Bribery vs lobbying: The problem of interpretation

-

An easy way to distinguish between bribery and lobbying is using the legal system.  Bribery is condemned and criminalised by all legal systems around the world.  In some countries such as United States and United Kingdom where the issue of bribery is considered very seriously people who are caught offering or attempting to offer bribes are punished severely. In contrast to bribery, lobbying is not condemned or criminalized by legal systems. In countries such as United States the law indirectly encourages lobbying by allowing a register of lobbyists in government establishments.  However, these differences between bribery and lobbying might not be as large as suggested by legal systems.  Instead they might be attributable to the way in which the concepts of bribery and lobbying are defined.

Bribery is considered to be an act that involves offering of a gift either in kind or cash to a person, a body or a government with an evil intent to get such a person, body or government to act contrary to to the way in which they would normally act.  The act of bribery often arises from the desire to retain or secure a business for profit.

In contrast, lobbying is viewed as an act that involves persuading a person, body or government to act in a particular way which will not necessarily benefit the lobbyist.  The act of lobbying is often associated with attempts by non-governmental or not-for-profit organisations to persuade the government to enact or change certain policies to favour certain sections of the community.

These definitions of bribery and lobbying suggest that the boundary between bribery and lobbying is clear. This assumption  might be true to a certain extent but not to all extent.  Consider business D for example that lobbies  government A to influence  government B to promulgate or make favourable policies in country B which could enable the business to trade in this country.  This act of business D is not considered bribery because the business did not offer any bribe to government A so it could persuade government B to make business-friendly policies.

However if business E cannot persuade government A to influence government B to make business-friendly policies in country B but tries to influence government B directly by offering certain incentives to this government business E will be guilty of bribery.  This undermines the fact that both businesses D and E had a shared goal of trading and making profits in country B but have only acted differently in achieving this objective.

It can be concluded from these that lobbying is not as a lesser evil than bribery as many people think.  Both bribery and lobbying can be considered evil for the fact that they involve situations in which one party will try to influence another party to act in the way it will not normally act.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Spanish Dog Fouling Law: Are Spanish Politicians Pursuing The Wrong Agenda?

-
Image
 Dog fouling Spain has some of the strictest laws regarding pets possession in Europe. One of its laws governing animal possession in Spain, for example, bans having exotic creatures as pets and requires dog, cat and ferret owners to declare their animals to the authority within three months of bringing them into the country. Until recently, however, Spain has no law nor sanction for failure to clean up after dog fouling in public places. It was up to dog owners whether to clean up such mess. This has now changed following the introduction of the dog fouling law. The new law states that the fine for any person failing to clean up after his or her dog fouling in a public place such as a park or kids play ground should be 1500 euros. The rationale for this legislation is to deter dog owners from leaving their dogs messing up public places such as parks. Regular visitors to parks can testify how the sight of such dog foul can be an eyesore. However, asking dog owners wh
Read more

Social Media Networks: Calls For Tighter Regulations

-
One of the most fascinating technological inventions of the twenty first century is the development of social media networks such as YouTube, Twitter, and Face book. These social media networks make it possible for people to meet new people and make friends, locate old friends and family members, or to form a relationship that can result in marriage. They also provide a platform in the form of advertising for conducting businesses. Despite these benefits provided by the social media networks certain things can go awfully wrong on the networks. The most recent example of how the social media network can be turned into a weapon of criminality is the case last week involving threatening rape and murder messages sent to a number of British women on Twitter. Feminists are attempting to use this incident to rally for support for tighter regulations on activities being conducted within social media networks. Is it possible to control activities within these networks? Having legislat
Read more

Marketing Tricks: How Many Times Have You Fallen Victim?

-
Image
 Fat free food Whereas business owners call them marketing strategies, none business owners regard them as marketing tricks. Regardless of what you like to call them, businesses cannot survive without marketing tricks. Marketing tricks are the flywheel that keeps businesses engine running. We tend not to be concerned about them because of our perception that we are familiar with them and can avoid them. However, a careful look at the marketing tricks used by businesses will reveal that many of us have fallen victims of them in the past and can still fall victim of the malpractice in future. Let us consider two of these popular tricks used in supermarkets. The first marketing trick used by retailers is relating to the slogan “75% reduced fat”. Items labelled 75% reduced fat are often displayed on supermarket shelves. Some of us who are conscious of our health tend to go for them to avoid consuming excess fat. Excess fat in the body is considered to be a risk factor for
Read more