Statement by the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance – Hon. Gail Teixeira MP

“Understanding the Corruption Perceptions Index: Context, Methodology, and Misconceptions”

The recently published 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) seems to have attracted the attention, and in some cases delight, of several media houses to Guyana’s ranking; this is not an unusual occurrence as this is the predictable response whenever the CPI is published by Transparency International. Repeatedly it has been said in response in the Hansards of the National Assembly over decades and in the media that the CPI is not an empirical nor a scientific measure of corruption levels globally but one of perceived public sector corruption globally. I refer to my press statement of April 26, 2023 “Narratives that Ignore facts do a disservice to Guyana, Guyanese people”. I shall once again repeat and clarify the report’s scope, methodology, and the inherent limitations to avoid misinterpretations.

Let me at the onset repeat, in order to ensure no misinterpretation, that at no time herein is there an insinuation that corruption is not a problem; rather, the objection is that non-empirical, non-scientific data cannot be the standard by which such a serious issue is measured by Transparency International or any other organization.

The CPI is a perception-based index that aggregates views from 13 sources provided by 12 institutions deemed appropriate by Transparency International (TI). It should be noted that one of the 12 institutions, the World Bank Country Policy and Institutional Assessment includes a disclaimer that “the ratings are the product of staff judgement and do not necessarily reflect the views of the World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors or the governments they represent”.

In the case of Guyana, five sources were used, dating from 2022-2024, in which Guyana’s scores ranged from 38 to 44 among the different sources.

These sources assess perceptions of corruption in the public sector and apply a standardised methodology to produce comparable scores over time. However, as Transparency International explicitly states, “the CPI does not measure actual corruption levels.” Instead, it reflects perceptions, and it is fundamentally important to note that these perceptions are influenced by a range of subjective factors including traditional and social media narratives, socio-economic development and global trends.

These challenges are not new to Guyana, and it may be recalled that in April 2023, the 9th Annual Conference of the Commonwealth Caribbean Association of Integrity Commissions and Anti-Corruption Bodies, held in Guyana, discussed how the non-empirical, non-scientific approach of the CPI reflects unjust prejudices and biases against the developing world, in particular the CARICOM member states.

Key Clarifications

1.   Perceptions vs. Reality: The CPI measures perceptions of corruption, not documented incidents.

It relies on subjective assessments from undisclosed individuals in each country who TI refers to as experts and businesspeople. One can agree that the perceptions of these individuals can be shaped by heightened public discourse, isolated incidents, personal and business biases, and sociological and political worldviews.

2.   Methodological  Limitations:  The  CPI  uses  multiple  data  sources,  each  with  its  own methodological framework. These sources are standardised to fit the CPI scale (0-100), however, aggregation processes of this nature  inherently introduce  variability and uncertainty in data. Guyana’s CPI score change of one-point falls within the standard margin of error, as outlined in the CPI Technical Methodology, and should not be wilfully misinterpreted and opportunistically used as evidence of systemic deterioration by any means.

3.   Ethical  Considerations:  It  cannot  escape  notice  that  the  14  countries  whose  governments contribute to the funding of TI all score about 60/90 and, coincidentally, the Global South whose governments do not fund TI do poorly. One of the underlining principles of anti-corruption measures is the issue of conflict of interest. Is there not a conflict of the interest between TI and the governments which fund it?

4.   Guyana’s Progress: In fact, while some persons have chosen to focus on the subjective narratives, it seems to have been completely missed by the media that Guyana is listed as a “Significant Improver” over the past 10 years in the same CPI report. This designation reflects the country’s steady progress in strengthening its governance and anti-corruption mechanisms. Within the last five years only, Guyana has implemented key reforms, enhanced institutional oversight, and taken steps to foster greater inclusion, participation, transparency and accountability. This recognition as a “significant improver” underscores the success of these initiatives and highlights the bigger picture of Guyana’s commitment to sustainable long-term anti-corruption progress.

