Transparency International on Thursday last week released its global Government Defense Anti-Corruption Index. Taiwan shone among the 85 countries considered in the report, as it was awarded 70 credits, far exceeding the average score of 30. Taiwan ranked sixth, sharing the spot with Germany.
The index grouped the assessed country in six bands, ranging from A — very low corruption risk — to band F — critical corruption risk.
New Zealand was the only country in band A, and Taiwan and the UK were among the eight countries in band B, signifying a low corruption risk. This is the same allocation that Taiwan received the previous two times it was evaluated, in 2013 and 2015.
In this year’s evaluation, Australia, Canada, France, Japan, Singapore, South Korea and the US were all in band C, representing moderate risk.
China was only awarded 28 points, which placed it in band E, signifying very high risk.
The index evaluated each country’s risk of corruption in five areas: political, financial, personnel, operational and procurement.
For example, it looked at whether there is a robust democratic oversight mechanism, whether there is a legal framework for defense expenditure and management of disposed of military equipment, whether military personnel are given anti-corruption awareness training, whether there is effective oversight of corruption and whether national defense procurement is controlled.
It used more than 70 evaluation questions and indices, all of which are first self-assessed by each country taking part in the report and then evaluated by academics and specialists familiar with the country in question.
Transparency International also sent staff to the countries to conduct in situ assessments, and points were allotted in a systematic process according to scientific standards.
The rigorous process has earned the assessment a reputation for reliability and accuracy.
This year’s report pointed out that Taiwan has a strong democratic system, although China talks of peaceful unification and has never renounced the possibility of forcing Taiwan to unify through military means.
The Sino-US tensions of the past several years have raised the temperature in the Taiwan Strait, leaving Taiwan with no choice but to rapidly upgrade its defensive capabilities and invest heavily in national defense and procure weapons.
Transparency International views Taiwan’s democratic and legislative oversight mechanisms and its robust auditing system favorably, and assesses the political risk of corruption in the defense sector as low.
Taiwan’s national defense budget, expenditure items and cost are transparent, and the financial data are publicly accessible, both of which considerably reduce the financial risk, too.
Moreover, Taiwan’s comprehensive regulations governing military personnel make the system very alert to where risk of corruption might arise.
The report also notes how seriously Taiwan’s military regards ethics and anti-corruption training, and its only recommendations were the need for more vigilance to increase awareness of corruption and that a more strategic and progressive action plan should be implemented.
It also highlights that military procurements in Taiwan are extremely political and sensitive, and that the US is the main weapons provider. Given the huge national defense procurement expenditures, the report recommended that the government establish a more transparent, competitive procurement mechanism with more comprehensive oversight.
Taiwan should be pleased with the report’s approval and should heed its recommendations.
The Ministry of National Defense could, for example, seek to improve the quality and content of its anti-corruption education program and divest itself of dogmatic slogans, shaping the integrity and trustworthiness of the organizational culture of the military.
Regarding the establishment of a strategic and progressive anti-corruption action plan, the government could look at the sections on bribery risk evaluation, anti-graft policy and execution plans in the ISO 37001 standard for anti-bribery management systems, and explore how these can be applied in Taiwan’s national defense context.
Regarding procurement contracts and process control, the government has over the past few years been promoting an “integrity platform” for major procurement projects, hoping to make it more open and transparent through mutual communication and to significantly reduce the risk of corruption.
The ministry has yet to develop its own integrity platform, which could be introduced to nonconfidential procurement projects in the future.
The ministry should look into the report’s recommendations and to take the good work it has been doing to the next level.
Hsu Jen-hui is a professor at Shih Hsin University’s department of public policy and management and director of Transparency International Chinese Taipei.
Translated by Paul Cooper
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has its chairperson election tomorrow. Although the party has long positioned itself as “China friendly,” the election is overshadowed by “an overwhelming wave of Chinese intervention.” The six candidates vying for the chair are former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), former lawmaker Cheng Li-wen (鄭麗文), Legislator Luo Chih-chiang (羅智強), Sun Yat-sen School president Chang Ya-chung (張亞中), former National Assembly representative Tsai Chih-hong (蔡志弘) and former Changhua County comissioner Zhuo Bo-yuan (卓伯源). While Cheng and Hau are front-runners in different surveys, Hau has complained of an online defamation campaign against him coming from accounts with foreign IP addresses,
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The
RSS