國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
分會不針對個案進行調查或爆料，以免阻礙與其他行為者之聯盟關係，二是避免 政黨政治以免損及國際透明組織之信用，以上二原則也成為新分會會員之入會條 件之一。5
國際透明組織促成 OECD 反賄公約在短短八年內(1989~1997)從研究可行性 簽署公約具有重大貢獻，足以與美國並列為該公約之催生者。美國是呼籲各國
，但是一直到國際透明組織於1995 年應邀加入 OECD 反貪工 組，OECD 才加快立法腳步，也因為國際透明組織動員各分會遊說本國政府並 且理
國際透明組織其實是集體創作，總部的表達方式卻給人印象是催生者只有一 人。從柏林總部之官方網站與文件中，提到 都稱為創始人 而
。事實上， 年創立過程中一直是集體決策。
本人的著作中回憶草創階段，在海牙的荷蘭發展援助部部長會議室，部長 楊‧普龍克從阿姆斯特丹邀請一位德國公證人見證創會並註冊為法人團體之 位創始人。 描述自己是其中一位創始人，也是創會之初的首任理事會主席。
的個人領導與國際透明組織之創立與發展固然密不可分，但是外界對 其領導風格有不同之評價。部份開發中國家的菁英階級認為Eigen深受第三世界
到
簽約的原始鼓吹者 作
性說服歐洲大企業接受反貪公約，各會員國對於該公約之態度才逐一從抗拒 到接受。
第二節 內部分裂與出走
一、 個人英雄
Peter Eigen (founder) 不是共同創始人之一(co-founder) 1993
Eigen
11 Eigen
6
Eigen
L. de Sousa, op. cit., p. 32.
彼得‧艾根(Peter Eigen)，《全球反腐網：世界反賄賂鬥爭》
5
6 ，前引書，頁20。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
分會之信任。7 另一部份人士認為個人主義色彩偏濃，de Sousa歸納其訪談 12 個 國家分會與柏林總部人士之後，歸納Eigen 的強勢領導造成總部之公關與媒體曝 光機會集中於一人，於是外界觀感為：「單一創始人、單一領導……單一發言人 與鎂光燈前之人。」8
二、 派系出走
從2003 年兩位創始人 Peter Eigne 與 Jeremy Pope 正式決裂可看出該組織之 內部人事複雜性，人事紛爭則影響日後組織運作與國際反貪運動。德國籍 Peter Eigen 與紐西蘭籍 Jeremy Pope 是 1993 年在柏林共同創立國際透明組織的 11 位 共同創始人。兩人的學經歷相仿，法律人背景、同是 1938 年出生、也都是國際 透明組織草創初期的實際負責人，1994~1998 期間 Eigen 是理事會主席(Chairman of the Board)、Pope 是執行長(Managing Director, MD)，在總部的行政體系中，通 常由這兩人共同決策，理事會全體 9 位集體背書。然而兩人理念的不相容導致 Pope 出走另立門戶，Eigen 則是繼續以強勢風格領導柏林總部。
Cragg分析Eigen與Pope兩人既有政策歧異也有個人宿怨問題。9 Eigen與Pope 兩人是基於反貪理念結合的專業人士，理念固然一致，但在目標與運作方面歧見 日
公 M
深，導致Pope離開國際透明組織，另創同性質之國際非政府組織TIRI。
以紐西蘭籍Jeremy Pope 與挪威籍學者 Fredrik Galtung 為代表人物的倫敦辦 室可稱為倫敦派或分權派。以理事會主席 Peter Eigen 與倫理委員會主席 ichael Viehen 為代表人物之陣營可稱為柏林派或集權派。
1998 年Pope被調往英國倫敦擔任主管。柏林總部在倫敦設此辦公室，做為
同前註，頁11。
“…one founder, one leader…one spokesman and spotlight man.” L. de Sousa, op. cit., p. 24.
“Failure to renew Pope’s contract was a result of both policy and personal conflicts. As I recall, there were concerns on the part of senior management about the role of the London office and its relative independence from the central operation.” W. Cragg, W. 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Ph.D.
