Is there a proper way to combat corruption? : A comparison of the anti-corruption strategies of Iran, Thailand, Denmark, and Singapore

Sammanfattning: Corruption exists in all societies, and often takes place behind closed doors. Corruption can take many different forms, such as when public employees demand or accept payment or favours in exchange for their services, when politicians misuse public funds or give public contracts or jobs to their friends, family, or sponsors, or when businesses bribe officials to secure advantageous agreements (Transparency, n.d). Transparency defines corruption as “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain” (Transparency, n.d).  In some societies corruption is a rare occurrence while in other countries it permeates the whole society. This study aims to see patterns in non-corrupt countries' anti-corruption strategies as well as patterns in corrupt countries' anti-corruption strategies.  Singapore and Denmark are two nations that consistently score highly on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI), a sign of a less corrupt culture. However, countries like Thailand and Iran consistently score poorly on the CPI, suggesting a larger corruption issue (Transparency, 2022). This paper aims to provide an overview in the form of a comparative desk study of the anti-corruption measures of the four countries and to draw comparisons between them, to determine whether less corrupt countries combat corruption in a different way than more corrupt countries. What this study has found is that strong institutions and anti-corruptions agencies given the right amount of tools and independence are more likely to be able to combat corruption in countries; rather than fragile institutions and anti-corruption agencies who are politicised and controlled by the government.