That was a celebrated phrase coined by English historian Lord Acton (1834–1902) in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton about how historians should judge the abuse of power by past rulers, and, more and more, it is appearing to become an apt description of our current political affairs.

Corruption is a highly political phenomenon because a range of corrupt acts may be politicised. This happens when the spoils of corruption are sought and reinvested, not only for personal enrichment but also to maintain and enhance a corrupt leader’s hold on power, thus threatening democracy and the rule of law, not to mention good governance.

When corruption is politicised, corrupt acts are used to extract resources from the public coffers, which are then reinvested in the structures, networks, and tactics that politicians use to maintain and extend their hold on power. We have had our share of forms of corruption over the last few years that really pay homage to Lord Acton’s dictum.

Indeed, internationally, Malta has been, and apparently still is, notorious for its corruption. For decades, a pair of political machines, the Labour and Nationalist parties, have operated with impunity on the island. But in 2013, the corruption went into overdrive. Since then, we have had and still have channels and roads that lead to corruption, as well as channels and roads that are tantalisingly tempting. It is incredible how we have had, and still have, high-ranking government officials and politicians who devilishly fall into that temptation. Corruption is beginning to affect not just the heart of government but the entire body.

We have had proven cases of soliciting bribes, that is to say, money or favours paid to a political powerholder (in person, to their family members, an organisation, or the ruling party) by national and international companies or private individuals. In exchange, the bribe-payers got access to natural resources, concessions, state contracts, or other privileges. We have had proven cases of embezzlement consisting of the theft or misappropriation of state assets (funds, property, and services) by someone in authority in a public institution. We have had cases of fraud when power holders either played an active role in concealing or intentionally misrepresenting facts (including their own involvement) or took a share of payment or reward for ‘closing their eyes’ on economic crimes. We also had the occasional case of extortion employing the use of force, threats, harassment, or persistent demands to extract money or other resources from individuals, groups, and businesses.

Of course, it is easier to stay in power when your opponents have diminished and your ranks of supporters have swollen. When accountability is weaker, you can subvert democratic institutional checks and balances. Sadly, we are now seeing this type of power-preserving corruption in an all-pervasive manner. We are witnessing it through tactics such as favouritism or nepotism, patronage, and cronyism. We see it through vote-buying or ‘handouts’. We see it in rampant impunity.

This current state of affairs is negatively impacting the enjoyment of all of our human, civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, as well as the right to development, which underscores the indivisible and interdependent nature of those rights. We are seeing the many consequences of corruption as it damages the legitimacy of our leaders and causes a loss of public support for and trust in our state and government institutions. Rampant corruption threatens to impact the ability of the state to protect and fulfil its human rights obligations and to deliver relevant services, including a functioning judiciary, law enforcement, health, education, and social services.

We incredulously followed media and civil society revelations and disclosures of corrupt politicians, judges, police investigations or criminal prosecutions, and underhand or shady dealings within public tenders for major government projects or privatisation deals for national services. Do you recall that a government minister was linked to a driving theory test corruption case involving three Transport Malta officials, or government efforts to protect friends and allies from the investigation into the murder of journalist Caruana Galizia? And how can we forget those years during which Malta fought accusations of being a tax haven after it had been dealt another reputational blow by being graylisted by global anti-money laundering body FATF? The Pilatus Bank and the Egrant inquiries, together with the Electrogas and VGH/Steward hospitals scandals, can perhaps be considered the apex of our corruption pyramid. So far, that is.

Corruption has been around for a very long time and will be around in the future unless governments can figure out effective ways to combat it. This is not going to be easy. This is hardly surprising since most corruption is clandestine. Also, determining just how efficient government institutions are is not what would be called an exact science. As a consequence, corruption is notoriously hard to measure, and equally hard is the work of quantifying the extent of corruption and putting a figure in euros on its economic effects.

Of course, the focus should be exclusively on corrupt public practices, i.e., those illegal activities that reduce the economic efficiency of governments. Apart from those, there is also private corruption, such as that practised on individuals and private enterprises by organised crime. We need to come out of this corruptive hold as soon as possible, as it risks encouraging systemic institutional decay where the legislature, administration, and judiciary become subordinate to the interests of political elites and protected criminals and are therefore unable to fight corruption.

Yet, ironically, the flip side of corruption being politicised is that anti-corruption is also political, even though it is often presented as an endeavour distanced from political processes. Interventions that aim to reduce corruption can be politicised in different ways, leading to unintended or counterproductive outcomes. Powerful actors may be subtle, using their official position to obstruct anti-corruption efforts through inaction or disruption, perhaps at the same time as rhetorically championing those same efforts.

Political power, wealth, and corruption are intrinsically linked, and they remain an invisible threat to the very foundations of our nation.