This paper explores the efficacy and limitations of anti-corruption initiatives and frameworks implemented in the EU nations and India in light of multiple corruption cases involved in these regions.
Siddharth Kanojia, Assistant Professor, Jindal School of Banking & Finance, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana, India.
Shashi Bhushan Ojha, Assistant Professor (Law), Bennett University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Muzaffar Hussain Mir, Assistant Professor (Law), Bennett University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Many studies have concluded that corruption hinders economic expansion by threatening the viability of the public budget and reducing the capital available for infrastructure development and social welfare. Thereby cultivating social inequality and eroding trust in the state and institutions. In recent decades, the European Union (EU) and India have experienced multiple corruption cases, including bribery, embezzlement, and abuse of power.
Consequently, some EU nations and India have attempted to implement legislations and frameworks to curtail corrupt practices. The impact of adopted approaches can be witnessed in the contrasting scores and ranks of both regions on the Corruption Perception Index.
Therefore, considering the distinctiveness in the efficacy of the approaches adopted by both of these regions, this paper intends to explore the efficacy and limitations of anti-corruption initiatives and frameworks implemented in the EU region and, subsequently, recommend the adoption of a similar approach which may prove to be beneficial in addressing the pressing issues of political and bureaucratic corruption in India.
Published in: Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
To read the full article, please click here.