Iran and Nigeria have the most corrupt governments, both in my own opinion, based on prior knowledge, and confirmed by the Corruptions Percentage Index 2015, with Iran ranked 130 and Nigeria 136 in terms of the level of corruption present based on the standards outlined by this organization.
There are a variety of similarities and differences between the Iranian and Nigerian governments. Both countries have similar procedures and methods by which they select their head of state (i.e. through direct popular elections, having multiple candidates, and creating fixed election cycles with two-term limits). However, when it comes to political parties, there are vast differences. In Iran, political parties were banned until 1998, and even the parties that exist now are, in reality, mere groups with similar political alignments. In contrast, Nigeria has numerous parties, defined by different factions (divided by ethnicity, religion, and so forth). Additional differences lie within their structures of leadership: Iran has a dual executive structure, wherein there is both a president and a Supreme Leader (who must be a direct descendant of Muhammad and primarily supervises politics to ensure conformity with Islamic law). Nigeria has no such system, which highlights a religious difference between the two countries as well, as Iran has elements of theocracy, that affect all citizens, whereas Nigeria, as a federal constitutional republic, does not. Despite authoritarian leadership, however, both Iran and Nigeria have strong civil societies and high participation. Another commonality can be found in the types of leaders both countries have historically possessed, as some major governmental leaders are military, and have obtained the position they hold through coups.
Nigeria specifically has a great deal of corruption due to both British colonialism (and the tumultuous aftermath) as well as greed coupled with a political environment that favors the wealthy. In regards to instability, the British, upon their departure, left Nigeria with little political support to assist them in the transition to independence. As various groups fought over power, and power vacuums emerged, corruption emerged in the country as a part of these conflicts, and remains to this day. Additionally, the political environment in Nigeria favors those with greater wealth. As a result, politicians, in order to maintain their power and to satisfy their greed for material wealth, will often take advantage of the system to gain more money. This is furthered by the surrounding cultural environment, where tribal relations and gift-giving can sometimes lead to corruption.
Two major causes of corruption in Iran consist of governmental involvement in the economy and private markets and its structure of civil society (and particularly the incorporation of strict religious tenets). The lack of transparency surrounding governmental financial transactions allows for corruption to exist, especially given ties to the private market, and more prominently, the oil industry. It has also been suggested that the overall size of the government budget relative to GDP may be positively correlated with corruption levels. Iran’s civil society may also be a cause - Iran has a very traditional society and culture, where clan and a sense of community plays a large role, and as a result, this makes the society vulnerable to manipulation and corruption.
Crackdowns on corruption are occurring in both countries, with Iran having slightly more success. However, as the rhetoric decrying corruption often lacks subsequent actions, there are a number of solutions that both countries can take to reducing it. Focusing on education is the first solution, because ensuring that school and university curricula are in line with modern societal developments help reinforce positive values for future generations. This shouldn’t be limited to formal schooling, however; education through religious and community-based institutions and increased political participation may help bridge the gap between the younger generations and current politicians. The second solution is in terms of increased transparency, particularly through freedom of the press, which is notably lacking in Iran, but also to an extent in Nigeria. Demanding accountability, and investing in resources for oversight and management, particularly when it comes to governmental spending, may serve as an effective means of combating corruption. The third way to reduce corruption is to amend international laws, as countries (such as Sweden) that seemingly have no internal corruption actually do encounter this problem in their overseas interactions. Establishing common global conventions, such as through the UN Convention Against Corruption, may be a step in the right direction to reduce international loopholes that increase corruption.
