CPI 2014: Pakistan improves in corruption ranking

Scores 29 out of 100, and is ranked 126/175, which is the best Pakistan has ever achieved


News Desk December 03, 2014

In Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) 2014, Pakistan has scored 29 out of 100, and is ranked 126/175, which is the best Pakistan has ever achieved since the first CPI was issued in 1995, said a press release issued to the media on Tuesday.

However, Transparency International (TI) Pakistan Chairman Sohail Muzaffar said he hopes the government will now work with new vigour to combat corruption.

More than two-thirds of the 175 countries in the 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index score below 50, on a scale from 0 (perceived to be highly corrupt) to 100 (perceived to be very clean). Denmark comes out on top in 2014 with a score of 92 while North Korea and Somalia share last place, scoring just eight.

The scores of several countries rose or fell by four points or more. The biggest falls were in Turkey (-5), Angola, China, Malawi and Rwanda (all -4). The biggest improvers were Ivory Coast, Egypt, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (+5), Afghanistan, Jordan, Mali and Swaziland (+4).

The Corruption Perceptions Index is based on expert opinions of public sector corruption. Countries’ scores can be helped by open government where the public can hold leaders to account, while a poor score is a sign of prevalent bribery, lack of punishment for corruption and public institutions that do not respond to citizens’ needs.

Transparency International called on countries at the top of the index where public sector corruption is limited to stop encouraging it elsewhere by doing more to prevent money laundering and to stop secret companies from masking corruption.

While top performer Denmark has strong rule of law, support for civil society and clear rules governing the behaviour of those in public positions, it also set an example this November, announcing plans to create a public register including beneficial ownership information for all companies incorporated in Denmark.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 3rd, 2014.

COMMENTS (13)

Ahmad | 9 years ago | Reply

@Rubab Farooqui: @pakistani: The most funny part of the story is during ppp govt in 2012 when corruption was on its peak Pakistan was ranked as 136th on this list and now after nearly two years Pakistan is ranked as 125th WOW what an improvement so would u plz tell me what is major difference between ppp and pmlN

In Your Face Patwaris! | 9 years ago | Reply

126th place and people are hailing it as an achievement :O We should be ashamed of ourselves!

And those giving credit to the Nooras, have you forgotten that KP is also a part of Pakistan?! And you must know which party formed the government in that province and that too for the first time ever :)

FactCheck for the Patwaris:

---> In KP: Rs300m recovered from corrupt officials in two months (http://www.dawn.com/news/1128499)

Anti-Corruption Establishment (ACE), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, director Ziaullah Toru said on Thursday said that despite hurdles being created by lawmakers his department had arrested 302 officials of different government departments and recovered looted amount of Rs300 million from them during last two months.

---> Khyber Pakhtunkhwa anti-corruption legislations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CorruptioninPakistan#KhyberPakhtunkhwaanti-corruption_legislations)

The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Bill was passed in the provincial assembly on 31 October 2013. It was enacted throughout the province by the Governor of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on 4 November 2013 as the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Act, 2013.[38] The legislation makes way for provisions that add transparency to the various functions and departments of the government. It gives the citizens of the province the right to access any information or record held by a public body, except for the information that is sensitive to the security of the state.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