INTRODUCTION
Any discussion around ethical considerations or
connotations could be very controversial. The reason is not far fetched; being good,
bad, right, wrong, fair, or unfair could be very relative. It could be
contingent on the situation, the issues involved or the individual giving the
judgement. In our daily transactions, we feel an obligation to consider not
only our personal well-being, but also that of other persons. Ethics is,
therefore, a code of behaviour that a society considers moral and appropriate
for guiding our relationship with one another. The issues at stake here include
honesty and integrity, as well as, fair, open and straightforward dealing. It
involves conforming to the golden rule “do unto others as you would have them
do unto you”.
While
there is a tendency for people to generally view ethical conduct as relating
only to issues of financial exchange between persons to induce favours, that
is, being corrupt; it is indeed an over simplistic argument and a poor
understanding of the details of ethical conduct. Issues of ethical conduct
includes the issues of exchange of gifts, requests for loans, conflict of
interest, misuse of position by abusing ones office including: misusing
confidential information, government property, and official time among others.
Corruption is part of the moral degeneration that is sweeping across the entire
world. Ideally organisations, nay societies should have Code of Conducts for
its people especially in position of power and responsibility, committing
themselves to principles of incorruptibility, integrity, openness and respect.
This calls on people to live honestly and positively and promote fairness and
impartiality. However, it is the perceived corruption in government that is the
cornerstone of all social ills.
CORRUPTION
PERCEPTION IN AFRICA
High ethical standards, and low corruption
perception will always be relevant and acclaimed in organisations and human
societies. Religious, philosophical and psychological inputs all play some part
in the manifestations of unethical behaviour. Businesses therefore need to be
concerned with the overall moral environment. Such concerns will possibly expose
ways in which good people may unwittingly take part in morally questionable activities. Gibson
(2000) identified four types of excuses generally made in unethical conduct: “I
was told to do it; Everybody’s doing it; My actions won’t make any difference;
and It’s not my problem”.
Generally, in organisations and most business
settings, personal weakness, temptation and pressure as well as poor operating
systems (where checks and balances are absent or weak) are perhaps the most
prevalent grounds of unethical behaviour. The interesting part of this is that
the individual knows very well what is the right action to take, but does not
have the fortitude to take the right action. Everyone, or nearly so, knows and
can recognise a "bribe"
when faced with one but may redefine it as "gratitude"
for a service rendered and often the common justification in most settings is
that "I did not solicit for it" (Gbadamosi, 2002). The
temptation to receive bribe may arise from many sources including a pressing financial
need for on-going projects, health and other personal or family needs.
Alternatively, it may be the pressure of loosing ones job if the person does
not co-operate with a "clique"
that have so perpetuated corruption in the system. Real life examples of these
settings abound in many African countries (see Gbadamosi, 2002).
The African Bureaucratic Structure Survey (ABSS) in
a survey of 20 African countries found that in many countries it is common that
private firms have to pay some irregular “additional payments” (bribes or tips)
to get things done. However, there was a great degree of disparity; ranging
from Namibia, where bribery was felt to be virtually “non-existent” to Kenya,
Nigeria and Togo, where bribery was felt to be “mostly” needed to get things
done (Court et al, 1999). The ABSS also investigated the amount tips and
bribes add to basic salaries over the last twenty years in the 20 African
countries. The level of bribery seems to have increased for the African sample
as a whole and it is a serious issue in some countries. Bribery has become
endemic in Kenya and Nigeria and is now perceived to almost double bureaucrats’
salaries while it adds very little to salary in Botswana, Mauritius, Namibia
and Tunisia (Court et al, 1999). It is also significant to note that the
situation has improved in some previously
troubled countries, particularly Eritrea, which was singled out as
needing further investigation given the dramatic improved positive performance
in most respects (Court et al, 1999).
The German based world body Transparency
International (TI) has over the last years conducted surveys to establish the
perception of corruption around the world popularly referred to as the
Corruption Perception Index (CPI). The 2001 and 2002 TICPI ranked and listed
the corruption perception in 91 and 101 countries respectively. A total of 17
(2001) and 20 (2002) African countries were on the list and occupied between
rank 26 and 90 (2001) and between 24 and 101 (2002) with most falling over 50
(see Table 1). The “CPI Score” ranges between 10 (highly clean) and 0 (highly
corrupt).
