Hacker News Reader

Comment by lionhearted | Hacker News Reader

Edit: I'm asking a serious question here - the article itself mentions that the poorest people aren't able to get access to birth certificates or get their home connected to municipal water unless they pay bribes they can't afford. This seems pretty brazenly criminal to me. And the death penalty is legal. So...

Maybe a naive question - how hard would be to just have the government announce they're going to hang anyone who asks for a bribe, then make a big show about hanging 100 corrupt bureaucrats? Wouldn't that drastically cut corruption down?

View on HN

how hard would be to just have the government announce they're going to hang anyone who asks for a bribe, then make a big show about hanging 100 corrupt bureaucrats? Wouldn't that drastically cut corruption down?

Thanks for asking a specific factual question. The policy you mention has not worked in China, where it is widely seen as a way to kill off lower-level officials who are insufficiently cooperative with the highest-level officials. China regularly has publicly announced executions for corruption, but it still has pervasive corruption.

It would reduce corruption - temporarily, at least, even though the killings would probably end up being very political (a bad thing! Consider how many would take it as a chance to get rid of their enemies). It would also scare bunches of people, and corruption would merely go underground as long as the hangings were enforced, before reappearing when enforcement slips. Not to mention the difficulties with getting the government - assumed to be filled with corruption - to do it. It is basically infinitely easier to educate the populace, make them refuse to give bribes when asked, and give them a way of responding to bribes which both refuses to do so, lets them feel part of an anti-bribe community, and reminds the officials that bribes are illegal.

Also, I doubt that anyone would argue that murdering anyone who asks for a bribe is better than eliminating the environment which makes people feel like they can ask for bribes.

How will you pick the 100 corrupt bureaucrats? By lottery or by targeting your political enemies? Would you really hang your nephew's corrupt best friend, or would you target the guy most likely to be challenge to your party in the next local election (despite his crimes being relatively minor)? The end result wouldn't be a cut down in corruption, it would just make the corrupt more careful about covering their backs.

I think punitive measures generally do not work. What is great about this is that it breaks someones sub-conscience, snaps them out of their behavior (hopefully), at the very moment of corruption.

Capital punishment, though legal, has been reserved for the ["rarest of the rare"](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_India#Law) cases by the Supreme Court of India. There have been instances when even serial killers have been pardoned. So it may not even be legally possible to pass such a law.

I took "hanging" metaphorically. Surely jail time or a heavy fine would serve a similar purpose?

Generally, wide enforcement with lenient penalties works better than narrow enforcement with crazy hard penalties.

catching 100,000 corrupt officials and putting them in jail for 6 months after a hefty fine and loss of position would probably work better.

And how would you make up for the sudden loss of 100,000 bureaucrats? I don't have to think too hard to come up with a number of scenarios where this policy will just make things even worse.

Always carry a licensed Pistol for your personal safety if you wanted to fight corruption in India http://to./3h22

While hanging out on LiveJournal's Bangalore forum, I've read several stories that make me think even the threat of legal prosecution in India can be mostly meaningless, with people taking years just to get a trial, and afterwards waiting years before there is a spot in prison for them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com