dissertation-Ernie Ko. E. Ko ed., 2009 年 11 月 26 日。
7 8 9
‧
發生重大歧見。這時候，Jeremy Pope與Peter Eigen兩位國際透明組織之共同創始 人發生個人理念與管理上的重大歧見。10Peter Eigen對於兩派之爭有不同解讀，他認為是個人之爭而非政策或理念之 爭。關鍵在於總部認為給付Jeremy Pope擔任研究主任(Research Diretor, RD)的薪 資太高，Pope又不受柏林總部執行長(Managing Director, MD)Elshorst之管轄，
Eigen與部份總部高層人士因此決定Pope於 65 歲屆齡退休。事出突然，Pope從錯 愕轉為妥協，建議以較年輕又有研究能力的Fredrik Galt
交換條件。總部拒絕，隨引發一連串的後續爭議。儘管葡萄牙籍學者L ís de Sousa訪查後為文認為Peter Eigen以 65 歲屆齡逼退Jeremy Pope，但是Eigen堅持是 理事會的共同決議而且隨後Pope是有條件同意離職，而且要求Pope去職是基於人 事成本考量。Peter Eigen的說法迥然不同於Jeremy Pope。11
Jeremy Pope 對於彼時兩人的對立以及因此產生的影響有如下的回憶，他於 2009 年 11 月 17 日回函本文作者之電子郵件原文節錄如下：”At the Casablanca AGM it was clear that Eigen was operation's think tank was being rather too successful and we would soon be earning enough (thanks could look after them, rather than a distant and largely ignorant Berlin. The media (BBC World
10
upset with Galtung and myself [按 Jeremy Pope]. The London office we were running as the to a Norwegian contract) to cover our running costs. African national chapters were asking if we Service, Voice of America etc) were using us as spokespeople on the corruption issue rather than Eigen (never good with the media).” J. Pope, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Re: research questions for my Ph. D. dissertation-Ernie Ko (November 17). E. Ko ed., 2009 年 11 月 17 日。
11 2009 年 11 月 29 日 Eigen 回函本文作者之電子郵件原文節錄如下：”The "differences between hould not be renewed; he had become too independent in building up our n office -- even though he reported as "Research Director" of TI officially to the Managing
tions regarding TI-CIR. E. Ko ed.. 2009 年 11 月 29 日。
London and Berlin" where mainly personal. Jeremy Pope was turning 65 and the Board decided that his expensive contract s
Londo
Director, Elshorst, in Berlin. Pope agreed to terminate his employment contract under the condition, that we apoint his young colleague and friend, Galtung, to the position of Research Director. This we refused; Galtung was not yet ready for this senior position. Thereafter Pope and Galtung started a very destructive campaign against Berlin and me personally. Jeremy Pope had been, as one of the first salaried employees of TI, my closest partner in the early years of TI; he was therefore popular in the movement and his campaign was quite painful for all of us.” P. Eigen, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: RE: Ph.D. ques
‧
Circular #33/2002 -- Mediation between London and Berlin”，信中附上肯亞籍John Githongo與孟加拉籍Kamal Hossain兩位仲裁人受理事會決議之委任，訪視倫敦辦 公室之後做成之建議。主要內容是人事一條鞭，建議重組倫敦辦公室改稱為 Tran敦辦公室與柏林總部兩陣營之不信任感。13
歲強制退休為由，向Pope發出不續約通知。據信是兩位高層，理事主席 Peter Eigen與倫理委員會主席Michael Viehen聯手所為。15 Pope向總部倫理委員會
sparency International Centre for Innovation and Research，簡稱TI- CIR，隸屬 柏林總部秘書處管轄，倫敦之主管由柏林總部之理事會主席任命之。但是對於柏
W. Cragg, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Re: Ph. D. dissertation-Ernie Ko (3). E. Ko ed., 2009 年 11 月 26 日。
Ibid.
12 13
to lay out his worries, and that we then have five
15 4
14 關於雙方的對立情景，Jeremy Pope 有一段生動描述，他於 2009 年 11 月 17 日回函作者之電子 郵件原文節錄如下：At Casablanca Galtung and I [按 Jeremy Pope] sat with Eigen and suggested that he have five uninterrupted minutes
uninterrupted minutes to respond. Eigen agreed but then sat in complete silence, without saying anything, let alone a cause for complaint. J. Pope, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Re: research questions for my Ph. D. dissertation-Ernie Ko (November 17). In E. Ko ed., 2009 年 11 月 17 日。
L. de Sousa, op. cit., pp. 32-3
‧
之一Wesley Cragg( 曾去函Eigen明 獲 倫 委員會委員。兩派紛
爭畫下句點，以Peter Eigen為代表人物之柏林派確定主導日後總部之政策與人事。
派分 工 放到各國分會，Eigen則
chapters are sta o e "levies" on national chapters when the chapters succeed ney for th selves (almost ing to run a "franchise" operation). It is a sad and sorry .” J. Pope, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Re: research questions for my
io 7
18 原文為”PE (按 Peter Eigen) has always been a notorious iabl
gross tendency t op Com
and CIA. E. Ko e 12 月 11 日.
19 “There was no conceptu difference between London and Berlin; we reintegrated the re department into the TI Secretariat in Be orm
London.” P. Eigen, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: RE: Ph.D. q ions regarding TI-CIR. E.
