dw.com
Türkiye's Corruption Perception Index Score Remains Low at 34
The 2024 Corruption Perception Index ranked Türkiye 107th out of 180 countries with a score of 34, unchanged from 2023, highlighting persistent concerns about public sector corruption despite some recent economic reforms.
- What is Türkiye's 2024 Corruption Perception Index score, and what are its immediate implications?
- Türkiye received a score of 34 out of 100 on the 2024 Corruption Perception Index (CPI), ranking 107th out of 180 countries. This score is unchanged from last year and below the global average of 43, indicating a persistent issue with perceived corruption in the public sector. The ranking improved slightly due to other countries' score decreases, not necessarily indicating progress in Türkiye's fight against corruption.
- What factors contributed to Türkiye's relatively unchanged ranking despite the same score as the previous year?
- Türkiye's CPI score of 34 is its lowest since 2004 and marks a 16-point drop from its highest score in 2013 (50). This decline correlates with a weakening of control mechanisms and a lack of effective anti-corruption institutions, according to Transparency International. The organization highlights the need for more effective reforms to improve Türkiye's standing.
- What are the long-term systemic issues impacting Türkiye's ability to improve its CPI score, and what potential future consequences might result from its continued low ranking?
- The continued low CPI score for Türkiye, despite some economic reforms and removal from the FATF grey list, suggests deep-seated systemic issues hindering anti-corruption efforts. The lack of an effective anti-corruption body and weak oversight mechanisms severely limit progress. Türkiye's low score, among the lowest for EU hopefuls, points to significant challenges in achieving transparency and accountability in the public sector.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing of the article presents a somewhat negative perspective on Turkey's performance in combating corruption. While the low score is factually presented, the emphasis on the decline from the highest score in 2013 and the comparison with countries having lower scores due to their own decline creates a somewhat biased perspective. The repeated mention of the lowest score since 2004 reinforces this negative framing. The headline, if any, likely would also contribute to this framing, although not available for analysis.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective, presenting the data from Transparency International's report. There is no evidence of loaded language or emotional appeals.
Bias by Omission
The analysis focuses heavily on Turkey's score and ranking, but lacks detailed examples of specific instances of corruption or insufficient anti-corruption measures. While the report mentions the lack of an effective anti-corruption body and weak oversight mechanisms, it doesn't provide concrete examples to illustrate these points. The comparison to other countries is made, but lacks depth in explaining the contextual factors contributing to their scores. The omission of specific examples weakens the analysis's impact and limits the reader's ability to fully grasp the nuances of the situation.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by contrasting democratic countries with authoritarian regimes in terms of their CPI scores, without adequately acknowledging the spectrum of governance types and their varying levels of corruption. While the correlation is noteworthy, the simplistic division ignores the complexities and variations within each category.
Sustainable Development Goals
The report highlights that Türkiye's score in the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) has been declining for the past decade, indicating a worsening of corruption levels. This directly impacts reduced inequality as corruption disproportionately affects vulnerable populations and hinders fair distribution of resources. The quote "Türkiye daha etkili reform yapmalı" ("Turkey should implement more effective reforms") emphasizes the need for addressing corruption to improve equality.