering the impacts of their actions on other citizens. Politics has allowed corrupt officers to win elections and take powerful positions in government. Therefore, citizens continue to suffer because their interests are not addressed by those they expected would alleviate their problems.

Also, the existence of artificial scarcity of resources has pushed people to look for cheap ways of getting what they need. For instance, the scarcity of employment and investment opportunities has led to stiff competition for the limited available resources. Therefore, people use unorthodox ways to persuade those in charge of approving projects to allow them to continue with their investment projects. People with malevolent intentions continue to destroy the economy of their nations as they create false impressions of the scarcity of resources. The existence of unhealthy competitions among businesses forces some of them to use unethical ways to persuade their clients to buy their products. Government officials in charge of quality standards are usually bribed to cover the activities of such investors, and this promotes corruption in businesses. This violates the rights of citizens to access quality products and services.

Thirdly, the ethical qualities of people in authority have decreased, and their value system deteriorated due to lack of strong moral teachings and responsibilities. People no longer have respect for the old ideals of moral and honest service delivery procedures, and society has become a haven for individuals that disregard human dignity. It is necessary to explain that modernity has clouded the need to respect the positions and individuals placed to serve others. People have little respect for morals that guide service delivery and ensure others benefit from their services. Therefore, corruption has been fuelled by poor moral values and lack of respect for human life.

The present generation is full of corrupt activities because people fail to condemn them. There are no strong civil societies to rebuke and oppose corrupt leaders, and this promotes the flourishing of this behavior in generations. The American public forum is dominated by debates on gay marriages, foreign policies, and inflated health bills, but nobody seems to pay attention to the escalating cases of corruption in the public and private sectors. The younger generations do not see the need to fight corruption because their predecessors support and cultivate it through modern systems and activities.

Lastly, widespread poverty and illiteracy have contributed to endemic corruption in modern societies. There are efforts to educate people, especially the rural folks, to ensure they know their rights and freedoms to reduce corruption in their societies. However, these efforts seem to bear no fruits because poverty drives them to seek cheap and quick ways of accessing their needs. Also, poverty makes people desperate, and thus, they do anything that will ensure they have food on their tables. Therefore, corruption flourishes in most societies because people do not know their rights and those that do have limited resources to access them.

Corruption violates the rights and freedoms of individuals to get basic services from public and private offices. This means that this practice compromises the quality of services offered by employees in the public and private sectors and puts the lives of citizens at risk. Corrupt officials do not offer equal services to clients because they treat some with more interests than others. This violates the provisions of equality and the rights for justice in various issues. This makes public institutions and offices to become illegitimate because of misusing their democratic power for private gains.

Also, corruption hinders the effective development of political systems in a country. This vice promotes patronage that is serious threats to democratic processes. Most corrupt nations experience civil disobedience and political instability that hamper development projects. The introduction of multi-party democratic systems is usually hampered by the corruption that compromises the legitimacy of political parties and individuals. Civil disobedience and lack of trust in political institutions propel individuals to protest and demand the removal of their leaders from power.

Moreover, this vice stalls development projects and subjects citizens to abject poverty because of a lack of transparency and accountability in public offices. Corruption enables few individuals that have money to have their way and get what they want while those that do not have been forced to look for other alternatives. Poverty and unemployment are common occurrences in societies that condone corruption, and they cannot develop because of poor management systems. The need to offer quality services like improving infrastructure, medical facilities, schools, and social amenities is compromised by the lack of transparent processes of awarding tenders and distributing resources in a society.

Lastly, this vice discourages unity and cooperation in society because some individuals think they are more important than others. Unequal distribution of national resources and restricted access to public services lead to frustration and apathy among citizens, and this weakens the fabric that binds members of the society. This leads to social inequality and the emergence of class differences that violate the dignity and rights of individuals. Uncontrolled corruption widens the gap between the rich and poor, and this results in a weak civil society.