TABLE 1: THE TRANSPARENCY
INTERNATIONAL CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX (TICPI) 2001 & 2002
|
|
COUNTRIES
|
2001
|
2002
|
||||
|
AFRICA RANK
|
WORLD
RANK
|
CPI SCORE
|
AFRICA RANK
|
WORLD
RANK
|
CPI SCORE
|
||
|
1
|
Botswana
|
1
|
26
|
6.0
|
1
|
24
|
6.4
|
|
2
|
Namibia
|
2
|
30
|
5.4
|
2
|
28
|
5.7
|
|
3
|
South
Africa
|
4
|
39
|
4.8
|
3
|
36
|
4.8
|
|
4
|
Tunisia
|
3
|
33
|
5.3
|
3
|
36
|
4.8
|
|
5
|
Mauritius
|
5
|
41
|
4.5
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
6
|
Ghana
|
7
|
59
|
3.6
|
5
|
50
|
3.9
|
|
7
|
Morocco
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
6
|
52
|
3.7
|
|
8
|
Ethiopia
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
7
|
59
|
3.5
|
|
9
|
Egypt
|
6
|
54
|
3.6
|
8
|
62
|
3.4
|
|
10
|
Senegal
|
9
|
67
|
2.9
|
9
|
66
|
3.1
|
|
11
|
Malawi
|
8
|
61
|
3.2
|
10
|
68
|
2.9
|
|
12
|
Ivory Coast
|
12
|
77
|
2.4
|
11
|
71
|
2.7
|
|
13
|
Tanzania
|
13
|
82
|
2.2
|
11
|
71
|
2.7
|
|
14
|
Zimbabwe
|
10
|
68
|
2.9
|
11
|
71
|
2.7
|
|
15
|
Zambia
|
11
|
76
|
2.6
|
14
|
77
|
2.6
|
|
16
|
Cameroon
|
14
|
86
|
2.0
|
15
|
89
|
2.2
|
|
17
|
Uganda
|
16
|
89
|
1.9
|
16
|
93
|
2.1
|
|
18
|
Kenya
|
15
|
87
|
2.0
|
17
|
96
|
1.9
|
|
19
|
Angola
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
18
|
98
|
1.7
|
|
20
|
Madagascar
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
18
|
98
|
1.7
|
|
21
|
Nigeria
|
17
|
90
|
1.0
|
20
|
101
|
1.6
|
Source: Global Corruption Report of The Transparency
International 2001 & 2002
Much
as Table I above is largely indicative of corruption perception in Africa yet a
lot remains amiss. Over the last couple of years nearly the same African
countries have been recycled in the TICPI surveys, there is a need to bring in
some new countries in subsequent surveys to enhance the country spread and
general acceptability of survey. For example, countries like Libya (perceived
as economically buoyant by many) and Eritrea that Court et al. (1999)
suggested has made significant progress in its anti-corruption drive could
feature in subsequent surveys. Moreover, the several cases of the loots of
African leaders (former and serving) kept in European and American banks are
instructive. In many traditional African setting both the thief and his/her
collaborators are guilty of inappropriate behaviour. The legal systems in many
of the developed countries would concur. Nevertheless, the banking system of the
West is rarely condemned for this act of mischievously conniving with the
looting leaders while keeping their loots for them without asking questions.
Returning the same loot has proven to be problematic as in the case of Nigeria.
The argument that such returned loots could again be misappropriated begs the
question and is red herring.
The Cost of Corruption in Africa
The cost and effect of corruption in Africa is very high.
It includes costs to the nation, organisations and indeed individuals. It is difficult
to quantify the cost of corruption to a country because it comes in many forms,
monetary as well as human. The World Bank noted that corruption has the effect
of distorting public expenditures, increasing the costs of running business and
diverting resources from the poor to the rich. Corruption deters investment
because it is a disincentive to prospective investors thereby inhibiting
economic growth. The public sector, especially government departments, being
the largest spenders in most African countries is the pinpoint of most corrupt
practices. The press is awash with several cases of inflated contracts,
unsupervised government projects, unrestricted importation of locally available
materials, collusion in tax evasion among other experiences leading to stunted
development as a result of significant public funds diverted for personal uses.
