The unintended consequences of anti-corruption measures: Regulating judicial conduct in Ghana

There are endless possibilities of court users seeking to influence judges' decisions on cases in many countries. As a result, authorities often seek to reduce corruption opportunities by regulating judicial conduct and limiting access to judges. Using interview data from 15 judges drawn from a larger study of justice and anti-corruption officials in Ghana, this paper presents judges' interpretation and observation of rules around judicial conduct and the impact on corruption opportunities. The results suggest that judges interpret their obligations under these regulations broadly, including isolating themselves from the public to remove them from the possibilities of corrupt exchanges. However, it was found that instead of decreasing corruption opportunities, regulating judicial conduct in this way can produce unintended consequences. This anti-corruption measure, while well-meaning, can increase corruption opportunities, shift corruption opportunities to lower-level court officials, decrease transparency and guardianship, and even motivate judges to engage in corruption. The article concludes by discussing the implications of the results for preventing corruption in judicial systems.