Corruption is caused by man-made factors like capitalism, lack of transparency and accountability, nepotism, tribalism, poverty, weak social and political structures, and poverty. This vice lowers the pace of national development, weakens societies, and increases poverty. Therefore, people should work hard to ensure they fight corruption by educating their members on the importance of transparent practices. Also, government systems should be programmed to detect and eliminate this vice, and those found promoting it should face harsh penalties.

Johnston, M., Syndromes of Corruption: Wealth, Power, and Democracy. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Turvey, B., Forensic Fraud: Evaluating Law Enforcement and Forensic Science Cultures in the Context of Examiner Misconduct . Massachussetts: Academic Press, 2013.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, May 18). Essay on Corruption, Its Causes, and Effects. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corruption-causes-and-effects/

"Essay on Corruption, Its Causes, and Effects." IvyPanda , 18 May 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/corruption-causes-and-effects/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Essay on Corruption, Its Causes, and Effects'. 18 May.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Essay on Corruption, Its Causes, and Effects." May 18, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corruption-causes-and-effects/.

1. IvyPanda . "Essay on Corruption, Its Causes, and Effects." May 18, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corruption-causes-and-effects/.

IvyPanda . "Essay on Corruption, Its Causes, and Effects." May 18, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/corruption-causes-and-effects/.

• Principle of Scarcity
• Trend Analysis: Water Scarcity Issue
• Corruption and Corporate and Personal Integrity
• Political Interests Motivations and Opinions
• American Exceptionalism's Two Faces
• The Kenyan National Flag Significance
• Politics and Legislature in Canada
• Contemporary Political Culture: Country Comparisons

Top 20 Quotations for Corruption Essay

In this post, I am sharing the top 20 Quotations for Corruption Essay for the Students of FSc 2nd Year. Here I will share Quotes on Corruption for English Essay . I have already shared 2 essay examples on ilmihub for the students of Class 10 and Class 12.

• Corruption in Pakistan Essay with Quotes
• Complete Essay on Corruption with Quotes

Students who do not have essay content and need a complete essay on corruption with quotations can go to any of the above-mentioned essays and select one for them. They can also go through these Essay Examples with Quotations for other essay topics. Students who already have essay content and need only quotations can visit Essay Quotations in English . However, those who need Quotes on Corruption for the essay on Corruption may continue to this post.

Corruption Essay Quotations for Students of Class 10 and Class 12

“bribe-giver and the bribe-taker are both doomed for hell.” (حضرت محمد صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم).

• “Corruption and bribery are like poison and a horrible disease, which need to be put down with an iron hand”. – (Muhammad Ali Jinnah)
• “Conscience is God’s presence in man.” – (Swedenborg)
• “Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime”. – (Aristotle)
• “The worst disease in the world today is corruption. And there is a cure: transparency.” – (BONO)
• “Corruption is like a ball of snow, once it’s set a rolling it must increase.” – (Charles Caleb)
• “Power attracts the corruptible. Suspect any who seek it.” – (Frank Herbert)
• “Corruption is cancer that steals from the poor, eats away at governance and moral fiber, and destroys trust.” – (Robert Zoellick)
• “The duty of the youth is to challenge Corruption”. (Kurt Cobain)
• “Corruption wins not more than honesty.” – (William Shakespear)
• “EssayCorruption is nature’s way of restoring our faith in democracy.” – (Peter Ustinov)
• “We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office” – (Aesop)
• “Corruption hates what is not corrupt.” – (Paul Park)
• “I have seen corruption boil and bubble ’til it oerrun the stew.” – (William Shakespear)
• “Corruption, the most infallible symptom of constitutional liberty.” – (Edward Gibbon)
• “Corruption is like a ball of snow. Once it’s set a rolling it must increase.” – (C.C Cotton)
• “Corruption is the flesh that covers every bone.” – (Chukwuemeka E. Onyejinduaka)
• “If something can corrupt you, you’re corrupted already.” – (Bob Marley)
• “Each of us is born with a share of purity, predestined to be corrupted by our commerce with mankind.” – (Emile Cioran)
• “To oppose corruption in government is the highest obligation of patriotism.” – (G. Edward Griffin)
• “Power Doesn’t corrupt people, people corrupt power.” (William Gaddis)

