Corruption – perceptions and the reality

t is interesting, to say the least, that the former Commissioner of Police and Director of the little-known Anti-Corruption and Anti-Terrorism Agency, Darwin Dottin is promising Barbadians it is going after corruption in high and low places across the island.

As he provided information on the agency he was appointed to head in 2022, Mr Dottin outlined his agency’s focus will not only be on “petty acts of corruption – such as bribery involving police officers or customs officials” but he will be vigorously attacking corrupt acts of the “larger-scale”, provided he has the required evidence.

“We have to go where the evidence leads us. Investigating corruption is a little different from ordinary crimes. When you investigate a murder, you have a body, but corruption is often hidden. If you offer a person a bribe and they take it, they’re not going to come to the police and confess. So, there are special methods and technical capabilities required,” the retired police chief outlined.

Also of interest was Mr Dottin’s disclosure that he basically had a free hand in whom he could hire to build out the agency.

“I can hire my own staff, I have my own budget, and I have, or should have, operational independence,” he declared.

He further outlined that the minister would have a role in oversight, though the agency was “meant to function independently in its investigations and prosecutions”.

Mr Dottin further explained how powerful his position was, adding: “It’s not a government agency, it’s not a government department – it has corporate status. Parliament, in its wisdom, has given me those powers.”

It was back in 2021 that Attorney General Dale Marshall provided Parliament with the reason why this uniquely empowered crime-fighting agency was necessary.

The island’s lead legal advisor contended that the police service’s white-collar crime unit lacked the manpower to competently undertake such investigations and effect prosecutions.

As he addressed the House of Assembly, Mr Marshall pointed out: “We know that issues of corruption require an eye to detail, and it also requires in many instances the application of skill sets that are not readily available very often in Barbados.

“We believe that in order to be able to adequately deal with the issue of corruption we need to move beyond the operation of the [Police] and establish a dedicated agency that goes to work every single day to investigate corruption and terrorism issues.”

Public perception of corruption in Barbados still remains relatively low, even though there are signs that this is changing as the public is now more informed about what constitutes corruption.

The World Justice Project, in its 2022 Corruption In the Caribbean: Insights From the General Public report, was extremely informative.

In its assessment of the situation on the ground in Barbados, the non-governmental organisation with bases in Washington, D.C. in the United States, Singapore, and Mexico City, found the greatest percentage of respondents believed that public officers were being recruited based on family ties and friendship networks.

The next highest form of corrupt behaviour perceived by Barbadians was public officers asking for a bribe to speed up an administrative procedure.

Five per cent of respondents also felt that a law enforcement officer (police, customs, immigration etc,) asking for a bribe was “always” or “usually” acceptable.

Interestingly, those the public perceived to be the most corrupt were police officers at 37 per cent. Some 32 per cent felt MPs were all or mostly corrupt, while 48 per cent perceived the political parties were all or mostly corrupt.

The next group of corruptible persons, according to public perception, were judges and magistrates, members of the news media, prosecutors in criminal cases, and government workers generally.

Most important was the matter of solicitation or actual attempts at corruption such as seeking a gift, favour, or some extra money, including through intermediaries.

Interestingly, it was customs officers, public utility company officers and employees, as well as other civil servants whom respondents said they had contact with and had to give a gift, money or some favour in the last 12 months.

In the case of police officers, judicial officers, prosecutors, car registration and driving licence agency officers, land registry officers and elected representatives, people reported they had experienced zero instances in the last 12 months in which any of these public officers sought any money or favours from them.