The
values and norms of the people is also distorted as a result of corruption thus
undermining moral standards and promoting charlatans to the detriment of honest
endeavours. Where bribes are paid, for example, to law enforcement officers the
confidence in the criminal justice system is reduced and people may begin to
take laws to their hands to get their own kind of justice thereby undermining
the rule of law. Once those involved in corrupt practices are not caught and
investigated, the cost of the corruption can never really be known. It is
arguable that even consumers are not left out as they might pay higher prices
for goods and services because the cost of corruption has been built-in.
CORRUPTION PERCEPTION IN BOTSWANA
The early 1990s marked a significant turning point
for corruption awareness in Botswana. The country was rocked by major corruption
scandals among top government functionaries. The revelations came about through
the appointment of three Presidential Commissions of Inquiry: two in 1991 and a
third one in 1992. The following scenarios may be considered as the opening
cases of systematic corruption in Botswana. The first case was the Presidential
Commission of Inquiry (1991a), which investigated the circumstances surrounding
the supply of textbooks to primary schools for the 1990 school year. The
findings of the Commission indicated that laid down procedures, especially in
the tender and financial regulations were not followed. The result was a loss
of about P27 million (about US$15 million then) to government. The second
Presidential Commission of Inquiry (1991b) dealt with the distribution of land
in Mogoditshane (a suburb of the capital Gaborone). The Presidential
Commission discovered several abuse in the distribution of land in the area.
Some Cabinet Ministers were involved and they had to resign. The third
Presidential Commission of Inquiry (1992) involving another major corruption,
this time a government parastatal – Botswana Housing Corporation (BHC) – that
provides housing for the public. In this case the CEO of the parastatal and his
deputy were involved in large-scale corruption scandal where they
misappropriated the organisation’s funds.
The above scenarios were perhaps wake-up calls and
seem to have set the stage for re-awakening anti-corruption drive in Botswana.
The government of Botswana has since taken the issue of ethics and corruption
as very important to the long-term strategic objective of the nation hence the
establishment of the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC). The
DCEC was established by act of parliament in 1994 (cited as the Corruption and
Economic Crime Act 1994). Prior to this act, the standards of ethical conduct
in the Botswana civil service were based on several government documents which
includes but are not limited to; the Public Service Charter; General Orders;
and a number of ethics related guidelines.
DCEC’s objectives include the protection of Botswana
from the evils that can be caused by corruption and economic crime. In order to
achieve this objective, the DCEC adopted a three-prong strategy of combating
corruption through: Public Education, Corruption Prevention
and Detailed Investigation. One of the most important
responsibilities of the DCEC is to promote, among government employees, an
understanding of ethical standards for public service (DCEC Publication, 2003).
Recently, on June 12th 2003, the DCEC published and launched a
booklet on “Ethical Conduct in the Workplace” as another step to ensuring
proper ethical conduct in the workplace. It is heart-warming that even though
the DCEC was created for the public sector, it has realised the likely futility
of its efforts if the private sector is neglected in the drive towards creating
a more ethical work culture in the country.
While it is true that most employees are honest,
loyal and hardworking and they will do what is expected of them, indeed exceed
this level in certain cases without prompting, there are yet many others who
should not be taken for granted as possessing that strict sense of morality and
uprightness required for good ethical conduct in the workplace. This is perhaps
why one cannot but agree with the statement of the DCEC Director in his
foreword to the booklet cited earlier when he stated “… the hallmark of true
service is a willingness to go beyond what is legally required and to act
affirmatively to honour trust”.
The DCEC is always proud to remind all citizens,
residents and visitors to Botswana in conspicuous advertorials that, “Botswana
has ZERO tolerance for corruption”. Another publicised advertisement on
billboards and banners indicate “Being HIV Positive is not a Shame being
Corrupt is” to underscore how unacceptable corruption is within the
society. These are indications of the
need to continue the fight against all forms of corrupt practices to retain the
enviable position Botswana currently occupies as it does not take much to
damage a good reputation, restoring it when damaged becomes a much more arduous
task. The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (TICPI) has
consistently listed Botswana as the least corrupt country in Africa, ranking 26th
in the world in 2001 and 24th in 2002. The key here is that Botswana
is committed to inhibit the development of a culture of corruption. The
comparative statistics for reports received by DCEC since inception appears in
Table II.
