However, the anti-corruption ratings are not based on demonstrable facts; there's no other way to explain Surinam's rapid improvement on the index. In 2006, Surinam was 90th out of 180 countries ranked by Transparency International. This year, the former Dutch colony leapt to 72nd place, sharing its ranking with Brazil and China. However, there is no evidence that a demonstrable shift in the political or economic climate has taken place in the country. Surinam was not among the Inter-American countries that signed an anti-corruption declaration last year.
Victor Hart, director of transparency International's only office in the region, in Trinidad, says he has no explanation either:
" I was rather surprised at the major shift achieved by Surinam, especially when one looks at the shifts for the other countries in the neighbourhood. And I have no information about what's happening on the ground in Surinam at the moment to explain how that could have happened and if in fact it's accurate."
Achilles' heel
These unfathomable changes in ratings clearly expose the Corruption Perception Index's Achilles' heel. The scores on the CPI, published annually by Transparency International since 1995, are not based on hard facts but on the perception of experts and business people in the 180 countries ranked on the index, and perceptions are hard to verify. However, perceptions form the basis of the good results booked by EU countries. Denmark, Finland and New Zealand can now call themselves the least corrupt countries in the world. The Netherlands overtook Switzerland and rose from ninth place to seventh. The new EU countries also rose in the rankings.
Realistic picture
Transparency International's European director Miklos Marschall says:
"While indeed perceptions can be influenced by many things, overall they give you a realistic picture. Maybe for the first time in the history of CPI, there is an overall trend of little improvements. And EU membership, the process through which these new members became fully fledged members of the EU, had its positive benefits through external pressure. That is what you can see in Slovenia, Estonia, but also in relatively corrupt countries like Bulgaria and Romania."
Bribery
The World Bank, well known for the stringent requirements that its clients must fulfil, also emphasised the importance of the CPI. Daniel Kaufmann, director of Global Programmes and Government at the World Bank Institute says:
"I look up to it with enormous respect. Let's keep in mind that perceptions matter. What entrepreneurs or the citizens of a country say affects how they vote, how they invest. And secondly, nowadays the questions have become much more rigorous and scientific, even asking about the quantity of bribes. So that's much more rigorous than the typical opinion poll question in the past that asked 'in your view is there high or low corruption in your country?' That's not very useful, and that's a totally subjective perception."
According to Mr Kaufmann, Transparency International's index and the World Bank's own investigations produce similar results in about 90 percent of the cases, certainly in European countries.
However, the impact of European Union membership should not be overrated. Brand new EU member Romania has been given a failing grade of 3.7 percent and is now at about the same level as Ghana and Colombia.
"There is still a lot of work to do," admits Mr Marshall. Next year's list will show if the changes are permanent or if it was just a short live euphoria resulting from EU membership.
* RNW translation (jc)
Tags: bribery, corruption, EU, Romania , Surinam, Transparency-International, World Bank