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(lái)西亞的反腐斗爭(zhēng)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(lái)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(lái)，馬來(lái)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(wèn)題，接下來(lái)也會(huì)有一系列具體措施。但是，馬來(lái)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(kāi)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(lái)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(wèn)題和局限。關(guān)鍵詞腐敗公共廉政治理政治化賄賂和金錢(qián)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(wèn)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?，F(xiàn)在，我們比過(guò)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(guó)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(zhǎng)(Bardhan1997;Rose-Ackerman1999).因此各國(guó)政府和國(guó)際機(jī)構(gòu)努力尋找有效的措施來(lái)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(wèn)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(guó)家在遏制腐敗上取得了極大的成功，而其他國(guó)家盡管實(shí)行了類似的反腐敗改革和策略，但卻沒(méi)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(guó)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(jiàn)。盡管存在這種現(xiàn)象，打擊腐敗和促進(jìn)誠(chéng)信已成為許多國(guó)家政府改革的一個(gè)重要組成部分。馬來(lái)西亞也不例外。在感激善政帶來(lái)的經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)增長(zhǎng)和普遍繁榮的同時(shí)，馬來(lái)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(lái)也經(jīng)歷了不斷地改變與革新。自2003以來(lái)，反腐敗斗爭(zhēng)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?lái)說(shuō)，馬來(lái)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(lái)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(zhēng)中幾乎沒(méi)有帶來(lái)任何反響。這篇文章即是對(duì)馬來(lái)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(jiǎn)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(guò)"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(yǔ)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(lái)西亞廉政建設(shè)機(jī)制、策略和影響2003年以來(lái)，腐敗已成為馬來(lái)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(guó)誠(chéng)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(chéng)信文化方面所作的重大努力。NIP為促進(jìn)道德和社會(huì)誠(chéng)信的提供了一個(gè)全面的框架。為向馬來(lái)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(yíng)部門(mén)、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(lái)西亞誠(chéng)信研究所得以成立。由政府的政務(wù)司司長(zhǎng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，由董事會(huì)管理，馬來(lái)西亞誠(chéng)信研究所負(fù)責(zé)監(jiān)測(cè)NIP的執(zhí)行情況。誠(chéng)信研究所也負(fù)責(zé)制定適當(dāng)?shù)闹笜?biāo)來(lái)衡量國(guó)家誠(chéng)信計(jì)劃的完成情況、準(zhǔn)備馬來(lái)西亞誠(chéng)信系統(tǒng)的年度報(bào)告、組織利益相關(guān)者參與討論誠(chéng)信問(wèn)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(lái)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(guó)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(chéng)的并準(zhǔn)備迎接全球挑戰(zhàn)的人的培養(yǎng)。信念，虔誠(chéng)，渴求掌握知識(shí)，一個(gè)值得信賴的政府，文化以及誠(chéng)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(lái)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(lái)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。