MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency

Uruguayans admits graft is rampant in government offices

Former Pte. Batlle: ”this is nothing new, it has been around for years?

A majority of Uruguayans admitted that graft is extended in government offices particularly to make sure proceedings get that “needed push”, according to a public opinion poll released over the weekend.

The poll showed that 57% of Uruguayans considers that "incentives" are needed when dealing with government offices, a practice which has no political colour but rather has been long ingrained as common in the country. However 35% of those interviewed said that these kinds of actions are only needed in certain government offices, while 6% believe that certain recent incidents, such as a long court case involving Customs brokers, is rather the exception. More over an overwhelming majority of Uruguayans 78% believe that these "incentives" are a serious or very serious offence, almost a crime, which must be punished by the courts. Nevertheless 20% describe the practice as a "relative" offence or "not too serious". The poll helps to illustrate a debate triggered in Uruguayan public opinion following claims that Custom brokers and the overall Customs system is extensively "oiled" with this kind of incentives. Customs officials deny the charges but the prosecution has called for the sentencing of several Customs brokers and officials. The head of the Customs office that was in London for a conference and downplayed the claims was summarily sacked. A similar situation has been exposed at the courts where the "incentive" system is quite common among junior officers who have the daily handling of the cases. Even a former Uruguayan president Jorge Batlle stated publicly that "who doesn't know that some kind of gift or incentive is needed in the courts? Let's not be cynical; this is nothing new, it has been around for years". However the matter called for a special session of the Uruguayan Supreme Court to deny such practices. But at the same time it ruled that junior court officers are entitled to a per diem to enable them to address the many errands inside and outside courthouses. Problem with per diems is that the Uruguayan Judiciary does not advance them but rather pays on presentation of bills and with a cap.