Menu


      ARCHIVE 2006 - 2004


      CORRUPTION AND DEVELOPMENT

      Corruption is a universal social phenomenon that exists in any culture and thrives in any
      type of society. Corruption as a social phenomenon is especially prominent amongst our
      political leaders and government officials and poses a serious developmental challenge.

      In the political realm, it undermines democracy and good governance by flouting or even
      subverting formal processes.

      More generally, corruption erodes the institutional capacity of government as procedures
      are disregarded, resources are siphoned off, and public offices are bought and sold.
      At the same time, corruption undermines the legitimacy of government and such
      democratic values as trust and tolerance. Forms of corruption vary, but include bribery,
      extortion, nepotism, and embezzlement.

      In Zambia corruption is so common that it is expected when ordinary businesses or citizens
      interact with government officials. Government is corrupted whenever it is diverted from
      its affirmed purpose and directed toward some other goal, especially goals that conflict
      with its purpose.

      This more general kind of corruption is much bigger than a few bribes and has far reaching  
      consequences. The public’s trust in authority has waned over the years due to countless
      scandals involving politicians and public officials.

      When cases of bribery, scam, and embezzlement have played out in headline news, the
      men of ‘honorable status’ are implicated for operating dishonestly under the guise of
      serving the interest of the people. Being seduced by greed, money and power, they have
      shelved their duty to the public for self-enrichment, defiled the role of authority, and
      degraded themselves as not much better than white-collar criminals.

      Saturated with scandals connected to the government, the public no longer ascribe
      corruption to just a few government officials or isolated incidences but to the whole
      structure of the government. As a result, with nowhere to turn, people’s distrust and
      disgust of government officials have deepened, elevating political apathy at the election
      polls.

      It’s not surprising that corruption breeds in a closed environment where government
      activities are kept shrouded in secrecy for the sake of diplomatic confidentiality, where
      discipline is lacking to deal with individual politicians and administrators who had abused
      their powers, and where an authority figure embodying decency and ethics is fast
      becoming a fading image of the past.

      Even the punitive measures for misconduct, exact only a reprimand. Rarely would one
      see an offender being prosecuted, and thrown into jail, even in the case of embezzlement
      or scam. As corruption rears its ugly head in almost every government section and post,
      it’s reasonable to assume that corruption is not only widespread but also deeply
      embedded in the very structure of the government.

      The police, for example, are one of such public authorities that are responsible for
      maintaining order and justice in a society. A police department is very similar to other
      governmental bodies such as a court of law, or tax collection service, etc. It is a common 
      belief that such organizations tend to be corruption-ridden for one reason or another.

      The reason police are so susceptible and exposed to corruption is because of the
      organization structure of a police department. To illustrate, a police department does not
      generate any revenue and there is no private owner. The police are totally subsidized by
      the government.

      The government officials estimate the amount of funds that would spent by the police and 
      create a budget based on those estimates. Therefore, a police department is a consumer
      of tax-payers money rather than a contributor to the state’s budget.

      The people who work in the police force are only motivated by financial incentives that
      come from the government in a form of meagre salaries. People who stand on the various
      levels in the organisational ladder receive a very similar type of financial incentive.

      Thus, the head of a police department is only motivated by the salary that the government 
      sets forth in exchange for the service. There is usually no additional motivation resulting
      from better and more diligent work.

      Therefore, if you work in the police it usually does not matter how hard and how diligently
      you work, because the salary is rarely affected by that quality of work factor. Therefore,
      low salaries and the absence of external motivation contribute to the spread of corruption.

      Police officers are motivated to accept bribes in exchange for more lenient treatment.
      Offenders who bribe the police are also better off eventually, because that way they
      escape punishment that they would have to accept otherwise. There is a clear mutual
      gain that is generated as a result of such a relationship. However, there is a clear cost
      that offsets the gain derived by the two parties as a result of such a transaction.

      The cost is associated with the credibility and significance of the law that is undermined
      and eventually annihilated by corruption. The state cannot exist without the law and justice;
      as soon as those two components are ruled out the society turns into a chaotic crowd.

      Therefore, it is the government’s responsibility to control the level of corruption and make
      the police render a service to the society. The vice applies not only to the police but to
      other government offices such as the Road Traffic Agency, the Passport Office, Zambia
      Revenue Authority e.t.c.

