The Perils of Peronism

Recently, a figurehead of the Argentine political scene, Vice President and former President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, was sentenced to six years in prison on corruption charges. She and her late husband Nestor, who served as President from 2003 to 2007, are prominent in the Kirchnerism political movement, which is an offshoot of Peronism. Kirchnerism opposes international free trade agreements and other neoliberal ideals. According to the New York Times, Kirchner is divisive within Argentina; to her supporters, she is regarded as someone who has lifted many out of poverty. However, according to her detractors, her policies have triggered massive inflation and high poverty rates. As an example of her divisiveness, an attempt was made on her life in September.

According to Reuters, Kirchner was involved in a scheme to award public works contracts to businessman and close political ally Lazaro Baez. After the contracts were awarded, money was funneled back to the Kirchners. These public works contracts were based in the province of Santa Cruz, which is the Kirchners’ political stronghold. Kirchner will likely appeal her conviction in hopes of avoiding prison. Nonetheless, it appears that her days in the political spotlight may be coming to an end.

Going Bust: The Troubles of Michelle Mone

Recently, Baroness Michelle Mone, a member of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom, has been facing allegations that she and her family have unethically profited from government contracts awarded at the beginning of the pandemic. Mone is well known in the UK for founding Ultimo, a designer lingerie brand, leading to the nickname in some quarters of the UK media as “Baroness Bra.” On November 23 of last year, The Guardian published an exclusive saying that Mone and her children received £29 million ($36 million) from the profits of a company called Medpro PPE. Medpro was given a £200 million contract to provide Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) through the so-called “VIP lane,” where the government appeared to hand out contracts to companies with close links to people in government. Some of the PPE Medpro provided to the government proved defective and is currently sitting in warehouses.

In the case of Mone specifically, according to a follow-up article in The Guardian, it is clear that the Baroness had a much less stressful pandemic than most people. She and her then fiancé, a businessman named Douglas Barrowman, bought a luxury yacht called the Lady M. It is alleged that Barrowman received 65 million pounds in profits through the same scheme and then passed 29 million pounds of that on to an offshore trust that Mone and her children control. recently, The Guardian published an article saying Mone is taking a leave of absence from the House of Lords to try and clear her name. It is unclear what will happen next, but it appears that Baroness Mone has some explaining to do about how she may have profited off the misery of millions.

Australian National Anti-Corruption Commission Enacted.

I recently wrote about the Australian Parliament enacting new Anti-Corruption legislation. This is my original article https://app.legislata.com/posts/33182/detail.

Recently, The Australian Parliament enacted a law allowing the National Anti-Corruption Commission to be created. According to the statement released online by the Office of the Prime Minister, the main aims of the commission are to investigate corruption in Australia within the public sector. This new body will also be able to investigate previous allegations of corruption before the commission begins. The commission will also be able to hold public hearings in exceptional situations. Work will start in the middle of next year.

The History of Transparency International

Transparency International was formed in 1993. Before then, corruption was not studied in depth by international organizations. Corruption and bribery in the developing world were often a necessary part of doing business. However, by 1995, TI established its head office in Berlin, Germany, and subsequently opened 26 chapters worldwide. They started the first global Corruption Perceptions Index, which ranked countries on the level of corruption domestically. In the first decade of the 2000s, TI had advocated for international organizations to create their own anti-corruption bodies. An example of this was the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, which required UN members to enforce anti-corruption laws and encourage global cooperation on corruption.

In the 2010s, Transparency International started to expand its focus. For example, they began to focus on the connection between corruption and climate change and how funds intended to reverse the effects of climate change could be mismanaged. As the 2010s progressed, TI became more focused on combating the use of shell companies and increasingly elaborate methods that heads of state and business people employ to hide away ill-gotten gains. In 2019 Transparency started to focus on the link between corruption and democracy. In particular, they have looked at the connection between democracy in a given country and the level of corruption.

A follow-up on Brazil

Recently Lula da Silva won the run-off to decide the winner of the Brazilian election. While this comes as a great relief to left-wing political movements in Brazil and around the world, Brazil still faces questions about corruption. In a statement released by Transparency International, it is alleged that despite the harsh anti-corruption rhetoric put out by the previous government, Bolsonaro and his administration engaged in corrupt practices. It is alleged that money was funneled to allies of Bolsonaro without government oversight which was spent on multiple pet projects. The Bolsonaro administration has also gutted previous anti-corruption legislation to cover their crimes. One of the goals of the new government will hopefully be to reinstate and build on anti-corruption legislation, although given Lula’s previous history of alleged corruption, this remains to be seen.

Lula Da Silva: A Corrupt Politician or Hero to Brazil’s Working Class?

Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, better known as Lula, has been a prominent figure in Brazilian politics and on the international stage. Silva was the head of the metalworkers union in Sao Paulo state and, in the mid-1980s, founded the Partido Dos Trabalhadores (PT), known in English as the workers’ party. After many failed attempts, he was elected as president of Brazil in 2003 and served until 2010. In 2014 four years after he left office, a massive corruption scandal involving the state oil firm Petrobras.