TABLE
II: STATISTICS OF REPORTS RECEIVED BY DCEC SINCE INCEPTION
|
|
1994
|
1995
|
1996
|
1997
|
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
2001
|
2002
|
T0TAL
|
||
|
Number
of reports received
|
254
|
896 (253%)
|
1378 (54%)
|
1511 (1%)
|
1525 (1%)
|
1023
(-33%)
|
1475 (44%)
|
1841 (25%)
|
1779
(-3%)
|
11682
|
||
|
Number
where complainants identified themselves
|
237
|
734 (210%)
|
1003 (37%)
|
1132 (13%)
|
1052
(-7%)
|
741
(-30%)
|
1096 (48%)
|
1362 (24%)
|
1338
(-2%)
|
8875
|
||
|
Number
made anonymously
|
17
|
162 (853%)
|
375 (131%)
|
379 (1%)
|
473 (25%)
|
282
(-40%)
|
379 (34%)
|
479 (26%)
|
441
(-8%)
|
2807
|
||
|
Number
of investigations commenced
|
170
|
411 (142%)
|
417 (1%)
|
316
(-2%)
|
318
(1%)
|
362 (14%)
|
390 (8%)
|
413 (6%)
|
357
(-14%)
|
3074
|
||
|
Number
of reports either referred to other bodies or retained for intelligence
purposes
|
84
|
485 (477%)
|
961 (98%)
|
1195 (24%)
|
1207 (1%)
|
661
(-45%)
|
1085 (64%)
|
1428 (32%)
|
1404
(-2%)
|
8510
|
||
Source: Directorate
on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC) Annual Report 2002.
The yearly percentage change is reported in
parenthesis in the table.
Generally
Table II is an evidence of a subtle success of the anti-corruption efforts in
Botswana. Table II also indicates a growing number of cases reported and
handled by DCEC since inception but the annual reports of the body is beginning
to show a trend that is curious because of the antecedents of the directorate.
As noted earlier, events preceding 1994 revealed a number of top government
functionaries involved in corrupt practices, however the DCEC reports since
1994 has consistently showed a growing number of petty theft and trivial
corrupt cases with no “big catches”. Frimpong (1997) and Briscoe and Hermans
(2000) have also reported this trend. On the average the amount of money
involved in most of the completed cases in the last 6 years is about P600.00,
which is about $150.00. There are a few isolated cases involving senior public
officers (for example, a foreign national working for a public parastatal was
prosecuted for trying to influence a tender after collecting bribe) but none
involving a top government functionary or public office holder. The data
published by DCEC in its Annual Reports over the last 8 years has indicated
largely that most of the acts of corruption were perpetuated by junior
employees that ranges from mostly accounts clerks, vehicle examiners, junior
civil servants, to drivers, local businessmen, security guards, receptionists
and school teachers. Another interesting fact about the nature of the
complaints is that many had to do with allegations of false claims by public
officers concerning false claims for subsistence allowance and travelling
expenses which involved rather small amounts but which are widespread. Olowu
(1999) cited the Warioba Presidential Commission on Corruption in Tanzania as
classifying corruption into two broad forms: petty corruption, associated with
poor pay; and large-scale corruption by those determined to make big money. It
would appear that the Botswana reported experiences fall significantly into the
former category.
Of all
the 1779 complaints received in 2002, only 616 or (34.6%) related to
corruption, economic crime or money laundering while the remaining 1163 fell
outside the DCEC terms of reference (Annual Reports, 2002). Of those complaints
within the searchlight of the anti-corruption body 45% related to corruption,
52% to economic crime and 3% to money laundering. This is an indication that a
larger number of the complaints received by DCEC are misplaced or
inappropriate. A number of the complainants still do not properly discriminate
between disciplinary cases, which should be resolved by the organisation, and
ethical related matters needing third party intervention though investigation
as provided for by the law.
The decreasing rate of corruption, the impressive
ranking of Botswana in the TICPI, and the seeming absence of “big fishes” in
the catch of DCEC may be attributable to a number of possible reasons. First,
the establishment of the Directorate sounded a warning signal after the early
1990s scandals discussed earlier. It is possible that individuals may be
shunning corrupt practices or becoming extremely cautious as not to leave
traceable loopholes. Second, the massive education embarked upon by the DCEC
may be yielding positive dividend because citizens’ awareness is growing with
more and better knowledge of the nature and consequences of corruption. For
example, the 2001/2002 public awareness surveys indicated a 75% public
awareness level that was an improvement on the earlier survey by about 14%.