You may also like:

• My First Day At College Essay Quotations
• My Last Day At College Essay Quotations
• Corona Virus Essay Quotations
• Why I Love Pakistan Essay Quotations
• My Aim in Life Essay Quotations
• More In Quotations for Essays

Top 17 Quotations for A Rainy Day Essay

Top 20 Quotations for Cricket Match Essay for Students

Top 15 City Life Essay Quotations for Class 10 and Class 12

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Privacy Policty
• Terms of Service
• Advertise with Us

CORRUPTION QUOTES

quotations about corruption

Corruption, the most infallible symptom of constitutional liberty.

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

There is something in corruption which, like a jaundiced eye, transfers the color of itself to the object it looks upon, and sees everything stained and impure.

Corruption is the flesh that covers every bone.

6,000 Proverbs and Quotes of Chukwuemeka E. O.

The mistake you make, don't you see, is in thinking one can live in a corrupt society without being corrupt oneself.

Keep the Aspidistra Flying

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.

Before the Legend: The Rise of Bob Marley

The world is full of corruption, and deceit, and deviltry -- chock full of it.

Life in Danbury

As the world changes, the forms of corruption also gradually become more cunning, more difficult to point out--but they certainly do not become better.

Works of Love

If you can sense the corruption in me, it is ... because there's a dose of it in you.

The Rector of Justin

I have seen corruption boil and bubble 'til it oerrun the stew.

Measure for Measure

Corruption hates what is not corrupt.

A Princess of Roumania

Power attracts the corruptible. Suspect any who seek it.

Chapterhouse: Dune

I read all the papers Whad did I see? Page to page corruption Thank god it's not me

"Headlines", Hellbound

Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life.

"Of Means and Ends", Rules for Radicals

Corruption wins not more than honesty.

The corruption that most citizens experience, and which is most disruptive on a daily basis, is frequently called "petty," as distinct from "venal" or "grand" corruption. Petty corruption is annoying, but for people in a hurry or for people who don't want to stand in the same queue over and over, it is expedient.

The Corruption Cure: How Citizens and Leaders Can Combat Graft

Instead of politicians, let the monkeys govern the countries; at least they will steal only the bananas.

Twitter post, ildanquotations

The worst disease in the world today is corruption. And there is a cure: transparency.

TED Talk, March 14, 2013

Do not think that you can fight corruption without while you let corruption fester within.

Problems of Life: Selections from the Writings of Rev. Lyman Abbott

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.

letter to Mandell Creighton, April 5, 1887

Each of us is born with a share of purity, predestined to be corrupted by our commerce with mankind.

A Short History of Decay

Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Notable Quotes . All rights reserved. Browse by subject Browse by author

Essay on Corruption for Students and Children

500+ words essay on corruption.

Essay on Corruption – Corruption refers to a form of criminal activity or dishonesty. It refers to an evil act by an individual or a group. Most noteworthy, this act compromises the rights and privileges of others. Furthermore, Corruption primarily includes activities like bribery or embezzlement. However, Corruption can take place in many ways. Most probably, people in positions of authority are susceptible to Corruption. Corruption certainly reflects greedy and selfish behavior.

Methods of Corruption

First of all, Bribery is the most common method of Corruption. Bribery involves the improper use of favours and gifts in exchange for personal gain. Furthermore, the types of favours are diverse. Above all, the favours include money, gifts, company shares, sexual favours, employment , entertainment, and political benefits. Also, personal gain can be – giving preferential treatment and overlooking crime.

Embezzlement refers to the act of withholding assets for the purpose of theft. Furthermore, it takes place by one or more individuals who were entrusted with these assets. Above all, embezzlement is a type of financial fraud.

The graft is a global form of Corruption. Most noteworthy, it refers to the illegal use of a politician’s authority for personal gain. Furthermore, a popular way for the graft is misdirecting public funds for the benefit of politicians .

