Source:
Jubileo Peru
Mon Nov 06 2006
The anti-corruption struggle undertaken by the World Bank at the request of president Wolfowitz, has set up a strong debate within civil society with regards to the Bank’s legitimacy to undertake such a crusade and the criteria to be used. Within the framework of Eurodad’s Annual Conference (Berlin, October 29-31), a workshop entitled "Diverting funds or diverting attention? The new official anti-corruption agenda" was carried out, with the participation of members of the Latin American Network on Debt, Development and Rights (LATINDADD).
When calling for participation, the organizers of the event put the issue forward as follows: “Donors, from the World Bank to the European Commission, as well as many bilateral donors, are increasing the attention paid to the issue of corruption, development aid, and in a broader sense, to the area of development finance. Corruption in developing countries has become the explanation of why aid fails to be effective or the lack of development persists. The rhetoric of development is shifting from the assumption that “institutional issues are important” towards “non-corrupt institutions are the answer”. Corruption is undoubtedly a problem and it would not be smart enough to hinder our own efforts aimed at making IFIs and Northern and Southern governments to pay attention to this problem. However, we should question several assumptions behind the official agenda. Otherwise, the current debate on corruption and development finance runs the risk of omitting the most crucial items”.
The workshop included the presentation by Jeff Powell, of the Bretton Woods Project, and Carlos Bedoya, of Jubileo Peru (member of LATINDADD). The latter laid special emphasis on the Peruvian case and questioned the legitimacy of the World Bank as an institution capable of monitoring and sanctioning corruption acts in Southern countries.
See Carlos Bedoya's complete presentation (pdf format)
|
