The Pros And Cons Of Corruption

1474 Words6 Pages
Corruption can be considered a special crime where it might not involve reporting from a victim as both bribee and briber are winners in a corrupt transaction. It may be a situation where a corrupt public official receives a bribe from a contractor for granting his company a tender of a government project. This type of public corruption is relatively difficult to investigate and prosecute compared to other illegal acts (Wagner & Jacobs, 2014, p. 185). The reason is simply because corruption is often carried out by hidden ways and only among insiders, limited to a network of trusted actors and repeat customers (Lambsdorff, 2007, p.136-163) thus gathering of evidence is the biggest challenge for investigators and prosecutors. Even if one of the transacting party can be convinced to be a prosecution’s witness, the disadvantage for relying on his/her evidence is that he/she might turn hostile during the prosecution. In 2010, Norza Zakaria an UMNO (ruling politic party in Malaysia) supreme council member was charged for corruption which involved alleged vote-buying during the run-up to the party polls. The prosecution brought in witnesses who they received the bribes from Norza Zakaria during trial. All nine of them testified and contradicted their statements that were given earlier. They denied the involvement of Norza Zakaria in court. Norza Zakaria was acquitted and the nine of them were later charged for giving false statement (The Star Online, 17 May 2012). The above case
Open Document