The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) is an annual report published by Transparency International, a global civil society organization focused on combating corruption. The CPI ranks countries and territories based on their perceived levels of public sector corruption. It is one of the most widely recognized and used measures of corruption worldwide.
.jpg)
Let's know about some key details about the Corruption Perceptions Index:
1. Purpose:
The CPI aims to provide an assessment of the perceived corruption levels in the public sector of different countries. It reflects how corruption is perceived by experts and business people from around the world, as well as other assessments by independent institutions and analysts.
2. Methodology:
The CPI is calculated using a combination of data from different sources, including surveys and assessments from reputable institutions. The data used for the CPI often comes from sources that capture the views and experiences of experts and business leaders, rather than directly measuring corruption levels.
3. Scoring:
The CPI ranks countries on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 indicates highly corrupt and 100 reflects very clean. Countries with higher scores are perceived to have lower levels of corruption, while those with lower scores are perceived to be more corrupt.
4. Global Coverage:
The CPI covers a broad range of countries and territories around the world. However, it's important to note that not all countries are included in the report due to a lack of sufficient data or other limitations.
5. Limitations:
The CPI has some limitations. Since it is based on perceptions and not direct measurements of corruption, it may not accurately capture the true extent of corruption in a given country. Moreover, the sources used for the CPI can vary from year to year, potentially affecting the rankings.
6. Yearly Release:
Transparency International releases the Corruption Perceptions Index on an annual basis. New reports typically become available towards the end of the year, covering data from the previous year.
7. Influence and Impact:
The CPI has significant influence and is widely used by policymakers, researchers, and the media to understand corruption trends and compare countries' anti-corruption efforts. It can also serve as a tool to hold governments and institutions accountable and to advocate for greater transparency and accountability.
It is important to recognize that the CPI is just one tool among many for assessing corruption. It provides valuable insights, but it should be used in conjunction with other data and assessments to gain a more comprehensive understanding of corruption within a country or region.
Data on CPI for Bangladesh is available from 1999 to 2021. However, data prior to that is not available.
 |
| Chart 1: CPI Index Report |
Analysis based on these data
The CPI scores fluctuated over time, but there was a slight upward trend from the early 2000s to 2013, with a peak in 2013 (CPI Score: 2.8). Afterward, the scores fluctuated around the mid-2 range until 2021, where the CPI Score was 2.3.
Overall, Bangladesh faced ongoing challenges with corruption perception during this period, indicating the need for continued efforts to strengthen transparency, accountability, and anti-corruption measures in the country.
The CPI scores range from 0 to 100, where 0 indicates highly corrupt and 100 indicates very clean. As you can see, Bangladesh's CPI scores remained relatively stable over the years, with values around 2.3 to 2.8. These scores indicate that corruption was perceived to be a persistent challenge in Bangladesh during this period.
After analyzing the bar chart displaying the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) scores for Bangladesh from 1999 to 2021, we can draw several observations and identify areas of concern:
1. Relatively Low CPI Scores:
The CPI scores for Bangladesh have remained relatively low throughout the period, indicating a persistent perception of corruption in the country. The scores range from 1.3 to 2.8, with the majority of the scores clustered around 2.4 to 2.7. These scores suggest that corruption continues to be a matter of concern in Bangladesh.
2. Fluctuations in Scores:
While the overall trend shows a slight increase in CPI scores from the early 2000s to 2013, there have been fluctuations over the years. Despite some variations, the scores have generally remained within a relatively narrow range. The lack of significant improvements in the scores raises concerns about the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures.
3. Peak in 2013:
The highest CPI score of 2.8 was recorded in 2013, indicating a relatively better perception of corruption during that year. This could be attributed to specific actions or policies undertaken during that period. However, it is essential to explore the factors that led to this improvement and identify ways to sustain or improve upon it.
4. Decrease in 2021:
The CPI score decreased to 2.3 in 2021, indicating a decline in the perception of corruption compared to the previous years. This decline is a matter of concern and highlights the need for renewed efforts to address corruption issues in Bangladesh.
 |
| Chart 2: Corruption In Bangladesh |
Here these data show that from 2001 to 2005 Bangladesh became No. 1 in corruption 5 times and now a days it becoming come out from the trend of Corruption. If we see the previous data chart 1, then it clearly shows that being a champion in corruption was started in 1999 and over the year Bangladesh started to come out from the danger.
Matters of concern for Bangladesh:
1. Persistent Corruption Perception:
The consistently low CPI scores suggest that corruption remains a significant challenge in Bangladesh. Addressing this issue is crucial for fostering a more transparent and accountable society.
2. Lack of Significant Progress:
Despite some fluctuations, the overall trend in CPI scores shows limited progress in curbing corruption. The lack of substantial improvements raises concerns about the effectiveness and impact of anti-corruption measures and initiatives.
3. Impact on Governance and Development:
High levels of perceived corruption can undermine public trust in institutions and deter foreign investments. Corruption hampers economic growth and can have adverse effects on governance, public service delivery, and social development.
4. Need for Sustainable Reforms:
To address corruption effectively, sustained efforts are required across various sectors, including government, law enforcement, business, and civil society. Strengthening institutions, promoting transparency, and enforcing anti-corruption laws are essential for lasting reforms.
However, in general, Human Rights authorities, including international organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, often make recommendations and suggestions to address human rights issues, including corruption. Some of their common suggestions may include:
.png)
1. Strengthening Anti-Corruption Laws:
Human Rights authorities often recommend enacting and enforcing robust anti-corruption laws that hold public officials and private entities accountable for corrupt practices. These laws should be fair, and transparent, and provide appropriate penalties for corruption offenses.
2. Establishing Independent Oversight Bodies:
Setting up independent and effective oversight bodies, such as anti-corruption commissions, to investigate and prosecute corruption cases is crucial. These bodies should have sufficient authority, resources, and autonomy to carry out their duties without political interference.
3. Protecting Whistleblowers:
Encouraging and protecting whistleblowers who expose corruption is essential. Providing legal protections and support to those who report corruption can help deter corrupt practices and ensure accountability.
4. Enhancing Transparency and Open Governance:
Promoting transparency in government operations, budgeting, procurement processes, and public services is vital to reduce opportunities for corruption. Open governance practices, such as public access to information, can empower citizens to hold authorities accountable.
5. Promoting Civil Society Engagement:
Encouraging civil society organizations, media, and citizen participation in monitoring and reporting corruption can enhance transparency and create public pressure for accountability.
6. Promoting Judicial Independence:
Ensuring an independent and impartial judiciary is essential for the fair adjudication of corruption cases and upholding the rule of law.
7. Addressing Socioeconomic Inequalities:
Human Rights authorities may also highlight the link between corruption and socioeconomic inequalities. Addressing underlying issues of poverty and inequality can help reduce the incentives for corruption.
8. Strengthening International Cooperation:
Combating corruption often requires international cooperation, especially when corruption involves cross-border transactions. Cooperation among countries can help track and recover assets obtained through corrupt practices.
For up-to-date and detailed suggestions from Human Rights authorities on corruption and other human rights issues, I recommend referring to their official websites, reports, and publications. Organizations like Human Rights Watch (https://www.hrw.org/) and Amnesty International (https://www.amnesty.org/) regularly publish reports and recommendations related to human rights and corruption.
