Are you a Tendering Rogue?

Tendering rogues destroys our economy, mocks our justice system and should be charged for treason. The local Press is the best place to report corruption.

rebateAllocation of tendering areas are agreements in which tendering competitors divide markets among themselves. In such plans, competing companies allocate specific customer or type of customers, products, or territories among themselves. For example, one tenderer will be allowed to sell to, or tender on contracts let by, customers allocated to the other competitors. In other schemes, competitors agree to sell only to customers in certain geographic areas and refuse to sell to, or quote intentionally high prices to, customers in geographic areas allocated to conspirators companies.

However, in countries where corruption is a common problem it tends to disturb the market mechanisms and impede economic development. Corruption in public procurement makes the officials or the politicians in charge purchase goods or services from the best briber, instead of choosing the best price-quality combination. The result may be construction projects several times as costly as necessary, or the acquisition of goods not actually needed.

In 2013-14, for example in South Africa the public sector spent R500-billion on goods, services and construction. At least R30-billion of this was lost to corruption particularly related to tenders.

According to Andvig and Moene (1990), the negative dynamics can be explained as follows: When corruption is rare, the economy is in a “low- corruption-equilibrium”, in which both demand and supply is limited. Looking for someone to bribe is more risky when the bureaucrats hold high ethical standards. With increasing corruption levels, however, the request for bribes becomes easier, so does the proposal of bribes. The moral scruples of corruption as well as the risk of being caught, falls with a higher frequency of corrupt acts. This way corruption may lead the economy into a vicious circle, ending up in kleptocratic circumstances under which corruption is the standard, where honesty is too costly, with a general disregard of law and a higher level of criminal activity, and where each individual is busy making the most for him/herself, feeling no obligations for the country. The situation is often referred to as a corruption-trap. This self-propagating force of corruption may also explain parts of the difference in corruption levels sometimes experienced by quite similar economies. (Andvig and Moene, 1990; Søreide, 2000).

Corruption is rarely a one-sector phenomenon, occurring only in one institution of the state, or at one level of the bureaucratic hierarchy. Where it exists as a problem, it tends to pervade large parts of the state administration. The impairment of judicial systems, the police and investigative institutions are particularly destructive in this respect. Frequent failures to sanction and arrest perpetrators create a general disregard of existing laws. Trying to curb corruption by implementing anti-corruption measures into the procurement procedures can therefore appear optimistic in such a setting.

Corruption is rarely a one-sector phenomenon, occurring only in one institution of the state, or at one level of the bureaucratic hierarchy. Where it exists as a problem, it tends to pervade large parts of the state administration. The impairment of judicial systems, the police and investigative institutions are particularly destructive in this respect. Frequent failures to sanction and arrest perpetrators create a general disregard of existing laws. Trying to curb corruption by implementing anti-corruption measures into the procurement procedures can therefore appear optimistic in such a setting.

Reporting corruption

In many cases bribery is detectable only for the colleagues of a corrupt official. The cases difficult to observe for the police may be apparent for the associates. These can, for instance, discover unreasonable argumentation in favour of a certain company. Other people involved in the tender may also come across corruption. A way to report on the cases should therefore be established and published. A problem with anonymous “whistle-blowing”, however, is the risk of dishonest information reported in order to blacken certain persons and companies. Still, anonymous information has to be accepted to obtain knowledge about corruption from people fearing sanctions. In any case, the safety of persons revealing corruption scandals has to be considered.

When corruption is revealed the persons involved should be charged. Sanctions are therefore mainly a matter of the legal system. Either imposed by judges or the bureaucracy, the sanctions should, however, include a system of incentives in which the penalties for the corrupters grow more than proportionally to the price of the public contract.

Racial Profiling Exists and Must Stop!

Racial profiling has been widely criticised when it comes to predicting crime and is actually illegal in certain countries. The basis of racial profiling is the assumption that people of a certain race or ethnic background are more likely to commit certain crimes.

Racial profiling is a method of using racial or ethnic characteristics to predict whether a person is likely to commit a crime. The use of this much criticised method has risen in recent years with the perceived rise in the threat of terrorism.

What Is Racial Profiling?Racialprofiling

Racial profiling has been widely criticised when it comes to predicting crime and is actually illegal in certain countries. The basis of racial profiling is the assumption that people of a certain race or ethnic background are more likely to commit certain crimes. After the 9/11 terrorist attack, the US authorities used racial profiling conclusions to investigate foreign nationals of middle eastern descent. These conclusions were used even if there were no other factors that warranted investigation of these individuals.

Racial Profiling in the UK

Although racial profiling is not officially used in the UK the statistics do show otherwise. Under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, police officers are permitted to stop and search individuals with justifiable cause. According to the statistics provided by the Ministry of Justice some police do seem to be using racial profiling. Asian people were over five times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people. Black people were seven times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people. Only 0.6% of the searches ended in arrests for terrorism offences.

Why Racial Profiling isn’t Working

There have been a number of high profile cases that have highlighted the flaws in racial profiling. Colleen Larose, the middle aged, white, Philadelphian suburban dwelling woman is the antithesis of the typical terrorist profile. Self named ‘Jihad Jane’ was arrested on charges of conspiring with overseas militants to murder and if necessary to become a martyr for radical Islam causes. Colleen Larose is only one of many terrorists who do not fit the usual racial profile. Larose, along with many other white terrorists, is one of the reasons why racial profiling has been seriously undermined when it comes to profiling criminals.

Racial Profiling is Alienating Communities

One of the big dangers of racial profiling is that this method may actually be counter productive. The shocking rise in stop and search incidents of certain ethnic groups will only alienate these communities. Trust in the authorities from black and Asian communities will deteriorate. What could have been a source of information for the police from these communities will no longer exist due to the abuse of racial profiling. One senior counter-terrorism official claimed that community relations achieve results, stop and search does not.

Common Uses of Racial Profiling

Racial profiling isn’t used solely as an anti-terrorism tool. There are many instances of this type of profiling being used ‘unofficially’ throughout society. These can include monitoring of suspected shoplifters in stores and the stop and search of vehicles based solely on the race of the driver. Racial profiling as an airline security measure has been widely used throughout the world. In many cases this type of profiling is used at the customs point to determine who the officials will search. This can be seen as discrimination, and one of the dangers is that while others are searched the real criminals go free.

The Alternative to Racial Profiling

Human rights organisations such as Liberty have stated that racial profiling is not as effective as rational police methods. In January 2010 the Court of Human Rights ruled that section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 does violate the right to respect for private life. According to Liberty, the profiling of suspects should be based on actual suspicion and real intelligence. Stopping and searching on the basis of skin colour, name or dress code is not a valid reason.skin

Racial profiling is increasingly coming under fire from many organisations as an ineffective method of crime prediction. There is no doubt that it is routinely being used and abused by authorities such as the police. Since the ruling by the Court of Human Rights in 2010 the government will now have to address this serious issue. If the abuse of racial profiling continues it will no doubt lead to increasing mistrust in the police and government officials.

source:http://www.civilrightsmovement.co.uk/facts-racial-profiling.html