ABSTRACT
In principle high level political corruption is to be expected under authoritarian rule, where those in power enjoy impunity and are sheltered from public criticism. The dichotomous political analysis (authoritarian rule favours high level corruption; democracy discourages it) has an exact counterpart in the realm of economic analysis. Latin America certainly provides clear examples of authoritarian rule combined with market economics, and also of interventionist economics combined with political democracy. The political diagnosis of corruption emphasises simple abuse of public office, whereas the economic diagnosis points towards a more complex, discriminating, and enterprise-related account of surplus misappropriation. The anti-corruption mechanisms postulated by political liberalism assume an empowered citizenry or electorate, whereas economic liberals rely more on an autonomous private sector pursuing its interests through the market. Objective and dispassionate data collection on the topic of political corruption is an inherently problematic enterprise.
