December 2, 2011 by staff
The global anti-graft watchdog, which compiles an annual list of countries based on their ranking on a scale of 1 to 10, places India below China in the index, but above its neighbour, Pakistan. India is perceived to be more corrupt than China which is ranked 75th on the list, but is better off than Pakistan, that is placed at the 134th position.
Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index scores 183 countries and territories from zero (highly corrupt) to 10 (very clean) based on data from 17 surveys that look at factors such as enforcement of anti-corruption laws, access to information and conflicts of interest.
That India has sunk in the global corruption index has not come as any surprise to the political observers and social activists, given the environment that has been created across the country because of the surfacing of high-profile cases of financial irregularities in the past one year.
The list includes the 2G spectrum allocation scam, Commonwealth Games scandal, the Adarsh Housing Society case, aircraft purchase and illegal mining. Investigations in these cases have seen several politicians, bureaucrats and corporates landing behind bars in the last 12 months.
Against such a backdrop, the plummeting standing of India in the global transparency index has not come as any surprise to anyone. New Zealand, on the other hand, was ranked number one in the index. In other words, it was rated as the least corrupt country, while Somalia and North Korea were the worst performers.
Transparency International, the global body spearheading the fight against corruption, said its annual league tables showed that New Zealand stood at top of the global list overall as the least corrupt in the world, according to an AAP report. Australia was among the least corrupt country in the Group of 20 industrialised nations, according to the new survey.
Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.