Transparency International announced on February 21^st that Taiwan ranked 29^th in the Corruption Perceptions Index (hereinafter referred to as “CPI”) in 2017. There are 180 countries and territories (including Taiwan) in the global appraisal. Among them, Taiwan got 63 out of 100 points and was rated No. 29 in the global rankings, which is higher by 2 points, moving from No. 31 to No. 29 when compared with 2016.

In 2016, there were 176 countries that were included in the global appraisal list and increased to 180 countries in 2017. It means that Taiwan’s rating is higher by 83% among the countries in the appraisal list. In the Asia-Pacific region, Taiwan’s rating is inferior to New Zealand (rating 1, 89 points), Singapore (rating 6, 84 points), Australia (rating 13, 77 points), Hong Kong (rating 13, 77 points), Japan (rating 20, 73 points) and Bhutan (rating 26, 67 points) that is rated No. 7 in the Asia-Pacific, the same as in last year.

In 2012, important changes were made to the methodology of CPI to allow for score comparisons across time. In 2016, investigating data, proposed by Varieties of Democracies (V-Dem), was added that affected the comparison results during the year. In 2017, the evaluation of Taiwan conducted by CPI was referred to the investigation data form 8 organizations conducted in 2016, which constituted the basis for the comparison. The organizations and reference points to are: Global Insight (GI) with 71 points received, Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) with 55 points received, International Institute for Management Development (IMD) with 64 points received, Political Risk Services (PRS) with 53 points received, Bertelsmann Foundation (BF) with 77 points received, World Economic Forum (WEF) with 71 points received, Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC) with 55 points received, and Varieties of Democracies (V-Dem) with 56 points received. The details of Taiwan appraisal result is stated in Annex 1.

Except for the International Institute for Management (IMD), the points received in the remaining seven organizations were rising. Especially, the points received from Varieties of Democracies (V-Dem) increased by 6 points that is the highest. The appraisal of Varieties of Democracies (V-Dem) is found through researchers and experts’ research results, as the scope concerned are extended to judicial and legislators’ corruption situations in addition to the executive department, which proves that integrity action taken by every executive branch and our efforts in judicial reform has been noted in the past year.

The CPI scores and ranks countries/territories based on how corrupt a country’s public sector is perceived to be by experts and business executives. Although the points of International Institute of Management (IMD) has decreased by 1 point, those from the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC) has increased by 4 points with the similar questions, which proves that the index is based on perceptions. In fact, when the government’s decision-making and the administrative decision is not transparent enough, the public sector’s corruption is easier to be questioned. Therefore, the government shall endeavored to improve the transparency of the government’s decision-making process and take steps forward on every administrative transparency action, examine workflow and identify potential and possible business risks that may affect the government’s creditability on the basis of “the Executive Yuan and its affiliates (structures) promote the principle of transparent administrative workflow.” Thus, the government shall take the necessary action to improve the transparency of the Executive sector stipulated in Article 10 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption can be implemented.

In considering that CPI is based on the perceptions of experts and business executives, to decrease the disadvantageous effects on the companies’ activities caused by corruption, avoid improper interaction between public servants and businesspersons, including corruptions, conflicts of interest and corruptions that happened in government procurements and public construction between companies and the public sector. For the regulation of investigation part, keep on pushing the Whistleblower Protection Act and constitutes a comprehensive whistleblower protection scheme, encouraging those who know illegal activities to uncover illegal activities. For the prevention action, pragmatically reviewing current laws and regulations to avoid public servants and the business from being involved in crime due to an unreasonable legal system, which causes an impression that the government is weak in fostering legitimate integrity surroundings. Meanwhile, continue enhancing the promotion of a potential evaluator through occasions like international institutions and international conventions and appropriately present Taiwan’s efforts and significant results for co-operating with The United Nations Convention against Corruption, which would be a necessary condition for upgrading the rating.