According to BBC, In July 2017, Lula was found guilty of receiving a beachfront house as a bribe from a construction firm called OAS in return for his aid in winning lucrative government contracts. After spending four years in prison, his convictions were annulled because the alleged crimes took place in Brasilia when Lula was president and not in Curitiba in the state of Parana. This freed up the possibility for him to run again for president after three years of populist rule under Jair Bolsonaro. The first round of the election was held recently, and while Lula got 48% of the vote, he needed 50% to win outright. (Bolsonaro received 42%) A runoff will be held at the end of the month to determine the winner. It is difficult to know what the truth is here: Is Lula a hero to Brazil’s working class, or is he like so many other politicians who are corrupted by power?

A New Anti- Corruption Task Force in Australia?

The recently elected Labor government (similar to the Democrats in the U.S), led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, is planning to introduce new anti-corruption legislation. The main goal of this legislation is to set up a federal task force to oversee any anti-corruption investigations. In recent years, there have been several high-profile corruption scandals, including one involving a labor member of Parliament who accepted money from Chinese donors six years ago. According to Peter Hartcher of the Sydney Morning Herald, polling in Australia suggests that the public wants stronger A-C laws. Although bodies already exist at the state level in Australia dealing with this issue, this new legislation will be national. However, despite Albanese’s pledge to enact the law by the end of the year, there are signs that it could be held up by cross-bench members of Parliament who want an in-depth debate of the bill before enacting it. Its passage has also been held up by the passing of the Queen, which has caused Parliament to go into recess.

Bannon Indicted for Defrauding Contributors

One of former President Donald Trump’s chief advisors, Steve Bannon, is facing charges brought by the Manhattan district attorney’s office in New York State for money laundering and conspiracy to defraud contributors. According to Politico’s Julian Shen-Berro, Bannon is alleged, through a fundraising initiative called We Build the Wall, to have collected money in 2019 from donors to support building a wall along the U.S/Mexico border. Trump made a campaign promise to build such a wall and to make Mexico pay for it, but Trump never achieved that goal. We Build the Wall collected15 million dollars towards that end.

However, it appears that Bannon used some of the donated money to pay a salary to the president of We Build The Wall, Brian Kolfage, a former Air Force veteran, even though Kolfage publicly insisted that he would receive no compensation for his role in developing the fund. The charge is that Bannon used the rest of the money for personal use. Ironically, Trump pardoned Bannon before leaving office in January of 2021 over these exact charges, at the federal level, brought by the Department of Justice. But that doesn’t pardon Bannon from charges made by New York state, where it appears that Bannon or one of his co-defendants were living at the time. The pardon demonstrates that both Trump and Bannon believed that the federal charges were accurate and could jeopardize Bannon. Bannon could face up to 15 years in jail and heavy financial penalties if convicted. Of course, like many corruption cases, the donors who contributed to the effort will probably never see their money again…or a completed wall.

Zelenskyy’s House Cleaning.

Recently. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has fired several high-ranking officials in what is becoming an ever-widening corruption scandal. Reports emerged on Monday, the 23rd of January, that Zelenskyy had fired his deputy infrastructure minister Vasyl Lozinskyi for allegedly stealing $400,000 that was intended to support the war effort. According to an article in The Guardian, Lozinskyi colluded with contractors to inflate the prices of items such as generators, and he would pocket the difference. According to a Reuters article from the 22nd of January, the defense minister Oleksiy Reznikov had secured food on contracts at highly inflated prices. Zelenskyy’s deputy cabinet minister was also fired after allegations emerged that he drove luxury cars around Kyiv shortly after Russia invaded.

A Washington Post article published recently highlights the role journalists and NGOs in Ukraine have played in exposing corrupt schemes. Also, according to a recent report by The Guardian, Oleksandr Novikov, the country’s lead anti-corruption tsar, has vowed not to let up on pursuing corrupt individuals despite being in the middle of a war. According to polling done in Ukraine before the war, only 40 percent of the Ukrainian population was willing to report corruption. However, 84 percent of the population is now ready to report wrongdoing. Surely if Countries such as the US and the UK are going to continue giving military aid to Ukraine, they will want to see some progress on the anti-corruption front.

The Imprisonment of Aung San Suu Kyi: Politically Motivated or Genuine?

Recently Aung San Suu Kyi was convicted of corruption charges and now faces up to 33 years in prison. She is also facing charges related to breaching COVID-19 laws, sedition, and election fraud. Suu Kyi is viewed as a defender of democratic and human rights in Burma, where the military holds immense power over civil society. According to an article by NPR, the specific corruption charges relate to the alleged misuse of state funds and allowing a cabinet minister to purchase a helicopter. Western experts generally assume that Suu Kyi’s trial is essentially for show, not unlike the trials that took place during the Stalin era in the Soviet Union. Despite Ms. Suu Kyi’s questionable actions regarding the minority Rohingya ethnic group, it seems unlikely that she is guilty of wrongdoing.

Suu Kyi’s trial and corruption charges appear to be a classic example of an authoritarian government attempting to remove a politician with democratic ideals through spurious allegations. Befitting a country where a military junta is in power, there is not much information on how deep corruption runs in Myanmar. However, there is a report authored by the Anti-Corruption Resource Centre detailing the different types of misconduct that affect civil society in Myanmar. For example, cronyism appears to be prevalent within the military, with high-ranking ministers selling state-run assets to close friends and associates with little transparency being observed. Myanmar also suffers from a “resource curse,” meaning that while it is blessed with many natural resources, corruption surrounding oil & gas exploration and logging is rampant. It seems very clear that the military junta sees Suu Kyi as a threat to their abuses and of their grip on power, so putting her in prison on politically motivated charges appears, from their perspective, to be the only option.