Extortion is another major method of Corruption. It means to obtain property, money or services illegally. Above all, this obtainment takes place by coercing individuals or organizations. Hence, Extortion is quite similar to blackmail.

Favouritism and nepotism is quite an old form of Corruption still in usage. This refers to a person favouring one’s own relatives and friends to jobs. This is certainly a very unfair practice. This is because many deserving candidates fail to get jobs.

Abuse of discretion is another method of Corruption. Here, a person misuses one’s power and authority. An example can be a judge unjustly dismissing a criminal’s case.

Finally, influence peddling is the last method here. This refers to illegally using one’s influence with the government or other authorized individuals. Furthermore, it takes place in order to obtain preferential treatment or favour.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Ways of Stopping Corruption

One important way of preventing Corruption is to give a better salary in a government job. Many government employees receive pretty low salaries. Therefore, they resort to bribery to meet their expenses. So, government employees should receive higher salaries. Consequently, high salaries would reduce their motivation and resolve to engage in bribery.

Tough laws are very important for stopping Corruption. Above all, strict punishments need to be meted out to guilty individuals. Furthermore, there should be an efficient and quick implementation of strict laws.

Applying cameras in workplaces is an excellent way to prevent corruption. Above all, many individuals would refrain from indulging in Corruption due to fear of being caught. Furthermore, these individuals would have otherwise engaged in Corruption.

The government must make sure to keep inflation low. Due to the rise in prices, many people feel their incomes to be too low. Consequently, this increases Corruption among the masses. Businessmen raise prices to sell their stock of goods at higher prices. Furthermore, the politician supports them due to the benefits they receive.

To sum it up, Corruption is a great evil of society. This evil should be quickly eliminated from society. Corruption is the poison that has penetrated the minds of many individuals these days. Hopefully, with consistent political and social efforts, we can get rid of Corruption.

{ “@context”: “https://schema.org”, “@type”: “FAQPage”, “mainEntity”: [{ “@type”: “Question”, “name”: “What is Bribery?”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”: “Bribery refers to improper use of favours and gifts in exchange for personal gain.”} }, { “@type”: “Question”, “name”: ” How high salaries help in stopping Corruption?”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”:”High salaries help in meeting the expenses of individuals. Furthermore, high salaries reduce the motivation and resolve to engage in bribery.”} }] }

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Essay on Corruption

Students are often asked to write an essay on Corruption in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Corruption

Understanding corruption.

Corruption is a dishonest behavior by a person in power. It can include bribery or embezzlement. It’s bad because it can hurt society and slow down progress.

Types of Corruption

There are many types of corruption. Bribery is when someone pays to get an unfair advantage. Embezzlement is when someone steals money they’re supposed to look after.

Effects of Corruption

Corruption can lead to inequality and injustice. It can make people lose trust in the government and can cause social unrest.

Fighting Corruption

To fight corruption, we need strong laws and honest leaders. Education can also help people understand why corruption is harmful.

Also check:

• 10 Lines on Corruption
• Paragraph on Corruption
• Speech on Corruption

250 Words Essay on Corruption

Introduction.

Corruption, a pervasive and longstanding phenomenon, is a complex issue that undermines social and economic development in all societies. It refers to the misuse of entrusted power for private gain, eroding trust in public institutions and impeding the efficient allocation of resources.

Manifestations and Impacts of Corruption

Corruption manifests in various forms, including bribery, embezzlement, nepotism, and fraud. Its impacts are far-reaching, affecting socio-economic landscapes. Economically, it stifles growth by deterring foreign and domestic investments. Socially, it exacerbates income inequality and hampers the provision of public services.

Anti-Corruption Strategies

Addressing corruption requires a multi-faceted approach. Legislation and law enforcement are critical, but they must be complemented with preventive measures. Transparency, accountability, and good governance practices are key preventive strategies. Technology can also play a significant role, particularly in promoting transparency and reducing opportunities for corrupt practices.