5.  Regional Context: Guyana remains ahead of several regional peers and has consistently demonstrated progress over the past decade. Guyana, by ratifying the Inter-American Convention on Corruption and the UN Convention against Corruption and adopting the Lima Commitment and the UNGA Political Declaration against Corruption, has committed by treaty obligations to be reviewed by these bodies on progress made or not made. Comparing Guyana’s score with smaller, historically high-ranking jurisdictions like Barbados or The Bahamas overlooks the broader context of Guyana’s development trajectory. Guyana has made notable strides in strengthening its anti- corruption framework, including the establishment and strengthening the capacity of key institutions, legislative reforms, and increased public sector transparency. To name only two unique features of Guyana’s anti-corruption measures, which do not exist in sister countries, are the NPTAB website which publishes the minutes and awards of tenders and the appointment of the constitutional Public Procurement Commission.

6.   Anti-Corruption Initiatives: The Government of Guyana continues to prioritise transparency, accountability, and good governance. Robust anti-corruption institutions, legal reforms, and training initiatives have been implemented to strengthen oversight and enforcement mechanisms.

Responding to Misleading Claims

Of note is that the Stabroek News article of February 13, 2025, stated that “the CPI report 2024 has found that “state capture by political and economic elites fosters misappropriation of resources and illicit enrichment and environmental crime.” However, the source of this statement is Insight Crime not one of the sources used by TI in the CPI scores and ranks. Interestingly, the same source in its article of June 2024 attacked Guyana’s “judicial bodies of being involved in corrupt activities and “being coopted by mining groups and their political acolytes.”

Five Years of Progress

Since assuming office in 2020, following the 5 months long elections results delay which indisputably attained unintentional international notoriety on corruption, the Government of Guyana has implemented a broad range of measures to recover from the period of the most brazen electoral corruption and simultaneously bolster the anti-corruption architecture of the State.

Some of the notable highlights include:

•    Broad-based  legislative  strengthening  and  reform  including  to  electoral,  anti-corruption  and financial laws, oversight mechanisms, and constitutional reform;

•   Establishment of a National Coordinating Committee on the United Nations Convention Against Corruption and the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption;

•    Consistent anti-corruption capacity building for the public and private sector on a range of international and regional treaty recommendations and obligations;

•    Re-established and strengthened critical oversight bodies such as the Integrity Commission, the Office of the Ombudsman, the Public and Police Service Commissions, the Public Service Appellate Tribunal, the Public Procurement Commission, etc.;

•   Substantially increased funding for constitutional, statutory and parliamentary oversight bodies;

•   Submitted Annual Reports on progress in implementing the Inter-American Convention against Corruption since 2021;

•    Completed the State’s 6yth Cycle review on the implementation of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption in February 2024;

•    Completed Guyana’s 2nd Self-Assessment on the United Nations Convention against Corruption in 2023, with the next stage of the review being implemented in 2025;

•   Participated in the annual IMF Article IV consultations with IMF staff;

•   Participated in CFATF/FATF Guyana reviews on AML/CFT;

•   Developed and published Guyana’s Anti-Corruption Framework Volume I;

•    Organised workshops with civil society, government agencies and constitutional bodies on anti-corruption;

•   Hosted annual Human Rights and Anti-Corruption Expos since 2022 to enhance public awareness on corruption and Guyana’s institutions;

•   Won the prestigious Best Regional AML/CFT Case Award (BREMOLT) at the 59th Plenary and

Working Group Meetings.

•   Annual Audit Office Reports and increase in special audits in the last four years, all laid in the National Assembly and publicly available.

The Way Forward

This struggle is not unique to Guyana – it was Barbadian Prime Minister Mia Motley who in an interview with a reporter from SVT (Sweden) queried: “Why is it that every time we talk about countries from the south, the first allegation is corruption? The USA, UK & Europe are riddled with corruption, but nobody says that they’re not capable of achieving their objectives (…).” Prime Minister Motley clearly articulated that this is a challenge that developing countries face and her comments on the matter are instructive.

The findings of TI’s CPI should be interpreted with caution and supplemented by independent, evidence- based assessments of States’ governance and anti-corruption performance which Guyana has committed to. The Government of Guyana remains committed to engaging with international partners, civil society, and the media to continue to advance anti-corruption efforts and ensure the responsible use of global indices like the CPI.