Findings of the Research in the Framework of Campaign

Republic of Montenegro

Government of the Republic of Montenegro

Directorate for Anti-Corruption Initiative

FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH IN THE FRAMEWORK OF CAMPAIGN

„CHOOSE THE RIGHT PATH AND REPORT CORRUPTION“

CONDUCTED BY THE DACI IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGH EDUCATION

August, 2007

FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH IN THE FRAMEWORK OF CAMPAIGN „CHOOSE THE RIGHT PATH AND REPORT CORRUPTION“, CONDUCTED BY THE DIRECTORATE FOR ANTI-CORRUPTION INITIATIVE IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGH EDUCATION

In the framework of its campaign „Choose the RIGHT path and report corruption“, Directorate for Anti-corruption Initiative conducted, in cooperation with the Ministry of Education and Science, a series of educational sessions, during May and June 2007, in high education institutions of the Republic of Montenegro: „Mediteran“ University, University of Montenegro, Faculty of Philosophy and Faculty for Administrative and European Studies.

The aim behind these sessions was to provide general knowledge on corruption and its forms, while accentuating possible corrupt practices in the system of education. Furthermore, sessions were meant to acquaint the student population with the scope of work of the Directorate for Anti-corruption Initiative, as well as anti-corruption principles and activities of institutions of high education. Overall goal was to render the student population prone to detecting corruption practices, fostering active and personal engagement, or one through student organizations, in contributing to the fight against corruption. Finally, the purpose behind the sessions was to initiate comprehensive communication between institutions of high education, student population and its organizations, as well as state bodies tasked with prevention and suppression of corruption.

Professors from host universities and faculties, as well as representatives of the Directorate for Anti-corruption Initiative and Ministry of Education and Science addressed the students, focusing on identification of corrupt practices, methods and means for suppressing them, actual state of play in our country and worldwide, as well as on mechanisms for preventing corruption in our country.

Four sessions held at the institutions of high education were attended by approximately 100 students, who were asked to fill in a questionnaire prepared by the Directorate, aiming to record their viewpoints on the following topics:

·  What corruption represents;

·  Presence of corruption in our society;

·  Types of activities where corruption is present;

·  Own participation in (or observance of) corruption;

·  Own standpoint and reasons pro et contra reporting corruption;

·  Choice of state body or institution for reporting corruption;

·  Glance at traditional interpersonal/family ties and corruption;

·  Identifying practices of corruption in the area of education;

·  Most common corruption practices at faculties;

·  Perceiving corruption in a student organization;

·  Assessing the tendency of certain groups in high education institutions towards corruption (professors, administrative staff or students).

The questionnaire was suitably constructed and contained 12 questions with an open and closed response system. With regard to closed questions, students were instructed to opt for one of the given alternatives; however, in some cases, their response entailed several alternatives.

Findings of this research were produced upon analysis by an expert that the Directorate hired for this particular task. These results are presented based on frequency analysis of responses to questions. Findings of 95 filled-in questionnaires that were processed aim to pinpoint certain trends in reference to offered alternatives, while refraining from giving final conclusions. Findings will serve to map out future anti-corruption activities designated for student population, as well as for institutions of high education in Montenegro.

I Viewpoint on what corruption represents

Results gained in the section on students’ viewpoint on what corruption represents, point out that corruption is defined as:

·  Abuse of official duty, both personal and duty and position of another person, in order to acquire material gain and other personal interests, while violating society’s moral values;

·  Illegal and immoral act, improper and unlawful conduct in service, any sort of violent behavior, i.e. anything that is contrary to established norm and correct conduct, that distorts official and personal reputation of an employee;

·  Disrespect towards the demands determined in contracts and obligations of institutions and individuals, as well as circumventing the obligations that institutions accepted on enrolment of students;

·  Case when a person or organization conduct their business in an unprofessional manner, driven by ulterior motives, either bribe or various connections and ties; highest possible rottenness and deceit; corruptness that stands off moral and its values;

·  Thievery and robbery, not only of material goods, but also of information and resources;

·  Immoral act and, among others, deprivation of rights gained by one’s own quality and efforts; abusing one’s financial, material power or position in obtaining personal gain and rude “path” to success;

·  Buying exams, bribery, bribery of institutions and individuals to their benefit and regardless of costs and consequences of such actions: bribery in fulfilling basic necessities of everyday existence;

·  Accepting bribe from people so that one could gain benefit and solely personal interests; achieving one’s goals in a dishonorable manner, usually aided by bribery;

·  Bribing people that one depends on in fulfilling and realizing personal and mutual interests; payments in order to get results and attend to certain needs.

Elaborated review of definitions on “What corruption represents” leads to a conclusion that student population clearly discerns the notion of corruption, as well as behavioral patterns that could be classified as such. It is perceived that the student population that gave its points of view in this survey, provided also a negative value judgment of corruption, referring to it as “social evil,…difficult to root out…” while other determinants – moral condemnation - relating to other aspect of corruption, will be elaborated later on in the report. It was also noted that, in spite of the fact that some of the faculties attended do not study legal aspects of social functioning, students clearly perceive corruption and refer to it as a criminal offence. They observe corruption not only through economic and other consequences, but also through problematic and dysfunctional interpersonal relations between employees, as well as relations towards other persons – beneficiaries of services, communicating in such a way a moral condemnation of corruption phenomenon in our society.

II Presence of corruption in our society

While expressing views on presence of corruption in our society, results obtained on the basis of students’ replies are presented in the chart below (1):

Chart No. 1

Results indicate that student population points to significant presence of corruption in our society. Out of 95 questioned students, 72 state that corruption is present to a great extent, whereas 21 observe corruption in certain areas; in merely one case the response given is that the subject is not sure, i.e. there is no corruption. Taking into account the total of questioned student population, it is concluded that ¾ consider corruption largely present in our social setting. Their perception indicates that more direct and comprehensive anti-corruption measures need to be undertaken.

