“Non-Corrupt Government”: Less Than Good, More Than Impartial

In recent years, the study of corruption has become one of the most prominent in the social sciences. If there is corruption, however, it is because something has been corrupted; something pure has been sullied. This pure element serves mainly as a normative reference: It may never have constituted a social and political reality. However, the purpose of this article is to try to define what its components might be. In this way, theoretical considerations can be used to provide a more solid basis for the fight against corruption. The position of this paper is that the opposite of corruption should be explicitly defined without the use of abstract categories such as good governance or integrity. The paper will begin with a discussion of the concept of “non-corrupt government” and then proceed to a theoretical analysis of the main issues involved. It will conclude with some practical remarks on how to build, in the most parsimonious way, the benchmark of quality that corruption undermines. The contention is that a “non-corrupt government” is based on four principles: (1) equality (input side), (2) reasonableness (input side), (3) impartiality and professionalism of the administration (output side), and (4) accountability of the office (output side).