Corruption is a universal social phenomenon that exists in any culture and thrives in any type of society. Lots of nations claim to have removed corruption. By the same token many people believe that corruption can only flourish in bureaucratic societies or post-communist countries where every single matter is controlled by the corrupt government. Even though such a belief is popular, the truth does not support such an argument. Corruption is all-pervasive and can not be gotten rid of totally and irrevocably. It exists everywhere in every stratum of society. However, most people associate corruption with the federal government, authorities, legal system and other entities that are in some way related to the control and allowance of public resources. The police are one of such public authorities that are accountable for keeping order and justice in a society. A cops department is really comparable to other governmental bodies such as a court of law, or taxation service, etc. It is a common belief that such companies tend to be corruption-ridden for one basic reason. All theses public structures get and disperse the tax-payers’ cash, simply put there is no person totally interested in controlling the flow of funds like in a huge corporation. An independently owned business is very various in regards to its ownership structure. There is a specific clearly specified group of people who own business. It would be reasonable to assume that they are very much interested in controlling the monetary resources they purchased the business. Thus, there is a clear reward to manage the flow of resources because kind of company. A public organization that is not owned by any personal entity is extremely different. It is extremely similar to a communist nation where there is no clear line of command and duty. Despite the fact that the structure of the organization such as a cops department generates favorable soil for corruption to grow, the society must create clearly detailed methods in order to tackle this social vice that is definitely responsible for creating losses for the society and undermining the idea of justice, order, social equality and democracy.
To begin with it is necessary to recognize the nature of corruption in general terms. Corruption appears to be inherent to any social structure. Also, it appears to be fundamental to humanity since the cultural or social setting does not exert any influence on the possibility for corruption to prosper. Corruption exists in democratic countries like the United States of America or European nations. By the same token, corruption exists in post-communist societies and nations such as Indonesia, or Colombia. The similar thing amongst all those nations is that corruption is not restrained by geographic, political or cultural boundaries. Nevertheless, the difference among the previously mentioned societies depends on the level of corruption that a provided society wants to endure. It is no secret that countries like Indonesia are practically ridden with corruption. A foreign entrepreneur can not open a store without paying kickbacks to city government authorities for taking care of the paperwork and the regional authorities for so-called security services. In case our fictional business owner declines to pay the cops, his brand new store is likely burn to the ground the very next day. For that reason, cultural and social elements essentially specify the role of corruption in a given social organization.
Corruption as a social phenomenon is particularly salient in companies like the cops. The factor authorities are so vulnerable and exposed to corruption is because of the company structure of a police department. To illustrate, an authorities department does not create any revenue and there is no personal owner. The cops are absolutely funded by the federal government. The government officials estimate the quantity of funds that would invested by the cops and create a budget plan based on those price quotes. For that reason, a cops department is a consumer of tax-payers cash instead of a contributor to the state’s budget plan. Individuals who work in the police force are only motivated by monetary incentives that come from the federal government in a kind of salaries. People who stand on the numerous levels in the organizational ladder get a really comparable type of monetary reward. Hence, the head of an authorities department is only inspired by the salary that the government states in exchange for the service. There is typically no extra inspiration arising from much better and more persistent work. For that reason, if you operate in the cops it normally does not matter how tough and how diligently you work, since the wage is rarely affected by that quality of work aspect. For that reason, low wages and the lack of external inspiration add to the spread of corruption. Policeman are motivated to accept kickbacks in exchange for more lenient treatment. Lawbreakers who bribe the authorities are also better off eventually, because that way they escape punishment that they would have to accept otherwise. There is a clear shared gain that is created as a result of such a relationship. However, there is a clear expense that offsets the gain derived by the two celebrations as a result of such a deal. The cost is related to the reliability and significance of the law that is undermined and eventually wiped out by corruption. The state can not exist without the law and justice; as soon as those two elements are ruled out the society becomes a disorderly crowd. Therefore, it is the federal government’s responsibility to control the level of corruption and make the cops render a service to the society.
Undoubtedly, there are two problems that should be dealt with in order to manage corruption among law enforcement officer. The very first essential element is legal constraints and regulations that need to be developed particularly to prevent the police from taking part in any of such transactions with lawbreakers. There need to be an anti-corruption department the job of which is to observe the operations of the policeman. This anti-corruption department should enforce the government’s policies concerning corruption. Those policies should be extremely stringent and clear in figuring out the proper punishment for the police officers spreading out corruption. The disciplinary actions may vary from fines to expulsion from the authorities, despite the fact that some other penalty might be deemed suitable depending on the situation. The fundamental is that punishment must be clear and strict, so that individuals understand the potential severe consequences that such habits can result in. That is a standard method that should be carried out in virtually every cops department. Even though such a program might turn rather costly for the federal government, the result that it can potentially yield is obvious. The members of anti-corruption committee should be paid handsomely so that there is no sense for them to participate in corruption. Another technique to control corruption is to increase the wages of all policemans hence supplying them with additional inspiration. As it can be seen, all these techniques involve capital expenditures, and it is quite clear that corruption can not be eradicated. The fundamental is to control it at a certain acceptable level where the potential harm that corruption can do to a society is low.