About 54% respondents associate DCEC with bribery issues. In terms of sectoral
comparison of corruption proneness, respondents’ indicated about 49% in government
sector, 17% in private sector and 15% in parastatals (DCEC Annual Reports,
2002). Third, the corruption prevention drive of DCEC might also have been a
positive factor. Annually the operational procedures of several government
departments and activities are assessed, such investigations reveal those
requiring procedural restructuring and performance improvement. Specific focus
is however on the removal of opportunities for corruption in the operating
system and perceived corruption enhancing work practices. In 2002, for
instance, both the Immigration and Labour departments were the focus of such
activities since media reports had indicated corrupt practices in the issuance
of resident permits, waivers, work permits and similar approvals. A number of
revisions in work practices that will reduce or eliminate opportunities for
corruption have since been recommended for implementation. Fourth, the print
media has also particularly been a champion in the effort to reduce corruption
in public offices. They seem to follow any lead they obtain with a lot of
publicity which public functionaries are certainly not always comfortable with.
Fifth, the seeming low involvement of high-ranking public officers and a high
proportion of junior officers may be due to the fact that most decisions are
made at the junior level. For example, the issuance of driver’s licence, work
permits, residence permit extensions etc will rarely involve officers even at
the middle level of the organisation involved as such decisions are fully taken
at the lower level. Compared to many other African countries this particular
scenario might be peculiar to Botswana. Finally, the absence of appropriate
investigative skills on the part of DCEC officers to detect large-scale
corruption may also contribute to the seeming absence of “big catches” in the
anti-corruption efforts.
Anti-Corruption
Efforts in Botswana
The anti-corruption drive in Botswana is
significantly rooted in the efforts of the DCEC. In this section we discuss
some of the problems, limitations and bottlenecks the directorate has to
contend with for the accomplishment of its goals and objectives. We also
identify its unique experiences.
Status of Offender: There is the “big fish” versus
“small fish” syndrome in the classification of persons being prosecuted for
corrupt practices. It appears as if only the lower cadre citizens are accosted
and tried for corruption offences and not the top civil servants and government
functionaries. The status of persons being prosecuted by DCEC is largely in the
former and not the latter category. The question is thus asked, for instance,
if some people are untouchable? With the information available on DCEC and the
experiences of its operation since inception, this does not appear to be the
case. Yet it is important to remain transparent in its activities because once
people start to believe that the absence of a “big catch” by DCEC is
premeditated much of its public campaign efforts will come to nought. Whenever
and wherever this happens or begins to happen then the fight against corruption
is lost. If the experience from several African countries is anything to go by
this scenario be a major problem in the fight against corruption.
Trial and Prosecution: The 1994 Act establishing
the DCEC does not give the body the powers of trial over alleged offenders,
rather case files are passed to the Attorney General’s office which is already
seemingly overburdened by several other functions with decreasing human
resource capacity. As a result of this there is a long waiting period to obtain
justice because of inadequate personnel and the statutory restriction. The DCEC
will perhaps be well off with powers to prosecute its own cases with competent
legal practitioners, thus freeing it from the AG’s Office.
Public Education and Rural Population: The DCEC public education
drive has been very useful in the anti-corruption efforts of Botswana and come
in different forms including but not limited to brochures, newsletters,
promotional materials, posters and banners, magazines and newspapers, press
releases, sign posts, public awareness surveys, talks and presentations, radio
and television, trade fairs and moral education. Nine years on, surveys have
indicated that the public education campaign is yet to reach the heart of
Botswana’s rural populations (DCEC Annual Report, 2002). We may ask, how much
of corruption is experienced in the rural setting? Is the rural population a
real problem and real threat to the accomplishment of a corrupt free society?
Compared to many other African countries the opportunities for corruption
abound in Botswana rural areas and this is why the anti-corruption watchdog
agency cannot and is not leaving behind the rural population in its anti-corruption
efforts. First, public officers in the rural areas have a lot of discretionary
powers, which may be abused if proper checks and monitoring are not put in
place. Second, public records have shown that corruption is rampant in rural
areas especially in the northern parts of the country where the tourism
industry booms. The Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) opens
up interaction between the rural community representatives and Safari Operators
in the area. Monitoring such activities thus becomes important to curb excesses
and possible misconduct of both parties.
