COUNTRIES around the world lack proper institutional framework to regulate political funding, new study has shown.<\/span><\/p>\n The Global Integrity Report: 2011, a major investigative study of 31 countries, was released over the weekend by Global Integrity, an award-winning international nonprofit organisation that tracks governance and corruption trends globally.<\/span><\/p>\n Twenty-nine countries out of a 31-country sample scored less than 60 on a 100-point scale on questions assessing the effectiveness of laws regulating individual and corporate donations to political parties, as well as the auditing of those donations and campaign expenditures. Government monitoring agencies tasked with enforcing such laws typically lack investigative power and often have little to no authority to impose sanctions.<\/span><\/p>\n With two exceptions, all countries assessed fit into one of two major categories: those with solid or even model sets of regulations that they fail to implement, or those that leave the flow of money into political campaigns entirely unregulated.<\/span><\/p>\n The Report, which seeks to assess the medicine applied against corruption rather than the actual disease of corruption at the national level, also assessed other areas of government transparency and accountability. These include conflicts of interest regulations, freedom of the press, and law enforcement accountability.<\/span><\/p>\n It covers developed countries such as the U. S., Ireland, and Germany as well as dozens of the world\u2019s emerging markets and developing nations, from Algeria to Ukraine to China. Rather than measure perceptions of corruption, the report assesses the accountability mechanisms and transparency measures in place (or not) to prevent corruption through 320 \u201cIntegrity Indicators\u201d as well as journalistic reporting of corruption. Gaps in those safeguards suggest where corruption is more likely to occur.<\/span><\/p>\n In 29 of the 31 countries assessed, government bureaucracy is considered an extension of the ruling party or is routinely utilized for partisan purposes. The boundaries between public resources and party activities remain blurry in most countries assessed, with the exceptions of the U.S. (100 score) and Ireland (75 score).<\/span><\/p>\n Several countries experienced noticeable improvements or declines in their overall scores on anti-corruption safeguards since they were last assessed in 2009. Liberia, Armenia and Tajikistan showed the biggest improvements, while Sierra Leone, Mexico, and Zimbabwe saw decreases in performance.<\/span><\/p>\n