Overall situation is completed by the fact that ¼ students consider corruption present in some areas, leading to the conclusion that it is vital to conduct measures tailored to the areas marked as susceptible to corruption. Nevertheless, this ratio reveals that questioned subjects perceive corruption, they perceive it in certain areas, which calls for more intense, faster and more comprehensive anti-corruption actions in high education.

III Types of activities where corruption is present

The questionnaire was intended for students to identify areas of social interaction in which they consider corruption to be present the most, as well as to choose one of the alternatives. However, they opted for two to three alternatives in average, because they were not able to choose only one of them. Chart 2 illustrates the frequency of their replies:

Chart No. 2

Based on ranking of frequency of certain alternatives in replies, it is concluded that the student population perceives significant presence of corruption mainly in health sector and state administration, followed by police and education. Fifth and sixth place on the scale are occupied by political parties and judiciary, while other activities are ranked last. When taken into account the fact that students didn’t choose only one of the possible alternatives, we reach a conclusion that corrupt practices appear in major areas of state’s functioning. Results point to the fact that none of the branches of power were left out - neither legislative, nor executive and judicial. Scale of this occurrence in all segments of society should dictate future all-encompassing measures and activities of the Ministry of Education and Science, Directorate for Anti-corruption Initiative, other state bodies and civil society, in an effort to curb corruption in a synchronized and systematic manner.

IV Own participation in (or observance of) corruption

Results obtained on the basis of replies on whether students themselves were participants in, or observers of, corrupt act in our society, are set out in the chart 3:

Chart No. 3

Chart 3 shows that the questioned subjects respond more or less equally to own participation and observance of corrupt practices. Still, the number of those who did not participate in, nor observe, act of corruption is higher. Previous statements point toward approximately identical attitude on two opposing types of behavior. Therefore, anti-corruption activities and measures need to be focused not only on identification of acts of corruption, but also on raising awareness regarding their detrimental nature and refusal to accept participation in corruption.

V Own standpoint and reasons pro et contra reporting corruption

Chart 4 demonstrates results that were gained on the basis of students’ replies on possibility to report the fact that a criminal offence of corruption had been committed.

Chart No. 4

To a large degree, the graph shows that students state they would report an act of corruption provided they had information of it being committed. Students that would report corruption represent majority – 2/3, whereas 1/3 would not act in such a manner. This figure is encouraging – the fact that two thirds of questioned subject would report a corrupt act leads to conclusion that not only awareness and perception in society are high, but simultaneously that personal activism in solving social concerns appears to exist.

However, almost one third of questioned students convey the standpoint that corruption should not be reported, provided that a person is in possession of that kind of information. This figure should not be disregarded in analysis, because it represents counterbalance to the previous group, as well as calls for the need to look more closely at the reasons behind such attitude of students, manifesting lack of concern toward action against corruption.

When we examine the reasons of students that would not report a corruption offence, we end up with the following most common motives:

·  System of social control and sanctioning is not efficient enough to come to terms with corrupt actions and punish the perpetrators;

·  Feeling that there is a lack of personal safety and danger for family members, should they decide to report corruption;

·  Personal indifference while focusing on one’s own activities, rendering a person unable to pursue something that is of common interest;

·  Clear reasons do not exist, apart from the decision not to report corruption.

Evidently, one third of students indicate that the system of social control and sanctioning of corruption in our society does not function properly. Likewise, it was noted that some students feel personally endangered and indifferent toward common social trends.

Should the questioned population be observed generally, according to the ratio between those who would report corruption and those who wouldn’t, it is possible to aim future anti-corruption activities in two directions. First course of action should be education with the view on detection and definition of corruption, as well as encouraging the public to report corruption. Second direction should target smaller part of the population, aiming at intensified awareness raising on what corruption is and what the consequences are for a person and for society in general; awareness should also be raised on the need for personal and collective engagement in detection and suppression of corruption.

VI Choice of state body or institution for reporting corruption

Results gained on the basis of students’ replies to the question on the choice of state body or institution to whom they would report corruption are shown in the chart 5.

Chart No. 5

Illustrated results point to the fact that the majority of questioned subjects, 56 of them, marked the Directorate for Anti-corruption Initiative as the institution to which they would turn in reporting corruption; 23 students would go to the administrative department of their faculty, 9 would go to the Police Directorate whereas only 7 would turn to other bodies and organizations, where Ministry of Education and Science was mentioned.

Should these results be ranked based on choice of a competent body or institution that students would address in reporting corrupt practices, we could see that Directorate for Anti-corruption Initiative comes first, and is followed by the administration of a relevant faculty and Police Directorate. Last spot is occupied by other institutions – Ministry of Education and Science.

Interpretation of this results leads to a conclusion that students perceive Directorate for Anti-corruption Initiative as the body tasked with preventing corruption, where they would also report a suspicion that act of corruption had been committed. The data that ¼ of the questioned subject would turn to the management of their faculty is of interest, indicating that there exists a level of certainty that students’ problems with/caused by corruption may be resolved within the autonomous institution of high education. Out of the total number of students, 72 of them would go to the body or institution other than their own faculty. In this regards, future activities of institutions of high education should be aimed at strengthening working and supervisory bodies within the faculties; this approach would ultimately contribute to prevention of corruption, as well as its efficient sanctioning. Furthermore, cooperation between faculty’s instances and competent state bodies should be intensified.

VII Traditional interpersonal/kindred relations as corruptive activities in our society