Corruption Prevention Efforts: Perhaps the strongest point
of DCEC efforts, which seems less recognised is the Corruption Prevention
Division – a lot has been done and is being done by this unit. Some of these
activities are reported in the Annual Reports of the last few years. This is in line with the adage that
“prevention is better than cure”, which could go a long way in further preventing
and possibly ultimately eliminating the ills of corrupt practices. The methods
used in corruption prevention especially identifying loopholes in public
service performance and blocking such loopholes to minimise the incidence of
corruption offers some lessons to be learnt by other African countries.
DCEC Independence: Albeit there has been a lot
of hues and cries about the limitations of the statute establishing the DCEC
because the anti-corruption watchdog agency reports to the President of
Botswana and its Director is appointed by the President (and by implication may
also be fired by the President); to date there has been no indication of abuse.
Frimpong (2001) suggested that DCEC must be made to report directly to
Parliament and not the Presidency thus freeing it from executive control. A
hint of this is also given in the Director’s Annual report of 2002 tacitly
endorsing a World Bank recommendation of 2002. It appears that the proponents
of this change are being proactive at the possibility of a future corrupt
President appointing its own watchdog.
Encouraging Whistleblowing: Finally, encouraging
whistleblowing in Botswana may serve very useful purpose in the fight against
corruption. Again, it may serve a very positive purpose to initiate some reward
for honest public officers or people with exemplary conduct. For example, Table
II indicates an increase in anonymous reports received by DCEC from 17 (or
about 7% of reports received) in 1994 to 441 (or about 25% of the reports
received) in 2002. Whistleblowers are very useful to achieve success in any
anti-corruption efforts. Whistleblowing involves going public, often with
allegations of wrongdoing or unethical practices (Baron, 1993). The
whistleblowers are employees who are willing to risk their careers to alert the
public about dangerous or illegal situations. They provide a source of
protection to the public by speaking out about such activities. Notwithstanding
whistleblowers are often ostracised from the organisation and treated as
outcasts and might even be fired under dubious pretences. Valid acts of
whistleblowing – employee informing on dubious practices in the workplace – is
increasingly being viewed in a favourable light with statutory protection and
valid whistleblowing is supported by governments of the USA, UK, Canada, Australia,
and New Zealand (Vinten, 2000).
The phenomenon of whistleblowing is, however,
relatively uncommon in African society. The African society is significantly
based on group bonds and people sticking together at all times. Internal
machineries usually exist to correct identified internal problems. As a result
individuals rarely would want to be identified as the odd person out – a
deviant of some sort – they would not want to be ostracised (Gbadamosi, 2002).
Sengall (1991) refers to the strong conformity emphasis shown by African
societies, the importance of one’s own group (or tribe) to the individual, and
inter-group comparisons in terms of reciprocal group attractiveness and
cultural similarity. It may be that individual performance is less important to
the African than the spirit of collectivism (Koopman, 1991). However, with
increase in industrialisation, education and improved economic conditions the
phenomenon of whistleblowing may be increasingly popular in the near future in
many Africa countries. South African President Thabo Mbeki at the Public Sector
Anti-Corruption conference in Cape Town, South Africa in 1998 indeed suggested
that the practice of whistleblowing should be institutionalised (Alant &
Uys, 1999). Botswana might benefit significantly by focusing on acts of
whistleblowing in the future and encouraging, maybe even rewarding it.
Factors that have aided the anti-corruption efforts in Botswana and lessons
for African countries
There
are a number of factors whose presence or absence has advanced the fight
against corruption in Botswana. They provide opportunities for other African
countries particularly those with similar features and characteristics to
examine and borrow a leaf or two from. It is essential to identify that Botswana,
though large in land size, is a small country with some 1.7 million inhabitants
making it structurally different to many other African countries yet sharing a
number of similarities with many others. Some of the relevant peculiarities
that might account for its seeming success in the fight against corruption and
economic crime are discussed hereafter.
The Commitment at the Top: Irrespective of the barrage
of criticism by Batswana (as citizens of Botswana are known), the
commitment of the leadership in ensuring good governance, improving the
standards of living of the people and particularly in eradicating corruption is
enviable. This commitment permeates most of the leadership in public office,
civil service and the parastatals. Frimpong (2001) reported how very clear and
committed the Director is about DCEC’s mission in the interview he had with
him. There are also a number of Media accounts reflecting the same view. This
commitment comes even from the President who has been so vocal and articulate
against corruption as he has been about HIV/AIDS. The same cannot be said of a
number of other African countries where there has been so much lip service to
the fight against corruption.
