腐敗治理廉政管理中英文對(duì)照外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)

中英文對(duì)照外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)(文檔含英文原文和中文翻譯)CombatingCorruptionandManagingIntegrityinMalaysia:ACriticalOverviewofRecentStrategiesandInitiativesAbstractTheGovernmentofMalaysiahasmadecontinuouseffortsandputinplaceanelaboratesetofstrategiesandinstitutionsaimedatcombatingcorruptionandpromotingintegrityinthesociety.Thenation’santi-corruptiondrivehaslatelyreceivedamajorboost.TheBadawigovernmentthatcametopowerin2003following22yearsoftheMahathireradeclaredcontainingcorruptionasitsmainprioritywhichwasfollowedbyaseriesofconcretemeasures.However,thegovernmentalattemptsandstrategiesinMalaysiaappeartohavemetwithlittlesuccess,asevidencedbythecurrentdatathatsuggestsentrenchedcorruptioninthesociety.Evidenceshowsthatdespitegovernmentalcampaignsandinitiatives,corruptionhasremainedacute,widespreadand,infact,worsenedinrecentyears.Thispaperpresentsacriticaloverviewoftheanti-corruptionstrategiesbeingfollowedinMalaysiaandexplorestheproblemsandlimitationsofthecurrentapproachtofightingcorruptionandmanagingintegrityinthesociety.KeywordsCorruption.Publicintegrity.Governance.Politicization.PatronageandMoneypoliticsIntroductionAlthoughcorruptionisnotanewphenomenon,latelyithasbecomeamatterofgrowingconcernallovertheworld.Thisispartlybecauseofthechangingeconomicandpoliticalenvironmentaroundtheglobeandpartlybecauseofthegrowingconsensusinbothacademicandpolicycirclesofthenegativeimpactsofcorruptiononsocio-economicdevelopment.Nowthereisafargreaterappreciationthaninthepastthatcorruptionisnotonlymorallywrong,itexactsaheavytollonanation’sprosperity.Corruptionunderminesgoodgovernance,distortspublicpolicy,leadstomisallocationofresourcesandhurtseconomicgrowth(Bardhan1997;Rose-Ackerman1999).Consequentlygovernmentsandinternationalagencieshavedivertedmucheffortssearchingforeffectivemeasurestocontrolthismenace.Thishasproducedavarietyofstrategiesandinstitutionalinnovationsaroundtheworld.ApopularchoicehasbeentheestablishmentofastrongandcentralizedanticorruptionagencymodeledalongthelinesofthoseinSingaporeandHongKongwithclearmandatestoconfronttheproblemsofcorruption.Elsewhere,amultipleagencyframeworkhasbeenadoptedwhichinvolvescreatingand/orstrengtheningofanti-corruptioncapacitiesacrossseveralgovernmentalagencies(Meagher2005).Buttheresultsachievedarefarfromuniform:whilesomecountrieshaveachievedconsiderablesuccessincontainingcorruption,othershavefailedtomakesignificantheadwaysdespitehavingfollowedsimilaranti-corruptionreformsandstrategies.Attemptstodrawlessonsforpolicytransfershaveproveddifficult(Klitgaard1988;Quah2003)giventhedifferencesinthecontextsandahostofotherfactor.Thusthereisagenerallackofagreementonwhatapproachesworkandwhatexplainsthesuccessandfailureofanticorruptionstrategies.Notwithstandingthis,combatingcorruptionorpromotingintegrityhasbecomeamajorcomponentofgovernmentalreformsinmanycountries.Malaysiaisnoexceptiontothisrule.InappreciationofthesignificanceofgoodgovernanceforsustainedeconomicgrowthandprosperitygenerallytheMalaysiangovernmenthasreneweditscommitmenttofightingcorruption.WhiletheAntiCorruptionAgencywassetupin1967withclearmandates,itwasreformedandrevitalizedsubsequentlytomakeitmoreEffectiveincontainingcorruptionandallformsofmaladministrationinthesociety.Since2003fightingcorruptionhasbeenfirmlyontheagendaofthegovernment:varietyofnewinitiativesandstrategieshavebeendevisedandimplementedeversince.Takentogether,Malaysiahasanelaborateanti-corruptionframework.YetMalaysiapresentsaninterestingcase:thelevelofcorruptionhasremainedhighandtheplethoraofstrategiesandtherecentcampaignsappeartohavemadehardlyanydifferenceincontainingandCombatingcorruptioninthesociety.ThispaperpresentsacriticaloverviewofMalaysia’santi-corruptionstrategieshighlightingsomeoftheirdrawbacksandlimitations.Itbeginswithabriefreviewoftheliteratureoncorruptionandanti-corruption,whichisfollowedbyanoverviewofinstitutionalstrategiesandrecentinitiativesforcombatingcorruptionandmanagingintegrityinthesociety.“Explainingtheresults:limitationsoftheanti-corruptionstrategies”providesananalysisoftheinadequaciesandlimitationsofthecurrentapproachtofightingcorruptionandmanagingintegrity.Finally,theconcludingsectionofthepaperoutlineskeylessonsandpolicyimplicationsforbolsteringtheeffectivenessofanti-corruptiondrivesandstrategies.Developmentssince2003Since2003corruptionhasbecomeacentralissueinMalaysia’spoliticaldiscourse.Soonafterhistakeoverofpower,PrimeMinisterAbdullahAhmadBadawideclaredfightingcorruptionashisfirstpriority.Thiswasfollowedbyaseriesofinitiatives—believedtobeanintegralpartofgovernment’santi-corruptioncampaign.TheintroductionofNationalIntegrityPlanin2004representsamajoreffortmadebyhisgovernmenttowardspromotingacultureofintegrity.TheNIPprovidesacomprehensiveframeworkforpromotingethicsandintegrityinthesociety.GearedtowardsinstillingandnurturinganethicalcultureandintegrityatalllevelsoftheMalaysiansocietytheNIPisexpectedtofocusonindividuals,family,privatesector,publicadministration,socio-culturalagencies,NGOsandpoliticians(GOM2004).TheMalaysianInstituteofIntegrity(MII)wasestablishedinordertoprovideaframeworkthatwouldsupporttheeffectivecoordinationandimplementationofNIP.ChairedbytheChiefSecretarytothegovernmentandgovernedbyaBoardofDirectorstheMIIisresponsibleformonitoringandcoordinatingtheimplementationofNIP.TheMIIisalsoresponsiblefordevisingappropriateindicestomeasureperformanceinachievingNIPtargets,preparingannualreportsonMalaysianIntegritysystemandinorganizingconventionsofstakeholderstodebateintegrityissuesseekingnewandinnovativewaystomoveforward.Asafurthereffortaimedatstrengtheninganti-corruptiondrivestheBadawigovernmentlaterestablishedtheAntiCorruptionAcademy.In2004theAbdullahgovernmentintroducedanotherschemedesignedtocomplementtheongoingeffortsforenhancingpublicintegrityinMalaysia.KnownasIslamHadari(civilizationalIslam)itisacomprehensiveframeworkwhichseekstopromoteanintegratedandbalanceddevelopment,consistentwiththetenetsofIslam.Itisessentiallyastate-sanctionedprogramofsocialengineering;itemphasizes,amongothers,thedevelopmentofknowledgeableandpiouspeoplewhoarehonest,trustworthyandarepreparedtotakeonglobalchallenges.FaithandpietyinGod,avigorouspursuitandmasteryofknowledge,ajustandtrustworthygovernment,culturalandmoralintegrityareamongtheleadingprinciplesofIslamHadari(JKIM2005).Suchprinciplesareexpectedtoguidetheindividualsaswellasorganizationsthusprovidingaframeworkfortheformulationofpoliciesandstrategiestowardsgoodgovernanceandresponsibleadministration.ItisobviousthatMalaysiahasputinplacecomprehensiveanti-corruptionstrategiesinvolvinginstitutional,legalandnormativeaspects.Thesestrategiesalsocombinepreventiveaswellaspunitivedimensions.Takentogetherwithwatchdogbodies,educationalandsocialawarenessprogramsandadministrativeinnovations,Malaysiaprovidesanelaborateframeworkfordealingwithcorruptionandissuesofpublicintegrity.Theobviousquestionis:howeffectivearesuchdrivesandstrategies?InarecentsurveyconductedbyTransparencyInternationaltherespondentshavearguedthatlittleimprovementshavehadoccurredinthefightagainstcorruption.Nearlytwo-thirdsoftherespondentsfromthemembersofthepublicbelievedthattherehavebeennoimprovementsinthelevelsofintegrityandTransparencyinbothpublicandprivatesectors.Aseparatesurveyoncorporatemanagersrevealedthatsome47%paidorknewsomeonewhopaidbribesinthepast12months(InternationalHeraldTribune,5March,2007).Thepolicewasrankedasthemostcorruptdepartmentfollowedbyotherenforcementagenciessuchasroadsandtransportandcustomsdepartment.Themagnitudeofcorruptionintheenforcementagenciesisevidentfromtheconfessionofaformerpolicechiefwhorevealedthat40%oftheseniorpoliceofficerscouldbearrestedwithoutinvestigation—strictlyonthebasisontheirlifestyles(AliranMonthly,11,2007).Theroyalcommissiononpoliceformedearlierbythegovernmentalsomadesimilarobservationsaboutthemagnitudeofcorruptionwithintheagency.ConcludingobservationsThispaperrevealsthatalthoughthereisanelaborateinstitutionalframeworktodealwithcorruptionandthegovernment’santi-corruptioncampaignhasbeeninplacesince2003,theoverallsituationinMalaysiahasbeenfarfromsatisfactory.Inotherwords,theinstitutionalmeasuresandgovernmentalstrategieshavefailedtohavesignificantimpactsoncorruptioninthesociety.Varietyofmeasuresintroducedisclearlyvisible,buttheireffectivenessisfarlessevident.Thisismoresowiththerecentmeasuresandinnovationssomeofwhicharestillattheearlystageofimplementation.Whilegovernmentalinitiativesmadeduringpastdecadesaregenerallyviewedfavorably,thereisafeelingthattheyfellshortofwhatwasrequiredtomakeanti-corruptionbodieseffectiveandcredibleintheeyesoftheN.A.Siddiqueepeople.ThepapershowsthatinsteadofstrengtheningtheexistinginstitutionsandenhancingtheircapacitytoactaseffectivewatchdogagenciesthegovernmentofMalaysiahasoftentakenthepathofestablishingnewinstitutionsandstrategies.TheleadershipinMalaysiaappearstobeefficientinimportingnewmodelswithalltheirinstitutionalwrappingsandjargonsbutpoorineffectiveimplementationandtheirsubsequentconsolidation.Theexperiencewithnumerouspublicsectorreformsconfirmsthis.Throughoutthe1990sand2000sthepublicserviceinMalaysiahasadoptedarangeofmeasuresmanyofwhichhavealreadyfallenwaysidegiventhecurrentemphasisone-government.TheBadawigovernmentcametopowerwithaslogantostampoutcorruptioninthesocietyhashardlymadeanymajordeparturefromthepastinthisregard.Reformsandchangesitintroducedhaveremainednarrowlyfocused;nosignificantmovehasbeenmadetoeithertorectifythedefectsofthepoliticalsystemortoaddresstheweaknessesoftheexistinginstitutionsforenhancingtheireffectiveness.Hardlyanythingsubstantivehasbeendoneintermsofstrengtheningdemocraticinstitutions,auditandoversightfunctions,freedomofmedia,accesstoinformationandthelike.Suchfailurescoupledwithpoliticalcorruptionandslacksintheenforcementoflawsandregulationshaveunderminedthegovernment’santi-corruptiondrivestoalargeextent.ThepapershowsthatthecurrentleadershipiseitherunableorunwillingtotacklepoliticalcorruptionfortherulingUMNOitselfisenmeshedinsuchculture.Thusthepoliticalwilltofightcorruptionhasremainedlowandhalf-hearted.Thepaperarguesthatitisthisweaknesswhichlargelyexplainsotherdeficienciesincludingthehandicapsoftheexistinginstitutionsandthenon-enforcementorselectiveenforcementofexistinglawsandregulations.OnesilverlininghoweveristheestablishmentofMACC.Despitesomeobviouslimitations,theestablishmentoftheMACCcouldberegardedasastepintherightdirection—althoughitremainstobeseenifthereformedstructurecanmakeanymajordifference.Thisbringsustosomeimportantquestions:doinstitutionsmatter?WhatlessonscouldbedrawnfromtheMalaysianexperience?AkeyargumentofthepaperisthatthatcurrentinstitutionsandstrategiesinMalaysiahavefailedtohavedesiredimpacts.ThepaperalsoshowsthatthedeterioratingcorruptionsituationinMalaysiaisdue,amongothers,tothedefectsofthecountry’spoliticalsystems,culturesandinstitutions.Inawaythissuggeststhatoldpoliticalinstitutionsandcultureslastlongandthattheycontinuetoshapeandconstrainnewpoliticsandreforms.Thusinstitutionsareimportantandtheydomatter!However,asthepaperdemonstrates,theintroductionofnewinstitutionalmeasuresisnotenough;infact,thisisnotwhatMalaysianeedsurgently.Institutionsarenecessarybutnotsufficientconditionsforeffectiveanti-corruptiondrives.Forinstitutionsdonotworkinavacuum,theymustbesupportedwithfavourablepolicycontexttoenablethemtoplaytheirroles.Therefore,whatisimportantisacomprehensiveapproachwhereanti-corruptioneffortsfocusbeyondinstitutionaltools.Arobustgovernanceframeworkcanbolsterthecapacityandeffectivenessofinstitutionstoalargeextent.Anti-corruptiondrivesandinstitutionsareunlikelytomakemuchheadwayifbasicconditionsofgoodgovernanceareabsent.Thereisgreaterneednowthananytimebeforeforafreemedia,freedomofinformationactandwhistleblowerprotectionlaws.ItisalsoimportantthattheOfficialSecretsActisrepealedtoensuregreatertransparencyinCombatingCorruptionandManagingIntegrityinMalaysiapublicadministration.CertainlyMalaysiacannotbeatransparentsocietyifthetransparencyanddisclosureofinformationispunishableunderthelaw.Objectivesofcombatingcorruptionandmanagingintegritywillremainlargelyillusiveaslongasfactorslikemoneypolitics,patronagenetworksandfusionofrolescontinuetobethekeyfeaturesofMalaysia'spolitico-administrativeculture.Sincetheeffectivenessofanti-corruptiondrivesisfrustratedbyhighlevelcorruptionconcertedandrobusteffortsarerequiredfortacklingit.Mostimportantly,thereisaneedtochangethepublicperceptionabouttheseriousnessofthegovernmentinfightingcorruptionmakingita‘highriskandlowreturnactivity’.Withoutthis,newinstitutionsandlawsareunlikelytobearmuchfruits.馬來西亞的反腐斗爭和廉政管理：近期戰(zhàn)略和舉措一種批判性概述摘要為了打擊腐敗實(shí)行廉政管理，馬來西亞政府已經(jīng)作出了不斷的努力，投入了一系列精心設(shè)計(jì)的的策略和機(jī)構(gòu)。近年來，馬來西亞政府反腐敗運(yùn)動(dòng)也得到了很大的推進(jìn)。巴達(dá)維政府在2003年掌權(quán)后宣布在隨后的22年的馬哈蒂爾時(shí)代，腐敗依然是優(yōu)先考慮的問題，接下來也會(huì)有一系列具體措施。但是，馬來西亞政府的嘗試和策略似乎少有成效，這已經(jīng)被目前的數(shù)據(jù)證明，當(dāng)前數(shù)據(jù)顯示社會(huì)中的腐敗仍根深蒂固。又有證據(jù)顯示，盡管政府進(jìn)行了反腐活動(dòng)，也開展了相關(guān)舉措，腐敗仍然是嚴(yán)峻的、廣泛存在的，并且事實(shí)上在最近幾年出現(xiàn)惡化。本文對(duì)馬來西亞政府采取的反腐策略進(jìn)行了一個(gè)批判性的概述，同時(shí)探討了當(dāng)前政府打擊腐敗和實(shí)行廉政管理中存在的問題和局限。關(guān)鍵詞腐敗公共廉政治理政治化賄賂和金錢政治緒論盡管腐敗并不是一個(gè)新現(xiàn)象，但最近它已成為一個(gè)世界各地日益關(guān)注的問題。這一部分是因?yàn)槭澜缃?jīng)濟(jì)和政治環(huán)境的變化，另一部分是因?yàn)楣妼?duì)貪污腐敗給社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)造成負(fù)面影響的共識(shí)在不斷增加。