Summary
Corruption is one of the major political-administrative-economic challenges, which Mexico is facing. It is considered one of the major obstacles, by Mexicans, which is keeping Mexico from realizing its potential. Different governments took different measures to curb corruption. However, these measures were half-hearted and most intended to hurt political rivals.
Recently, the government of Pena Nieto has introduced anti-corruption reforms that aim to curb corruption and improve governance by reduction corruption. The original idea was to give birth to a new institution, National Anti-corruption Commission (NAS). However, because of lack of support for NAS, President had to introduce National Anti-corruption System. The new policy is comprehensive but slightly flawed. Also, strong resolve, to curb corruption, is missing, which is why NAS is not performing as per expectations. Mexico will require a strong and independent institution, along with the political will, to curb corruption. Also, it must consider that corruption in certain ways facilitates Mexico’s economic growth.
What is the issue?
It is believed that large-scale corruption affects governance, as both are negatively correlated. Most, of the studies, infers that corruption weakens state institutions, which affects the economy and governance in the long run. When we compare developing countries with the developed countries, it becomes plain to us that in developing countries large-scale corruption is low and state institutions are highly functional and evolved. In contrast, developing countries’ institutions are impaired because of large scale-corruption (UNDP.Org, 2013).
Mexico also suffers because of widespread and institutional corruption, which various global institutions documented during different periods. To address and curb both widespread and institutional corruption different Mexican governments, at different times, devised different strategies, which produced mixed results. The incumbent government has implemented the strategy to curb corruption. This academic exercise will address the question that “Is the government in Mexico is implementing effective policies to curb corruption and ensure good governance?”
Background
Mexico, which has a $2 trillion economy, is the 15th largest economy in the world. The sheer size of the economy makes it an important country. However, despite its huge economy, poverty remains a serious issue. The economy is unable to produce lucrative socioeconomic opportunities for its people, who is partly because of corruption and governance related issues (HRW.Org, 2016).
In the last three decades, Mexican governments have taken a range of measure to improve governance and to curb corruption (Lustig, 1996). However, because of political instability and organized crime, it failed repeatedly to meet the set objectives. Studies, on this subject, have isolated various reasons for the failure of these policies, about curbing corruption and improving governance. The bulk of the studies suggested that because of the weak institutions, successive Mexican governments could not effectively implement their policies (Santiso, 2006). However, some studies suggested that Mexican governments were never truly sincere to implement strategies and policies to curb corruption, of numerous types, and to improve governance (Morris & Klesner, 2010).
The current Mexican government has once again taken the initiative to curb corruption and to ensure good governance in an entire country. Therefore, we are witnessing accountability, which intends to aid the government in realizing the objectives it has set. These accountability measures are being debated and studied rigorously to understand their impact and to project their possible consequences.
Arguments For
In the year 2016, Mexico introduced reforms related to anti-corruption. According to the observers, these reforms are very comprehensive and seems effective as they address those issues, which are stopping government and state institutions from curbing corruption. The anti-corruption reforms, approved in the year 2016, brought change to 14 articles of Mexico’s constitution, introduced two general laws and reformed five clauses (sub). These reforms gave birth to a new and supposedly more effective institution, National Anti-Corruption System (NAS). Also, this new institution has more support of civil society than the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NAC), which was the brainchild of Pena Nieto, Mexico’s President.
We learn, from the statistics, that birth and functioning of new institution NAS, has positively affected anti-corruption drive in Mexico. It is primarily because the institution is a consequence of a collective effort, in which government and civil society participated. It is true that there are certain issues in implementing policy and producing desired results. However, this is commendable measure, which will produce results gradually. Most important of all is taking the right initiative at the right time. For a very long period, there was a need for an independent institution, which could curb the menace of corruption, of which various variants exist in Mexico. It is presumed that as corruption will decline, gradually, and governance will improve (Kim, 2017).
The current data, regarding the aftermath, of establishing NAS, is apocryphal and less-mature, which institutions and organizations require passing verdict regarding the effectiveness of latest measure of Mexico against corruption. It is imperative to acknowledge that the current government, of Mexico, intends to improve governance primarily by reducing or curbing corruption.
Empirically, it is quite difficult to measure corruption and governance; however, researchers have developed instruments to measure these two important phenomena. Nevertheless, empirical evidence (that is mostly in the form of numbers/statistics), is not mature enough to be scrutinized and interpreted. Therefore, it is quite difficult to pass judgment regarding the effectiveness of anti-corruption policies and actions.
