A few days ago I read the defense statements of one of the entrepreneurs of perhaps the most emblematic cause of corruption that Argentina has ever experienced (which we know as “the notebooks of causes”)“mechanism” interconnected with other related causes (any similarity of this phrase with the mythical Netflix series “O Mechanism” and the mega-causes of Brazilian corruption, it is no coincidence). The businessman’s strategy states that these acts that are accused of him in the Cuadernos case were not to bribe officials, but to contribute to the election campaign of the ruling party between 2003 and 2015.
It is evident that one fact is less painful than another. Nor do I doubt that these confessions, added to the discrediting of the evidence which is undoubtedly also part of the strategy, have no other reason than to have a more favorable settlement or resolution.
In my case, without being a defender, a prosecutor or a judge, I allow myself to conclude in advance that, from the point of view of ethical behavior, campaign contribution in these terms is as bad or worse than outright bribery Why? We see.
We know that corruption is one of the great evils of nations. It drags the necessary points of gross domestic product into a black hole to turn us into a poor country. In fact, I don’t doubt it It is the greatest cause of all the ills of our country, even above others that appear to have a higher rating such as inflation or insecurity. In one way or another they are shrubs that share the same root.
Corruption is committed in several ways, being the corrupt financing of politics one of them, and for some, the most serious. This is for many reasons:
i) It endangers democracy as organizations and individuals with a high level of resources can do it influence election results through the financing of political campaigns, in this way the voice of citizens with fewer resources is directly and indirectly suppressed (the vast majority in countries like ours), also having the right to vote.
ii) Less resources for the population and, in particular, for those who need it most. Let’s not forget to think about a small detail in relation to the previous point: where do you think the funds destined to finance political campaigns come from? Do not doubt that it is excessive prices In most cases. In other words, ordinary people with lower purchasing power finance it erosion of democracy with fewer resources received from governments (read health, education, among others), or they will require higher taxes to finance these political campaign costs.
iii) Encourage inequality. When politicians are funded by the wealthy and big business, they are more likely (and historically known) to work for these groups than for the entire population. This widens the economic and social inequality gap, and even worse, as we’ve said before, when organizations rely on premiums to pay for policy. It also generates favoritism, as this form of funding leads politicians to favor the companies or individuals who provided it, rather than making objective decisions based on the common interest.
iv) affects transparency. When politicians receive large sums of money from secret sources, it is difficult to know who is influencing policy and in what direction. Even if there has been progress in the legislation related to the financing of the policy, it is insufficient in the light of the facts.
v) It erodes the reputation of politics. When people perceive that politicians are more concerned with serving their financiers than those who rely on them with their votes, it is difficult to re-establish a virtuous relationship between politics and society in the short or medium term. Note that advanced societies and developed economies base their progress on mutual trust between the public and private sectors. Without going any further, the economy cannot develop in a climate of distrust.
I have been involved in Ethics and Compliance and ethical culture change for more than 20 years. I have had to review more than 120 integrity programs, among others, those of some of the largest companies in the country and others abroad. And you know what? While there are many ways of drafting these policies, they generally have this in common try to avoid donations/contributions to campaigns or political parties as much as possible.
Where these are permitted (as an organization may agree in good faith with the views of certain candidates and/or parties grouping them), policies tend to ensure that this type of contribution is made ethically and transparently, and that they comply with applicable laws and regulations. On these occasions we usually recommend that you contemplate:
1. Verify the recipient’s identity: whether they are political parties, candidates or organisations, it is essential to ensure that these recipients are not engaged in any illegal or unethical activity.
2. Set a reasonable and clear limit on contributions, to prevent them from influencing political decisions.
3. Ensure transparency. Companies must make their donations public and ensure they are transparent to avoid the perception that they are trying to influence political decisions.
4. Staff training. Companies must train their personnel to understand applicable policy financing laws and regulations and to adhere to company policies and procedures. Including its directors and representatives, who “must act with the loyalty and diligence of a good businessman. Those who fail in their obligations are liable, without limitation and jointly, for damages and losses arising from their action or omission.
Additionally, integrity programs should have:
5. A policy anti corruption.
6.A channel for reporting unethical behavior (also called ethics line or complaints line) secure, confidential and with the possibility of anonymity. A non-retaliation policy associated with it, as long as reports are made in good faith.
7. Robust due diligence routines with third parties/business partners.
In summary, compliance policies on donations and similar expenses aim to ensure that political donations are limited and, if it is decided to make them, that they are made in an ethical and transparent manner, in compliance with regulations and legislation. This can help companies avoid the risk of corruption and maintain a strong and ethical reputation, which they clearly have not done. In fact, almost all construction companies began to develop their own integrity programs from a “certain date”, interrupting these dishonest and illegal practices that have generated the “repentance” of many of their managers.
In summary, corruption in the financing of politics is tremendously harmful to democracy, produces marked asymmetries and inequalities and threatens transparency and public trust. Avoiding these practices is essential.
Perhaps in the legal and judicial fields, if the case of the Notebooks was based on corruption or political financing, it can define the destiny and freedom of certain people. But let’s not be fooled, we know that we are talking about a worse, less transparent and more corrupt country.
Source: Clarin