The Place and Use of Cash: In the last few years
Botswana has moved significantly towards becoming a “cashless” society (at
least in the cities and towns). In most African countries with perhaps the
exception of South Africa, Namibia, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia and a few others;
economic activities are still significantly cash based, unlike in the developed
world, making it difficult to trace how money passed through hands. The use of
electronic banking services, Credit/Debit cards, ATMs, cheques for payments
etc. is relatively on a high side in Botswana (at least in the cities and towns)
and this significantly reduces the opportunities for corruption because large
sums of money not properly accounted for can be traced and questioned. This
movement towards a cashless society is vital in the minimisation of corruption
and fraudulent practices. This is a vital lesson for other African economies.
Citizens Registration and Identification: The registration of citizens
through a detailed and efficient identification process is already taken for granted
in Botswana. All Batswana are registered and possesses identification card
called – Omang. This citizen’s registration is very useful not
only for crime investigation and minimisation but also for corruption
reduction. Since citizens are easily traceable to their various localities
following up on corrupt practices cases by law enforcement agencies, for
example, is likely to yield positive results. In many other African countries
there is a very poor record of citizens and hence it is easy for people to
remain under cover undetected for a long time.
Education and Language: High level of literacy with
people being able to read and write (in any language) facilitates communication
and helps to disseminate information. It also advances the course of civic
education as well as political and economic participation. Educated citizens
are more likely to demand and support accountability and transparency while
others may take little interest in public activities remaining happy in their
own small world. On language, Setswana – the second official language in
Botswana – (English being the other), as a medium of communication, is widely
spoken and understood throughout the country and hence government can and do
aggressively disseminate information to its citizens using this medium. Even
though a few other languages are spoken in Botswana but citizens generally do
read and write Setswana. It is
thus a significant advantage for the country in its information dissemination
and fight against corruption. In some African countries there are several
hundreds of languages spoken, for example, in Nigeria. Rwanda (where Kiyarwanda
is spoken as the official language by all citizens) is another good example
where such monolingual culture helps literacy level and information
dissemination.
Ethnic and Religious Issues: Ethnicity and other divides,
including religious divide, can account for all kinds of segregation and
seclusion in the polity as well as interfere with good sense of judgement of
citizens. Many corruption cases have been swept underground on the account of
this and in the spirit of ethnic bond. To a very large extent this is not a
serious problem in Botswana as it is in many other African countries (e.g.
Nigeria). However, recently the drum of such divide is beginning to sound
louder in Botswana. Apart from the overbearing dominance of the Batswana,
there are also other groups like the Kalanga, Basarwa and Kgalagadi
and a few whites of European descent. The problem of ethnicity encourages all
forms of nepotism and mediocrity – “who you know”; and this also is becoming
strong and popular in Botswana.
Civil Service Reforms: Several recent public
sector reforms efforts of government may also be yielding positive impact. Programmes
like Work Improvement Teams (WITS) and the introduction of the Performance
Management Systems (PMS) to replace the old Performance Appraisal Systems in
the public service. The PMS for instance helps to deter corruption because it
increases accountability by individual officers.
CONCLUSIONS
Corruption remains perhaps the biggest threat to
developmental process of any nation. No nation seeking development should allow
it to develop into a national habit as it has become in some Africa countries. When
it becomes endemic as it is reported to be in countries like Kenya, Togo and
Nigeria then it is established, becomes a habit and people are no longer
shocked by it. The disintegration of
ethical and moral values worldwide is a phenomenal problem. Globally, there
seem to be an ongoing desperate effort to redefine what is right and wrong,
what is acceptable and what is not, and those values that must change because
the world has moved on and we are now in a “global village”. The traditional
African society was a strict one with well-defined moral standards and conduct.
Today ethics and integrity seems no longer important as they no longer have a
place. With poverty so pervasive in Africa, citizens – especially those who are
close relatives and friends to public office holders – now judge public office
holders who keep their integrity and remain “poor” in the midst of plenty
(public resources) as stupid, naïve and unhelpful.
This paper attempts to highlight the problems of
unethical behaviour, especially corrupt and fraudulent practices, in Africa
while demonstrating the importance and effectiveness of an effective fight
against corruption as an antidote for economic prosperity. The need to borrow
useful ideas from Botswana (though a relatively small country) where such a
fight – championed by the government anti-corruption watchdog agency (DCEC) has
been making giant strides – were highlighted.