Arguments Against
It is true that the Anti-Corruption reform bill is very comprehensive and a step in the right direction. However, it all comes down to the sincerity with which government and institutions implement a policy. On paper, most of the policies look comprehensive and suggest that they can produce results. However, when these policies and strategies are implemented, they fail to produce the desired result, even if a government is sincere. In the case of Mexico, we detect lack of will on the part of the government to fight corruption. Already, signs are emerging, which suggest that government is strategically using the anti-corruption drive to impair its political opponents.
According to the reports, prepared by the commissioners of NAS, Mexico’s government is blocking, in different ways, its anti-corruption drive. It suggests that government is not sincere to address the issue of anti-corruption and it intends to use this policy as an instrument against political rivals, rather than corruption (Ahmed, 2017).
So far, the strategy, policy, and actions, of government and its institutions, have not produced any impressive results. In fact, since the birth of NAS and implementation of anti-corruption policy, there has been no significant change governance and statistics reveal that corruption has not dwindled significantly. Some argue that such strategies and policies take time to produce results. Therefore, we should not judge these policies, this soon. It is true that anti-corruption strategies and policies, intend to improve governance, require time to take effect; however, they start to produce results after a small period, which allow observers to conjecture about the effectiveness of policy or strategy. Also, to address such deep-rooted problem, it is imperative for the government to be sincere and active in implementing the policy/strategy. This sincerity is missing, as per reports, which is why the chances of a successful anti-corruption drive, are slim.
Contradictions
There are some contradictions in the entire campaign or drive against corruption. For instance, in the case of Mexico, corruption facilitates economic growth. There are reports, which suggest that corruption has helped Mexico not only in realizing its economic objectives but also is attaining political stability. As corruption is deep-rooted; therefore, it has institutionalized. Therefore, eradication of corruption would be a difficult task, which will adversely affect the economy. Also, it seems that anti-corruption drive does not have the full support of the current government, which may produce dangerous results. Already, January has been the most violent January in decades, and it is presumed that it is because of the anti-corruption drive, which is affecting political stability.
Another contradiction is regarding the government will. Pena Nieto had a different strategy to curb corruption, and for that, he intended to use National Anti-corruption Commission as an instrument. He had to introduce a different set of reforms under the pressure of civil society. It is presumed that because of this reason, the government lacks the will to implement anti-corruption policy in letter and spirit. The government also intends to improve governance through the campaign against corruption, which seems to be a flawed policy.
Policy Recommendation (s)
We must acknowledge that anti-corruption reforms and the birth of NAS are huge developments and we must recognize these events and measures as a step in a right direction. However, because of the lack of will, on the part of the government, the institution of NAS must be more independent to produce results. It will require more pressure from civil society so that government may introduce more reforms that make NAS an independent institution, which does not require strong resolve of the government to be functional. We must provide more time to these institutions so that they could mature and produce desired results. During this period, they must be reformed to be more functional or effective.
Personal Opinion
I believe that introduction anti-corruption reforms and the birth of NAS are good omens. These developments will aid Mexico in fighting corruption. However, I am also not sure how governance can be significantly improved by solely focusing on corruption. Also, I am of the view that NAS is not independent enough, as an institution, which may affect its ability to produce results.
References
Ahmed, A. (2017, December 2). Mexico’s Government Is Blocking Its Own Anti-Corruption Drive, Commissioners Say. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/02/world/americas/mexico-corruption-commission.html
HRW.Org. (2016, December 31). Mexico-Events of 2016. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/mexico
Kim, J. (2017). The Mexican Cartel Conundrum: Policy Reform is More Effective Than Waging War. Journal Article| August, 1(1), 1-14.
Lustig, N. (1996, March 1). Mexico: The Slippery Road to Stability. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/02/world/americas/mexico-corruption-commission.html
Morris, S. D., & Klesner, J. L. (2010). Corruption and trust: Theoretical considerations and evidence from Mexico. Comparative Political Studies, 43(10), 1258-1285.
Santiso, C. (2006). Improving fiscal governance and curbing corruption: how relevant are autonomous audit agencies? International Public Management Review , 7(2), 97-108.
UNDP.Org. (2013, September 13). The Role for Anti-corruption and Governance: Looking to 2015 and Beyond. Retrieved from http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/articles/2013/09/25/the-role-for-anti-corruption-and-governance-looking-to-2015-and-beyond-.html
+447462439809