Corruption is a global issue that requires collective action. While governments bear the primary responsibility for curbing corruption, the involvement of civil society, media, and the private sector is indispensable. Thus, the fight against corruption is a shared responsibility, requiring the commitment and efforts of all sectors of society.

500 Words Essay on Corruption

Corruption, an insidious plague with a wide range of corrosive effects on societies, is a multifaceted phenomenon with deep roots in bureaucratic and political institutions. It undermines democracy, hollows out the rule of law, and hampers economic development. This essay explores the concept of corruption, its implications, and potential solutions.

The Nature of Corruption

Corruption is a complex social, political, and economic anomaly that affects all countries. At its simplest, it involves the misuse of public power for private gain. However, it extends beyond this to encompass a wide range of behaviors – from grand corruption involving large sums of money at the highest levels of government, to petty corruption that is prevalent at the grassroots.

Implications of Corruption

Corruption poses a significant threat to sustainable development and democracy. It undermines the government’s ability to provide essential services and erodes public trust in institutions. Furthermore, it exacerbates income inequality, as it allows the wealthy and powerful to manipulate economic and political systems to their advantage.

Corruption also hampers economic development by distorting market mechanisms. It discourages foreign and domestic investments, inflates costs, and breeds inefficiency. Additionally, it can lead to misallocation of resources, as corrupt officials may divert public resources for personal gain.

The Root Causes

The causes of corruption are multifaceted and deeply ingrained in societal structures. They include lack of transparency, accountability, and weak rule of law. Institutional weaknesses, such as inadequate checks and balances, also contribute to corruption. Cultural factors, such as societal acceptance or expectation of corruption, can further perpetuate the problem.

Combating Corruption

Addressing corruption requires a multifaceted approach that targets its root causes. Enhancing transparency and accountability in public administration is crucial. This can be achieved through the use of technology, such as e-governance, which reduces the opportunities for corruption.

Legal reforms are also essential to strengthen the rule of law and ensure that corrupt practices are adequately punished. Additionally, fostering a culture of ethics and integrity in society can help to change attitudes towards corruption.

Furthermore, international cooperation is key in the fight against corruption, particularly in the context of globalized finance. Cross-border corruption issues, such as money laundering, require coordinated international responses.

In conclusion, corruption is a pervasive and complex issue that undermines social, economic, and political progress. Addressing it requires a comprehensive approach that includes institutional reforms, cultural change, and international cooperation. While the fight against corruption is challenging, it is crucial for achieving sustainable development and social justice. By fostering a culture of transparency, accountability, and integrity, societies can effectively combat corruption and build a more equitable future.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Coronavirus
• Essay on Computer
• Essay on Climate Change

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Corruption In Pakistan Essay | 500 Words & 800 Words

by Pakiology | Apr 21, 2024 | Essay , English | 2 comments

Page Contents

1) 500 Words Essay On Corruption In Pakistan

2) 800 words essay on corruption in pakistan, understanding corruption in pakistan, the causes of corruption in pakistan, the consequences of corruption in pakistan, the way forward: tackling corruption in pakistan.

Corruption is a pervasive problem in Pakistan that has negatively impacted the country’s economy and political stability. It is the abuse of public office for private gain, and it is a major obstacle to Pakistan’s development.

There are many causes of corruption in Pakistan, including a lack of transparency in government institutions, weak law enforcement, and a lack of accountability. In addition, corruption is often seen as a way for people to get ahead in a society that is plagued by inequality and a lack of opportunities.

One of the most prominent forms of corruption in Pakistan is corruption in the public sector. Government officials often demand bribes from citizens in order to provide them with services that they are entitled to, such as issuing licenses or permits. This not only undermines the rule of law but also discourages investment and stifles economic growth.

Another major problem in Pakistan is corruption in the private sector. Companies often bribe government officials in order to secure contracts or other favors, which can lead to inefficient and wasteful use of public resources. This not only harms the economy but also undermines public trust in the government and private institutions.

