We use criminal punisment as a tool to get rid of corruption. Is it successful? No. Why? We criminalise corruption. And take crimial action on corruption. But we rarely take penal action that is civil action, we almost ignore it. There is a drawback in criminal action. To penalise someone by crimal action, we need to proove, beyond resonable doubt that person is responsible to the action. This is difficult, unlike when some physical harm is done to another, collecting evedence is difficult. Usually harming someone is not well planed. It is not difficult to find evidence and charge that person. Then murder can be well planed. But in murder, the method of finding the culprit is improved over the years and it is posible to find the culprits and punish them.
Fraud against a person, if the fraud is big, that person takes action. Usually if the fraud is big, the victim has substancial means to take legal action.
But problems arise when fruaud is aginst sociaty. In wealthy sociaties, better methods exist to find and punish culprits. In poorer sociaties corruption is widespread. These fraudsters plan these frauds in such a way it is difficult to catch them and punish them. Because to prove criminal action you need to prove beyond reasonable doubt. These legal action takes long time. The accuses need to be given fair chance to prove their inocence. You cannot apply balance of probabilities to prove tha action. Therefore frauds flarish. The world has become a heven to the fraudsters.
I have a suggesion. Criminal action need, beyond resonable doubt, because the violaters certain rights are curtail as punishent. Incarsaration by sending him to prison or a detention centre. Finacial penalties, where the accused has to depart from his wealth. These are very hard on a person and the sociaty has to be very sure that he commited to action.
What if we have lesser penalties and use balance of probabilites, as criteria to punish frauds against sociaty. These penalties can affect only the social contract by a person to the sociaty. Removal of civic rights. Usually current meaning of voting rights, government services, public education etc. We can redesign this in such a way that the affected person can live a nomal life, He can buy thigs from shops, he can rent or buy a house to live. Usually these high corrupters have enough wealth to sustain them. The criminal system take the same action for a pety bribe, to a trafic violation by a policeman who take the bribe because he do not have enough income from his salary. And a politicial who take bribes to give govenment contract.
We can use penalties like: no passport will be issued and the one issued is canceled. No national identity card. No bank accounts. No electricity, no water service ( he will have to use someone elses name to get these services. The idea is not to bar a person from useing lectricity, but he cannot buy these in his name). No mobile telephone issued in his name. These are some, there will be other benifits accured by teh preson from the sociaty, that can be curtailed.
These need not be life time bans, but limited to number of months or years depending the sevearity of the corruption.
Also the legal action should be swift, or its usefulness will be nulified in the end. This can be compared to Taxation Authorities. Since their action is swift, people are more scared to taxman than a policeman. That is people who has wealth.
These corruptors very scrupilious persons, and very resourseful ones, therefor whatever action it will be difficult to curtail them. But this will be a more efficient tool than crimial procedings.
