CPIB rules of reporting may frighten away whistle-blowers
To encourage more people to report corruption, the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) could revamp its rules of reporting. (“Corruption complaints at 30-year low: CPIB”; April 3)
When people report a suspicious case, they do so with an understanding that there is no guarantee of the facts.
However, the warning on the CPIB website that it is an offence to knowingly give or cause to be given any false or misleading information to the CPIB, punishable by imprisonment of up to 12 months or a maximum fine of S$10,000, may frighten away whistle-blowers. How would whistle-blowers know that their information about a perceived case of corruption is false or misleading?
Fighting corruption involves law enforcement, public participation and transparency mechanisms such as information disclosure. It was duly reported that complaints lodged in person were more likely to result in investigation than an email or fax complaint.
Regardless, all forms of complaints should be given equal weight, and the CPIB explained how it deals with corruption complaints. Nothing was mentioned about the reporting process, though.
Would-be complainants surely want to know how it is done and the degree of confidentiality. They must feel assured that the CPIB would not hold them responsible if their information unwittingly turns out to be wrong, or that they can remain anonymous.
To empower citizens to fight corruption, both the top-down approach — developing institutions and naturalising norms that target public administrative graft — and the bottom-up approach, which is to mobilise ordinary citizens, are necessary.
More important than encouraging people to come forward, however, is to ensure integrity in the system functions well, and all share a common set of characteristics that correlates typically to lower levels of corruption.
