To calculate national corruption data based on actual convictions is unlikely to provide an accurate assessment of the extent of corruption in any country, given serious challenges in gathering proof and the lengthy legal process involved; instead a perception based corruption index (CPI) is preferred which was developed by Transparency International (TI) and is reliant on capturing expert and business leaders’ assessment of activities of various public sector entities, including bribery, misuse of public funds, abuse of public office from personal gain, nepotism, and elite capture.
Nonetheless, the CPI generates valid three criticisms: (i) it is too complex a concept to be captured by a single score, (ii) it captures perception rather than corruption itself, and (iii) the index measures public sector corruption but disregards private sector that is more than likely to be complicit.
Twelve different institutional surveys are used to compile CPI, including African Development Bank, Bertelsmann Foundation, Economist Intelligence Unit, Freedom House, Global Insight, International Institute of Management, Political and Economic Risk Consultancy, the PRS Group, World Bank, World Economic Forum and World Justice Program. And in this context it is relevant to note that the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF’s) report released on 20 November 2025 titled “Pakistan: Corruption and Governance Diagnostic Report” (CGD) was with World Bank participation.
The report release was a structural benchmark under the ongoing IMF programme and claims that it “aligns with Pakistan’s ongoing economic reform program supported by a USD 7 billion Extended Fund Facility (EFF), which emphasizes fiscal sustainability, structural reforms, and institutional modernization.” Its findings, however, are not revelatory as they are consistent with previous reports by multilaterals and domestic sources (including media outlets) both in the private and public sectors – findings summed up appropriately in the report as follows: “persistent and widespread corruption risks (are) embedded in a heavily state-dominated economy that operates with complex regulatory environments, weak institutional capacities, fragmented oversight, with ineffective and inconsistent accountability and constrained rule of law. These factors collectively constrain private sector development and public sector effectiveness.” What is outstanding about this report is its focus on two major subjects that have not received the focus they deserve and one omission.
One focus of the report is on Pakistan’s Right to Information (RTI) system. “It has a legal foundation, but its practice has yet to substantially deliver on its intended transparency outcomes….in practice,” the Information Commission noted that a significant portion of RTI requests is either not swiftly acted upon or rejected based on exemptions. From 2022-2024, most of the appeals filed with the information commission related to RTI requests in the period 2022 to 2024 involving the Capital Development Authority (21 under process with 68 closed), NADRA 20 under process and 66 closed, Ministry of Interior 26 under process and 40 closed, National Accountability Bureau (16 under process and 43 closed), Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (21 under process and 38 closed), Federal Investigation Agency 15 under process and 43 closed, Federal Board of Revenue 23 under process and 31 closed, and National Assembly 16 under process and 30 closed.
The report suggests a robust whistleblower protection regime (only available in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa which adopted a law in 2016) and notes that a bill has been tabled in the National Assembly this year though it expresses a legitimate reservation notably that “the strong patronage networks, public officials or persons who witness or are privy to corruption dealings are discouraged from reporting corrupt activities since they could face harassment, retaliation, or recrimination. Passage and implementation of this important framework ensures that such whistleblowers are protected and thus should be prioritized.”
Mention is also made of the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC) in the report, which has consistently been an area of concern for the Fund. The report notes that SIFC is “vested with substantial authority to facilitate foreign investments, operates with untested transparency and accountability provisions.”
However, this insistence may be premature given that the October 2025 Update and Outlook released by the Finance Division notes negative USD 64.5 million total foreign investment in the first quarter of the current year and a decline of 34.2 percent in foreign direct investment inflows in the first quarter of the current year compared to the same period the year before.
The report further notes that the “State-Owned Enterprise Law was intended to enhance governance and management, but key reforms for its effective implementation remain pending. Moreover, while the law aimed to create a more standardized, rule-based framework for SOEs, (it) was undermined by the creation of a Sovereign Wealth Fund initially granted special rights, though the Government has subsequently indicated its intention to apply the same rules to this entity.”
A second focus of the report is on judicial reforms. The report pre-dates the highly controversial 27th Amendment (but not the 26th, which laid the framework for the twenty seventh). Be that as it may, its proposals are compelling and include: (i) creation of standardized principles for judicial appointments and tenure for the appointment of judges and members of the Administrative Tribunals and specialized courts and the demonstration of compliance with those principles in all judicial appointments in courts dealing with commercial cases; (ii) improving efficiency of the Federal Administrative Tribunals and Special Courts; (iii) strengthening integrity and conflict of interest provisions for all judicial personnel and review and increase transparency around payments and grants to judicial personnel; (iv) initiating yearly public reporting on the steps taken to strengthen integrity, including statistics on a number of complaints received, and the disposition of complaints and other actions; (v) enhancing Judicial Integrity; (vi) expanding and institutionalizing Alternate Dispute Resolution mechanisms by operationalizing ADR centres nationwide and enacting the Arbitration Bill; and (vi) preparing a multi-year judicial reform strategy to strengthen institutional performance and judicial service delivery in Pakistan.
These two areas of Fund’s concern are doable; however, it must be borne in mind that implementation of our donor supported laws that conform to international standards has been poor and, additionally, agencies that refused requests for information are unlikely to reverse their decisions and the assembly that passed the 27th Amendment is unlikely to implement Fund suggestions in spirit.
What the report fails to highlight, however, is the TI’s contention that “corruption is strongly intertwined with one of the biggest challenges humanity currently faces: climate change…..huge numbers of people around the world suffer severe consequences of global heating, as funds intended to help countries cut greenhouse gas emissions and protect vulnerable populations are stolen or misused. At the same time, corruption in the form of undue influence obstructs policies aimed at addressing the climate crisis and leads to environmental damage.” The omission maybe due to the ongoing Resistance and Sustainability Fund by the IMF; however, mention in the CGD would have been appreciated given the frequency of the impact of climate change on the people of Pakistan.
To conclude, the World Bank reckons that if Pakistan implements reforms under the ongoing EFF a growth rate of 5 to 6.5 percent over five years can be achieved – a projection which is unrealistic given the severe contractionary monetary and fiscal policies that are part of the EFF and a major impediment to growth.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.