Why is Brunei not on the CPI survey?

I often get queries on why Brunei is not included in the widely-known annual Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Survey Index (CPI). I myself have been trying to get Brunei on the Index as I would like to know how Brunei would fare in that ranking. I know I would be shooting myself on the foot if Brunei were ranked badly but it is obviously important we all know on the “perceived” level of corruption in this country. Unfortunately to get Brunei on the Index is not that easy as it may sound as Brunei is in that category of countries that lack the availability of independent surveys. This is because TI relies on other surveys. That is why the CPI is often called as “a survey of surveys”. What TI does is that it uses the data that are provided by other independent surveys conducted by institutions like Columbia University, Economist Intelligence Unit, Freedom House, Information International, International Institute for Management Development, Merchant International Group, Political and Economic Risk Consultancy, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, World Economic Forum and World Markets Research Centre.
As a country, Brunei needs a minimum of 3 of these independent surveys and to date I am told Brunei  has not met the minimum 3 independent surveys required. I have been in contact with TI which is based in Berlin, to help us on this. At first I thought we could conduct the survey by seeking the assistance of our university as our appointed consultant. However, I was advised by TI that this is not appropriate as it may appear that we might influence on the outcome. I obviously concurred as they do have a point. If the result of the survey was in ACB's favour, the public would say that the survey was not independently done.

My criticism of the CPI Survey was that in the past, the experts surveyed in the CPI sources were often business people from industrialised countries. The viewpoint from the less developed countries was underrepresented. I remember attending a conference once where a delegation from Bangladesh stood-up and was critical on the CPI arguing that it only reflected “perceived” level of corruption at the point of the bribe takers but not at the point of the bribe givers. The person said that, the CPI only looked at the perceived prevalence of bribes on the streets when it was companies from the western world which bribe the nationals of the less developed countries.
As CPI is based on polls, the results are also very subjective, and less reliable for countries with fewer sources. What is legally defined (or perceived) to be corruption also differs between jurisdictions. A political donation legal in some jurisdiction may be illegal in another. Thus, the CPI must be understood quite specifically as measuring a poorly defined public perception, rather than being an objective measure of corruption. TI has now come up with more direct corruption-survey, such as bribe-payer index and the corruption barometer.
I am hoping that Brunei will soon be taken on board this more direct surveys. I am now talking with TI and will keep you updated on it, insyaallah.