Corruption is rampant in many democratically elected governments, particularly, in third world countries; as the elected representatives, instead of serving people , tend to serve their own interests. Corruption exists in spite of media surveillance and judicial scrutiny.
Corporate governance may have an impact, but cultural norms play a large part in its effectiveness. For example, in a society where high power distance (i.e. - authoritarian) is valued such as those found in the Far East even democratically held governments have there limits. In such societies transparency is not necessarily a good thing. In some of these cultures (including democracies) collusion and graft are often seen as methods of obtaining equilibrium and maintaining the status quo.
Dear Jaharkanti,
Corporate governance is mainly concerned with the alignment of interests between different groups involved wth the entity. But if the very groups regard corruption as a means of selling bureaucratic services, there is no possibility to tackle corruption just by creating, say, a diverse cabinet of ministers. If you expect from such a cabinet the same benefits as you do from a diverse boad of directors, you will struggle, if all the ministers are open to corruption. Exactly the same is due if the (diverse) directors do not monitor and control the entity, but actively participate in transgression. Corporate governance is just a means, but it dos not create proper governance by itself.
Paul