The world observed the International Anti-Corruption Day on Dec. 9. This year's theme is 'Act against Corruption,' meaning that citizens, not just governments, should do their part in rejecting and exposing corruption, and acting as eyes and ears for the public good.

On the occasion, Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary-general, called for full global acceptance of an international convention aimed at ending corrupt practices around the world. Where are we today in fighting corruption, internationally and locally? I believe that we are already almost there at the international level. What is missing is national compliance.

In 2003, United Nations General Assembly adopted the "UN Convention against Corruption," and designated Dec. 9 as "International anti-Corruption Day" to raise awareness about corruption and the Convention.

That Convention was probably the first legally binding international anti-corruption instrument. It set out prevention and criminalization measures, while also facilitating international cooperation and asset recovery. The Convention entered into force in December 2005, just two years after its passage. So far, 164 countries (out of 193 UN member states) have acceded to it. Getting 164 out of 193 countries makes the Convention an international norm, binding on all nations. It is unusual for a UN legal instrument to garner so many votes in such a short time.

The short lag between passing the Convention and its entry into force, as well as the large number of countries joining over nine years, are both signs that the world was ready to take serious action against corruption. There are clear logical links between fighting corruption and development. In many developing countries, corruption is the main obstacle preventing their development from taking off. They usually have enough many for either development or corruption but not both.

Unfortunately, many countries have chosen to feed corrupt politicians instead of feeding the hungry and healing the sick. To quote from Ban Ki-moon's address last week: "The cost of corruption is measured not just in the billions of dollars of squandered or stolen government resources, but most poignantly in the absence of the hospitals, schools, clean water, roads and bridges that might have been built with that money — and would have certainly changed the fortunes of families and communities."

In sum, as the secretary-general explained, corruption destroys opportunities, undermines human rights and good governance, stifles economic growth and distorts markets.

Worst of all, corruption destroys the spirit and optimism of the young and leads them to despair, violence or both. Fighting corruption has now become more urgent as the UN and its member states are looking to develop a new development agenda to succeed the current Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which were agreed on by a UN summit of world leaders meeting in 2000. The current agenda sets 2015 as a deadline for achieving those goals. It has become clear that reaching those goals in many developing countries, let alone getting beyond them, is being held hostage by corruption.

In March 2011, the International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA) was set up in Vienna, Austria. It was a joint initiative by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the Austrian government and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), among others. IACA seeks to overcome current shortcomings in knowledge and practice in the field of anti-corruption through sharing experiences and best practices between its member states.

One wants to be optimistic and echo the UN Secretary General's words: “Corruption is not inevitable. It flows from greed and the triumph of the undemocratic few over the expectations of the many.” But in developing countries, where accountability and rule of law still have long ways to go, many believe that it is inevitable. It has been accepted as part of the norm of doing government business. The best we can hope for now is to expose cases of corruption and punish the perpetrators until the cost to the corrupt becomes too prohibitive to continue.

Saudi Arabia acceded to the UN Convention against Corruption in 2003. In 2007, it passed the "National Strategy to Protect Integrity and Combat Corruption." In March 2011, it set up the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), a ministerial-level governmental organization. In its 20-month tenure, the ACC has conducted awareness campaigns using both traditional and new social media.

However, there has been very little in terms of concrete public cases initiated by the ACC against specific perpetrators. Its reluctance or inability to do so may be understandable to professionals, as it is certainly difficult to carve out a role in the presence of so many other organizations with mandates that may overlap with that of the ACC. There are several supervisory and regulatory agencies, as well as judicial and quasi-judicial bodies and committees, whose mandates include fighting corruption.

Ordinary citizens have not been as understanding. Many are impatient to have the ACC play a more public role in fighting corruption. The sensational public trial of Jeddah municipal officials has only whetted people's appetite for more public accountability. The ACC has had no official role in that trial, but the public expects the ACC to have a more active and public role in fighting corruption in the future.

Last week, ACC commissioner said that its mandate was not limited to governmental activities, but covers private companies where the government owns at least 25 percent of shares. While welcome, such enlarged mandate may only increase public impatience for it to make waves fighting corruption in the private sector as well.

As the ACC gets closer to its second birthday next March, it has little time left to have something to show that impatient public what it has done besides educational campaigns.

-

Email: [email protected]