Corruption on construction projects can include bribery, extortion, fraud, collusion, money-laundering, or any similar activity.  It can take place during all the different phases of a construction project, including project selection, planning, design, funding, tendering, project execution, operation and maintenance, and dispute resolution.  It can involve any of the project participants, including government, funder, project owner, contractor, consulting engineer, joint venture partner, agent, sub-contractor and supplier.  It can take place at all links of the contractual chain, from the smallest sub-contract or supply contract at the bottom of the contractual chain, right the way up to main contractor, project owner, funder and government level.  


In view of its complexity, corruption on construction projects is difficult to prevent and to detect.  


Secrecy and concealment of information encourage corrupt activity and also make it more difficult to detect.  Greater transparency on public sector projects will help materially to reduce corruption as follows:



<ul style="font-size:10px;color:gray;">
<li>
Project information will be made widely available, and not only to those who may be implicated in corruption.  The project will, therefore, be subject to greater independent scrutiny. 
</li>
<li>
It will increase the likelihood that corruption will be discovered.
</li>
<li>
It will discourage corrupt activity because the potential perpetrators will be aware that there is a greater chance that any corruption will be discovered. 
</li>
<li>
It will encourage better governance as project participants may be obliged to disclose their existing practices which may be shown to be inadequate. 
</li>
<li>
It may reveal those project participants who have refused to disclose information and may raise legitimate questions as 
to why they are refusing to provide transparency. 
</li>
</ul>


A positive benefit of transparency is that it may help to reassure the public that the project is being conducted properly.



If the provincial government of Northern Samar cannot be transparent it means there is something wrong going on. This goes the same of with municipal projects and programs of Palapag, Northern Samar, Las Navas, Northern Samar, San Roque, Northern Samar, etc.



<a class="news_link" href="http://www.giaccentre.org/index.php" target="_blank">Global Infrastructure for Anti-Corruption Center (GIACC)
</a>

To reassure the public that projects and programs are being conducted properly, Northern Samar should promote transparency