Ko ed., 2009年11月29日。
關於上述情節 下：”W
，Jeremy
clear policy on the size get
11 月 17 日回函 the central operat
者之電子郵件原文節錄如 ould simply continue to grow
re now, I heard yester und Berlin, while the ld never
can't chec
rved for cash. Berlin als raising mo em
d as a consequence there undred people in and a tries to impos
try in
story
Ph. D. dissertat n-Ernie Ko (November 1 o self-aggrandise...” J. P
d., 2009 年 al
). E. Ko ed., 2009 年 11 月 ly unrel e, 深度訪談 Personal
rlin. It has since perf
17 日。
e carrier of information with a munication: RE: co-founders
search ed much better than than in
uest
‧
Peter Eigen Jeremy Pope
兩位主要創 與路線之爭
(anti-corruption) (integrity)
受對方指責 個人領導、拒絕溝 擅自對外、不循體 彼此缺乏信任、Pope 出走
Fredrik Galtung
(男、挪威籍) Cragg 於 2004 年請辭總部
‧
籍Fredrik Galtung 另創同 以廉政為議題之國際非政 府組織TIRI。Anti-corruption Movement. Sydney: Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government, the
上開
2010 年元月為止仍在任之Peter Eigen與德籍同儕Hansjörg Elshorst均認為 不同
21
認
資料來源：本文作者整理自Jeremy Pope, Peter Eigen, Wesley Cragg 等人深度訪談，L. de Sousa, Transparency International in Search of a Constituency: The Franchising of the global
Australian National University, 2005.
表格內容是基於本文作者多次向當事人求證之個人通訊記錄，分析整理而 成。Peter Eigen 與 Jeremy Pope 兩位共同創始人之意見之爭與出走影響至今猶 存。最明顯的影響在於欠缺開發反貪工具之創新性以及建立聯盟之包容性。 conceptual difference between London and Berlin; were integrated the research department into the TI Secretariat in Berlin. It has since performed much better than than [按 then 之筆誤] in London.” P.
Eigen, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: RE: Ph.D. questions regarding TI-CIR. E. Ko ed.. 2009 年11 月 29 日。
20
Pope’s departure. For instance, the Integrity System tuals & Pope. E. Ko ed., 2010 年 1 月 1 日。
21 Peter Eigen 之德籍同儕 Hansjörg Elshorst 在回應本文作者之訪談時也認為，一部份人士出走對 於實質工作沒有影響。Elshorst 於 2010 年 1 月 1 日回函本文作者之電子郵件原文節錄如下：
“When I learnt of Pope’s departure I did not contribute this to conflicts on matters of substance. Nor did I, from a sideline-perspective as chair of TI Germany, noticed a change in substance in TI’s policy and tools that I would have contributed to
Surveys continues to be a prominent tool of TI until today.” H. Elshorst, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Re: Fw: Lambsdorff's departure, intellec
‧
年9 月 18 日，位於美國華府之全球廉潔組織(Global Integrity)發布一則公告題為 Lambsdorff教授退出貪污認知指數(Johann Graf Lambsdorff Retires the Corruption Perceptions Index)，內容全文轉載該指數原創者Lambsdorff致國際透明組織之電Lambsdorff之學術同儕也是 1995 年開始長期共同合作研究並發表CPI之挪威
Transparency International will "reinvent" itself in ways consistent with what the world needs today.
Pope, 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Re: research questions for my Ph. D. dissertation-Ernie Jeremy Pope於2009年12月2日回函本文作者之電子郵件原文節錄如下”As for the consequences,
a
(2009). 深度訪談 Personal Communication: Re: UN vs. OECD conventions-Ernie Ko. E. Ko ed., 2009年12月2日。
to an international research agenda that hast to cceptable product.”
25 h. D.
22 Jeremy Pope 於 2009 年 11 月 17 日回函本文作者之電子郵件原文節錄如下：“My hope is that However, as long as the Neanderthals are at the helm the chances of this happening are slight.” J.
Ko (November 17). E. Ko ed., 2009 年 11 月 17 日。
23
I can only quote other people – and they say that after that the organisation lost its way as most of the fresh thinking came from Fredrik and myself. So it simply coasted along, living on its reputation and doing little to enhance or progress it. That comes to me from staff who h ve been there and left – one saying that the organisation ‘no longer represents the world I wish to live in’” Pope, J.
24 Lambsdorff 之電子郵件原文節錄如下：“From now on, it is only TI-S which will sign responsible for the outcome. I won't be out there to take the honor, nor the blame. I won't be out their [按 there 之 筆誤] to provide academic credibility and link the data
24 Lambsdorff 之電子郵件原文節錄如下：“From now on, it is only TI-S which will sign responsible for the outcome. I won't be out there to take the honor, nor the blame. I won't be out their [按 there 之 筆誤] to provide academic credibility and link the data