現(xiàn)在，我們比過去更加深刻地了解到腐敗不僅僅只是腐蝕道德文明，它對(duì)一個(gè)國家的繁榮也造成了嚴(yán)重的損害。腐敗破壞善政及公共政策，導(dǎo)致資源分配不當(dāng)，損害經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(Bardhan1997;Rose-Ackerman1999).因此各國政府和國際機(jī)構(gòu)努力尋找有效的措施來控制這種威脅。這就產(chǎn)生了世界上各種各樣的策略和制度創(chuàng)新。最受歡迎的模式是模仿新加坡和香港，建立強(qiáng)大和集中式的反腐機(jī)構(gòu)，發(fā)布明確的指令直擊腐敗問題。在其他地方，一種多機(jī)構(gòu)框架已被采用，這種框架涉及在在幾個(gè)政府機(jī)構(gòu)間創(chuàng)建和/或加強(qiáng)反腐能力(Meagher2005)。但各個(gè)政府機(jī)構(gòu)在反腐上取得的效果各異：一些國家在遏制腐敗上取得了極大的成功，而其他國家盡管實(shí)行了類似的反腐敗改革和策略，但卻沒有重大突破。由于背景的差異和一系列其他的因素，想要借鑒其他國家的政策被證明是很困難的(Klitgaard1988;Quah2003)因而，對(duì)于哪些方法是可行的，哪些是可以解釋反腐敗策略的成功和失敗，大家都缺乏一致的意見。盡管存在這種現(xiàn)象，打擊腐敗和促進(jìn)誠信已成為許多國家政府改革的一個(gè)重要組成部分。馬來西亞也不例外。在感激善政帶來的經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)增長和普遍繁榮的同時(shí)，馬來西亞政府也已重申了其打擊腐敗的決心。盡管于1967成立的反腐敗機(jī)構(gòu)（ACA)有其明確的目標(biāo)，但是為了使它在遏制當(dāng)代社會(huì)的腐敗和各種形式的行政失當(dāng)上發(fā)揮更大作用，ACA后來也經(jīng)歷了不斷地改變與革新。自2003以來，反腐敗斗爭一直都在政府的議程中：從此以后，各種舉措和策略就層出不窮?？偟膩碚f，馬來西亞有一個(gè)詳細(xì)的反腐敗框架。但是它也向我們展示了一個(gè)有趣的現(xiàn)象：馬來西亞的腐敗程度仍然很高，近期的策略和活動(dòng)在反腐敗斗爭中幾乎沒有帶來任何反響。這篇文章即是對(duì)馬來西亞反腐敗策略的缺點(diǎn)和局限性的批判性概述。本文首先是對(duì)腐敗和反腐敗文獻(xiàn)做簡要回顧，然后是對(duì)為進(jìn)行反腐敗和實(shí)行廉政管理戰(zhàn)略而施行的機(jī)制和新近創(chuàng)舉的概述。接著通過"解釋結(jié)果：反腐敗策略的局限性"這一部分，分析當(dāng)前治理反腐敗和廉政管理方法的不足和局限性。最后,文章在結(jié)語部分概述了加強(qiáng)反腐機(jī)制和策略有效性的重要經(jīng)驗(yàn)和影響。馬來西亞廉政建設(shè)機(jī)制、策略和影響2003年以來，腐敗已成為馬來西亞的政治中的一個(gè)中心話題。自總理阿卜杜拉·艾哈邁德巴達(dá)維上臺(tái)后，他就宣布把打擊腐敗作為他首要任務(wù)。隨后，他也進(jìn)行一系列的舉措這些舉措被認(rèn)為是政府反腐敗運(yùn)動(dòng)的一個(gè)組成部分。2004年的《全國誠信計(jì)劃》（NIP）的引入也表明了他領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的政府在促進(jìn)誠信文化方面所作的重大努力。NIP為促進(jìn)道德和社會(huì)誠信的提供了一個(gè)全面的框架。為向馬來西亞社會(huì)的各個(gè)階層的人們傳遞和培養(yǎng)道德文化，NIP將著重關(guān)注個(gè)人、家庭、私營部門、公共行政、社會(huì)文化機(jī)構(gòu)、非政府組織和政治家這些個(gè)人，群體。為了提供一種框架以支持NIP的實(shí)施和有效協(xié)調(diào)其他措施，馬來西亞誠信研究所得以成立。由政府的政務(wù)司司長領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，由董事會(huì)管理，馬來西亞誠信研究所負(fù)責(zé)監(jiān)測NIP的執(zhí)行情況。誠信研究所也負(fù)責(zé)制定適當(dāng)?shù)闹笜?biāo)來衡量國家誠信計(jì)劃的完成情況、準(zhǔn)備馬來西亞誠信系統(tǒng)的年度報(bào)告、組織利益相關(guān)者參與討論誠信問題以尋求新的解決方式，推進(jìn)工作。為進(jìn)一步加強(qiáng)反腐敗機(jī)制，巴達(dá)維政府隨后建立了反腐敗學(xué)院。在2004年，阿卜杜拉政府推出了另一項(xiàng)計(jì)劃，作為當(dāng)前努力的補(bǔ)充，以加強(qiáng)馬來西亞公共廉正建設(shè)。這項(xiàng)被稱為文明伊斯蘭教的計(jì)劃，提供了一個(gè)全面的框架，旨在促進(jìn)社會(huì)和諧均衡發(fā)展，它也符合伊斯蘭教義。文明伊斯蘭教計(jì)劃本質(zhì)上是一個(gè)經(jīng)國家批準(zhǔn)的社會(huì)工程；它首要強(qiáng)調(diào)對(duì)那些知識(shí)淵博的、虔誠的并準(zhǔn)備迎接全球挑戰(zhàn)的人的培養(yǎng)。信念，虔誠，渴求掌握知識(shí)，一個(gè)值得信賴的政府，文化以及誠信文明，這些都是伊斯蘭教的主要教義。人們認(rèn)為這些教義可以用來指導(dǎo)個(gè)人和組織行為，以此為制定政策法規(guī)和旨在建立一個(gè)良性的責(zé)任型政府的戰(zhàn)略提供框架。很明顯,馬來西亞實(shí)施了全面反腐敗策略，這些包括體制建設(shè)、法律和規(guī)范性文件的頒布。這些策略還結(jié)合了預(yù)防和懲治措施。