There are several factors that contribute to the high levels of corruption in Pakistan. One of the main reasons is the lack of accountability and transparency in the country’s political and economic systems. This allows corrupt individuals to operate with impunity, as they are able to conceal their activities and avoid being held accountable for their actions.

Another contributing factor is the widespread poverty in Pakistan. Many people are willing to engage in corrupt activities in order to make ends meet, as they see it as a means of surviving in a difficult economic environment.

Furthermore, corruption is often perpetuated by a lack of strong institutions and effective laws to prevent and punish it. In many cases, the government and law enforcement agencies are themselves involved in corrupt activities, which makes it difficult to address the problem.

The consequences of corruption in Pakistan are severe. It undermines the rule of law and weakens public trust in the government, leading to social and political instability. It also hinders economic development and stifles entrepreneurship, as it creates an uneven playing field for businesses and discourages investment.

In order to combat corruption in Pakistan, it is essential for the government to implement strong legal frameworks and institutional mechanisms to promote accountability and transparency. This could include measures such as stricter laws against corruption, better oversight of public officials and institutions, and improved access to information for the general public.

Additionally, there needs to be a cultural shift in the country towards greater integrity and honesty. This can be achieved through education and awareness-raising campaigns, as well as by encouraging a sense of social responsibility among the people of Pakistan.

In conclusion, corruption is a major challenge in Pakistan that needs to be addressed in order to promote economic development and political stability. By implementing effective legal frameworks and promoting a culture of integrity, it is possible to combat corruption and build a more just and prosperous society.

Pakistan, a country known for its rich cultural heritage, is facing numerous challenges in its journey toward becoming a developed nation. One of the most persistent and widespread issues that the country has been grappling with is corruption. Corruption in Pakistan has reached a level where it is not only hampering the economic growth of the country but also undermining the social and political fabric.

Corruption can be defined as the abuse of power or position for personal gain. It takes many forms, from bribery and embezzlement to nepotism and fraud. In Pakistan, corruption has permeated all levels of society, from the lowest echelons to the highest. It has become so widespread that it is now considered a norm in the country.

There are several factors that have contributed to the high levels of corruption in Pakistan. Some of the major causes include:

Lack of effective government institutions:

The government institutions in Pakistan are not strong enough to prevent corruption. There is a lack of accountability and transparency in the workings of these institutions, making it easier for corrupt officials to carry out their activities without fear of consequences.

Political instability:

Political instability has been a constant in Pakistan’s history, which has contributed to widespread corruption in the country. When political leaders are more focused on retaining power and advancing their own interests, they are less likely to prioritize the fight against corruption.

Poverty and income inequality:

Poverty and income inequality are also contributing factors to corruption in Pakistan. When people are struggling to make ends meet, they may be more likely to engage in corrupt activities to earn extra income.

Weak rule of law:

The weak rule of law in Pakistan has also contributed to the high levels of corruption in the country. When laws are not enforced and the justice system is unable to hold corrupt officials accountable, it is easier for corruption to thrive.

The consequences of corruption in Pakistan are far-reaching and damaging. Some of the major consequences include:

Hampering economic growth:

Corruption has a significant impact on the economy of the country. It undermines investment and creates an environment that is hostile to business. This leads to lower economic growth, less job creation, and decreased prosperity for the people of Pakistan.

Undermining social and political fabric:

Corruption not only undermines the economy but also the social and political fabric of the country. When people lose faith in the government and its institutions, it creates a void that can be filled by extremist and extremist ideologies.

Impeding development:

Corruption also impedes development by diverting resources away from areas that need them most. When public funds are misused or stolen, it means that schools, hospitals, and other public services are not receiving the support they need to provide quality services to the people.

Discouraging foreign investment:

Corruption can also discourage foreign investment, as investors are less likely to invest in a country where they perceive a high risk of corruption. This means that the country misses out on the benefits of foreign investment, such as job creation and economic growth.

Tackling corruption in Pakistan will require a multi-faceted approach that involves the government, civil society, and the private sector. Some of the measures that could be taken include:

Strengthening government institutions:

The government must take steps to strengthen its institutions and make them more accountable and transparent. This can be done by implementing effective anti-corruption measures, such as setting up independent watchdog agencies and increasing transparency in the workings of government institutions.

