One of our society's earliest and most pervasive phenomena is corruption. Particularly, it has left its mark on every nation on the planet in some manner. In this context, corruption refers to unethical behavior of people in positions of power for their own personal gain. Corrupt practices have a variety of causes, depending on the nation. For instance, some of the recognized reasons include system factors, psychological factors, and cultural factors. (Pellegrini, 2011). Additionally, there are a few other variables that have an impact on developing nations, mostly in Africa, including monopoly power, discretionary power, and public officials who lack accountability. Rampant in corruption has wide-ranging impacts that include reduced revenues, reduction in public spending, and hindrance in foreign direct investment (Transparency.com, 2017). Thus, a country can become a failed state due to fecund corruption. As indicated, corruption levels vary depending on a country. In this regard, the following essay provides a well-articulated discussion comparing and contrasting corruption levels and its impact on well-being in two different countries, Somalia and Germany.
Comparing and contrasting corruption levels between Somalia and Germany
Somalia and Germany are two countries that have differences and similarities in relation to the corruption levels. To have a clear understanding of the corruption levels in both countries, it would be imperative to indicate that Somalia is ranked by the United Nations as the least developed country with a GDP of 434.21 USD. On the other hand, Germany is one of the most developed countries with a GDP of 3.467 trillion USD. Thus, it would be irrefutable to indicate that it is indeed the best economically-developed countries. This is a clear indication showing that corruption levels vary differently in both countries.
In terms of ranking, Somalia is among the most corrupt countries in the world. In particular, Somalia’s government officials tolerate illegal and unethical activities in return for bribes. In Germany, however, corruption is not considered an obstacle for businesses, and it is unlikely to encounter any activities related to corruption. The appropriate way to compare and contrast corruption levels is by evaluating various government-related services such as judicial related system, police, public service, tax administration, and public procurement. In terms of judicial system, businesses in Somalia face high level of corruptions while dealing with courts. In particular, the judicial system are subject to political interference rendering it to be ineffective. In this particular fact, the courts are practically non-functional since Somali authorities never respect the court orders (Owoye & Bissessar, 2014). This is contrary to Germany where the judiciary system is characterized by high degree of professionalism, and any act of unethical issue related to corruption is condoned. Thus, judicial corruption does not deter any business from operating effectively. The businesses perceive the courts as the effective way of settling commercial disputes as well as challenging regulations imposed by the government. However, it is worth noting that very few citizens consider abuse of power and bribery to be widespread in German courts. Therefore, there is also corruption in Germany but in minimal scale as compared to that in Somalia.
In relation to tax administration, there is no tax administration in Somalia. In fact, most of the businesses and other related processes operate in an informal sector, and therefore they go on untaxed. The Somali government lack capacity to collect taxes since they are under the rule of the rebel groups. The rebel use all means possible to ensure they collect taxes with no stipulated procedure. This is contrary to Germany since corruption in relation to tax administration is unlikely. However, there is still a group of people who consider bribery to be prevalent and widespread among tax authorities (Wolf, 2013). In this perspective, it would be imperative to indicate that the levels of corruption in relation to tax administration are high in Somalia as compared to Germany.
In relation to public procurement, businesses in German usually contend with corruption in German public procurement sector. Some of the common risks include collusive biding, conflicts of interests in the evaluation of bids, as well as unclear selection criteria. However, it is vital to note that although corruption is visible in Germany in relation to public procurement, it cannot be compared to Somalia. In fact, Somalia has one of the most distorted public procurement. In fact, majority of the public procurements are treated as confidential. Senior officials that are close to public procurement tend to contract privately owned businesses for their selfish gains. Public funds encounter a lot of diverted and misappropriated due to the prevalent corruption in the country. Thus, majority of senior government officials tend to use public procurement for their selfish gains.
Comparing both countries in relation to legislation, both countries have established legal framework stipulated in the constitution, which criminalizes the abuse of public funds and corruption. However, the difference arises in the fact that Somali government does not implement anti-corruption laws effectively as compared to Germany. In particular, Somalia Governance is grounded on informal mechanisms that tend to welcome unruly and unethical related activities related to corruption and misuse of public related resources (Quah, 2009). Thus, it is imperative to indicate that Somali institutions are based on patronage network that serves personal interests and affiliated groups. As indicated, both countries have a framework that criminalizes corruption. However, Germany differs from Somalia in that it enforces of anti-corruption legislation. Further, Germany has a reputation for punishing acts associated with corruption.
Comparing and contrasting impact of well-being and development in Somalia and Germany
Corruption has wide-ranging impacts associated with political, economic, social, as well as environmental effects. In both countries, corruption poses one of the most significant risks to the corporate community and its operations. Since corruption in Somalia is prevalent, the impacts are huge as compared to Germany. In relation to political impacts, corruption impedes the rule of law and democracy. In fact, for the last two decades, public institutions in Somalia have lost their legitimacy because of misuse of power for private interest. As compared to Somalia, political impacts in Germany are not highly felt. The other comparable impacts of corruption in both countries relate to economic effects. The economic impacts can either be categorized as minor or major depending on the level of corruption (Rose-Ackerman & Palifka, 2016). Thus, Somalia has experienced major impacts associated with corruption. This is because most of the economic activities have been paralyzed by ever prevalent corruption causing costs of goods and services to increase uncontrollably. On the other hand, Germany experience minor economic impacts associated with corruption. In fact, the impact is normally unfelt by Germany citizens.
Conclusion
In conclusion, corruption has grown to become one of the most feared aspects of our modern society. In fact, it has been the cause of the fall of majority of regimes since it undermines the legitimacy of a government and weakens its structure. As indicated by the two countries, high levels of corruption can paralyze efforts of governance as it has been apparent in Somalia. On the other hand, low corruption levels can be a source of pride for a country such as Germany.
References
Owoye, O., & Bissessar, N. (2014). Corruption in African Countries: A Symptom of Leadership and Institutional Failure. In Challenges to democratic governance in developing countries (pp. 227-245). Springer International Publishing.
Pellegrini, L. (2011). Causes of corruption: a survey of cross-country analyses and extended results. In Corruption, development and the environment (pp. 29-51). Springer Netherlands.
Quah, J. S. (2009). Governance and corruption: Exploring the connection. American Journal of Chinese Studies, 119-135.
Rose-Ackerman, S., & Palifka, B. J. (2016). Corruption and government: Causes, consequences, and reform. Cambridge university press.
Transparency.com (2017). Transparency International - Global Corruption Barometer 2013. Transparency.org. Retrieved 25 November 2017, from https://www.transparency.org/gcb2013
Wolf, S. (2013). Political Corruption as a Regulatory Problem in Germany. German LJ, 14, 1627.