Improving the rule of law:

The government must also work to improve the rule of law in the country, by enforcing laws and regulations that prevent corruption, and by ensuring that corrupt officials are held accountable.

Encouraging civil society engagement:

Civil society can play an important role in tackling corruption in Pakistan, by raising awareness about the issue, advocating for reforms, and monitoring government activities.

Promoting ethics and integrity:

The private sector can also play a role by promoting ethics and integrity in their own operations, and by supporting anti-corruption initiatives.

Increasing transparency and accountability:

The government must also take steps to increase transparency and accountability in its operations, by making its activities more open and accessible to the public.

Providing education and training:

The government can provide education and training to its citizens, particularly the youth, on the dangers and consequences of corruption, and on the importance of integrity and ethical behavior.

In conclusion, corruption in Pakistan is a major barrier to development, and it is essential that the government, civil society, and private sector work together to tackle this issue. While there is no easy solution to corruption, the steps outlined above, if implemented effectively, can help to reduce corruption and create a more prosperous and just society in Pakistan.

Find more Essays on the following Topics

Ask Your Questions

You might like, democracy in pakistan essay with quotations.

Explore the evolution, challenges, and progress of democracy in Pakistan in this in-depth essay. Gain insights into...

Problems of Karachi Essay | 200 & 500 Words

Explore the multifaceted challenges faced by Karachi in this comprehensive essay. From overpopulation to traffic...

A True Muslim Essay With Quotations 2023

A true Muslim essay is about the qualities of a true Muslim and how they embody the teachings of Islam in their daily...

An Essay on My Mother: A Tribute to Mothers

Mothers are the backbone of a family and a crucial influence in the lives of their children. From an early age,...

It’s a good and simple worded essay , helped me understanding this subject .

Amazing each and every word was understandable and it adds information in my knowledge Thank You sooo much

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Submit Comment

• class-9-notes
• Friendship quotes
• Scholarships
• Science News
• Study Abroad
• Study in Australia
• SZABMU MDCAT
• UHS Past MCQs
• Universities

• Privacy Policy

Essay on Corruption in Pakistan in English with quotations

English essay on corruption.

EssayCorruption is nature's way of restoring our faith in democracy - Peter Ustinov

Corruption is cancer that steals from the poor, eats away at governance and moral fiber, and destroys trust- Robert Zoellick

Corruption is like a ball of snow. Once it's set a rolling it must increase- C.C Cotton

Relevant essays:

Post a Comment

Trending Topics

Latest posts.

• 1st year education guess paper 2024 pdf download
• 1st year Urdu past papers solved pdf download 2023
• 1st year guess paper 2024 Punjab Board pdf
• 1st year chemistry guess paper 2024 pdf download
• 1st year education paper scheme 2024
• 1st year Past papers solved and unsolved all Punjab Boards
• 1st year Urdu Guess Paper New 2024
• 1st year all subjects notes for FBISE and Punjab Boards pdf
• 1st year Urdu Khulasa Nasar and Nazam pdf download
• 1st year education Notes pdf download
• 1st year English guess paper 2024 Punjab board
• 2nd year guess paper 2024 Punjab board
• 1st year English MCQs Objective Solved Notes
• 2nd year English guess paper 2024 for Punjab Boards
• 1st year English complete notes pdf download
• 2nd year tarjuma tul Quran book pdf download
• 2nd year pak study short questions notes pdf download
• BISE Hyderabad
• BISE Lahore
• bise rawalpindi
• BISE Sargodha
• career-counseling
• how to pass
• Punjab Board
• Sindh-Board
• Solved mcqs
• Student-Guide

Advertisement

‘Every Dollar Counts’: Prosecutors Use Quotes From Trump’s Books Against Him

Donald J. Trump’s books provided prosecutors with passages they believe can help their case, as they argue that he knew that his company falsified business records to cover up a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels.

• Share full article

By Kate Christobek ,  Ben Protess and Jonah E. Bromwich

• May 7, 2024

Prosecutors cannot force Donald J. Trump to testify at his criminal trial in Manhattan, but that does not mean they can’t use his words against him.

On Tuesday, the prosecutors unearthed a series of damaging excerpts from books that the former president wrote, plucking out passages to help make their case against Mr. Trump. In essence, they called a past version of Mr. Trump to testify against his future self.

In his own words, Mr. Trump described how he kept a focus on minute details and watched every penny that left his accounts, corroborating a core component of the prosecution’s case as they argue that he knew that his company falsified business records to cover up a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels, a porn star.

On cross-examination, Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Todd Blanche, suggested that a ghost writer had been responsible for these words.

Mr. Trump’s written words also described how he sees sexual potential in women that he encounters, a salient point in a trial tethered to encounters with women that he is accused of covering up. “All the women on ‘The Apprentice’ flirted with me,” he wrote.

Prosecutors introduced the damning excerpts by questioning Sally Franklin, a witness who is an executive and editor, to read excerpts from “Trump: How to Get Rich” and “Trump: Think Like a Billionaire,” both of which were published by Ballantine, a Penguin Random House imprint.

The jury heard Trump’s written words: “Every dollar counts in business, and for that matter, every dime.” The text continued, “Even in high end shops, I bargain,” adding, “I hate paying retail.”

This was not the first time jurors heard Trump in his own words. Last week, prosecutors played video clips of him talking, and they have questioned witnesses about Mr. Trump’s infamous statement on the set of “Access Hollywood” that he would grab women by the genitals.

But the judge would not allow prosecutors to play the tape for jurors, a decision that elevated the importance of the book passages, or any other opportunity to use Mr. Trump as a witness against himself.

It might not be the only opportunity for jurors to hear from the former president. Although the prosecution cannot legally call him to testify, Mr. Trump could take the witness stand in his own defense, though it is unclear whether he will do so.

For now, jurors heard his words via Ms. Franklin, who read ominous passages in which Mr. Trump spoke of how he treated his perceived enemies.

“For many years I’ve said that if someone screws you, screw them back,” she read from a book by Mr. Trump. It continued: “When somebody hurts you, just go after them as viciously and as violently as you can. Like it says in the Bible, an eye for an eye.”

As jurors listened, Mr. Trump’s smiling image on a book cover was plastered on screens across the courtroom, a sharp contrast from the scowl he sported throughout the testimony.

Kate Christobek is a reporter covering the civil and criminal cases against former president Donald J. Trump for The Times. More about Kate Christobek

Ben Protess is an investigative reporter at The Times, writing about public corruption. He has been covering the various criminal investigations into former President Trump and his allies. More about Ben Protess

Jonah E. Bromwich covers criminal justice in New York, with a focus on the Manhattan district attorney’s office and state criminal courts in Manhattan. More about Jonah E. Bromwich

Our Coverage of the Trump Hush-Money Trial

News and Analysis

Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s former fixer, faced a fierce cross-examination  in the trial, as the defense tried to tear down  the prosecution’s key witness.

Over the course of two days of testimony, Cohen has detailed the $130,000 he gave to the porn star Stormy Daniels  to silence her account of a sexual encounter with Trump, and how Trump repaid him  after winning the presidency.

Trump’s trial has become a staging ground  for Republicans, including House Speaker Mike Johnson  and Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio , to prove their fealty to the former president.

More on Trump’s Legal Troubles

Key Inquiries: Trump faces several investigations  at both the state and the federal levels, into matters related to his business and political careers.

Case Tracker:  Keep track of the developments in the criminal cases  involving the former president.

What if Trump Is Convicted?: Could he go to prison ? And will any of the proceedings hinder Trump’s presidential campaign? Here is what we know , and what we don’t know .

Trump on Trial Newsletter: Sign up here  to get the latest news and analysis  on the cases in New York, Florida, Georgia and Washington, D.C.