      What can be done about such corruption? Some people think we need higher standards of 
      behavior among public officials and/or stricter scrutiny by voters. Both would of course be
      wonderful, if they happened. But what are we to do in the meantime — say, the next few
      years? Anyone familiar with Zambia’s political history knows that our leaders have been
      the way they are for many years.

      We therefore should not look for a change in human nature in 2007. What we can change
      are the incentives and constraints. Obviously, there are two issues that must be
      addressed in order to control corruption among government officers.

      The first essential component is legal restrictions and regulations that should be designed
      specifically to prevent the government officials from engaging in any of such corrupt
      activities. The anti-corruption department should enforce the government’s policies
      concerning corruption.

      Those policies must be very strict and clear in determining the appropriate punishment for
      the officers spreading corruption. The disciplinary actions may range from suspensions to
      expulsion from the office, even though some other punishment may be deemed
      appropriate depending on the situation.

      The bottom-line is that punishment must be clear and strict, so that people are aware of
      the potential severe consequences that such behavior can lead to.

      This is a basic technique that should be implemented in virtually every government
      department. Even though such a program may turn quite costly for the government, the
      result that it can potentially yield is obvious. In conclusion, if the government intends to
      win back public confidence, it must urgently enact policy reforms, show transparency in
      government activities and inculcate honesty and decency in public officials.
      (The Post Newspaper, January 18, 2007)


      THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION IN ZAMBIA
        (A personal reflection on the Zambian government’s fight against corruption)

      The new deal government of President Levy Mwanawasa has defined its main mission as
      poverty eradication through the eradication of corruption. Since 2001, it has put in place
      laws and institutions aimed at fighting the scourge that severely undermined development
      during the tenure of ex-president Frederick Chiluba. The center piece strategy was the
      establishment of the Task Force against Corruption. It is now six years since the task
      force came into being. Whether by design or fate, its operations have been more
      retroactive rather than proactive in nature in that it has been known more for prosecution
      of high profile bureaucrats and politicians who worked with president Chiluba than focusing
      on strategies to eradicate the vice. And because its focus has been on high profile
      individuals rather than on strengthening institutions and making government operations to
      be more transparent and accountable, corruption has thrived ever more than at any time in
      Zambia’s history. This view has been vindicated by independent surveys on corruption
      perceptions conducted by such organizations as Transparency International and the Jesuit
      Centre for Theological Reflection.


      WHO IS FUELING CORRUPTION?
      Without question, corruption in Zambia is still a preserve of the elite who occupy positions
      of trust from the Zambia people; politicians and bureaucrats. They have taken advantage
      of weak systems in public institutions that make it possible to siphon off large amounts of
      money without detection. These institutions are further weakened by the lack of effective
      oversight, checks & balances. These politicians and bureaucrats hail from a system
      which rewards those who are corrupt more than those who work hard. As a ruling party in
      government, the Movement for Multiparty Democracy was built on corruption, patronage
      and the rule of man. It has not reformed itself to get rid of bad eggs that were linked to
      corrupt activities. Instead, it has retained the key strategists of corruption within it rank
      and file. Consequently, it is ill suited to fight corruption.

      Recently, Jonas Shakafuswa, a deputy minister of finance came out in the open to
      challenge the party to rid itself of all leaders linked to corruption. He observed that there
      were a lot of top leaders who had been involved in corrupt activities, and yet continued to
      occupy senior party and government positions. They have far reaching power and
      unrestricted access to the president, who although he publicly makes statements to show
      the public and foreign donors that fighting corruption is at the top of his agenda, has
      nevertheless encouraged it by not reforming the party and the government institutions. 
      How can he achieve his objective of fighting corruption when he is at a helm of a party
      and government that don’t seem to share his vision? As observed by the Post newspaper
      of Zambia, “there is really no need for the government to be run by people who are facing
      corruption charges in the courts of law; people who have stolen state resources, money
      that belongs collectively to all our people. There is no way that these same leaders can
      be expected to lead or champion the fight against corruption.”
      (Post newspaper, January 18, 2007)


      CORRUPTION AND POVERTY

      In Zambia, as is the case with any society in which corruption thrives, the aim of those
      who profit from the scourge is to undermine institutional capacity create an impenetrable
      wall of opaque procedures and systems so that they can subvert formal processes, gain
      access to the center of power and authority and to destroy or humiliate those who oppose
      them. Such cliques have no feelings for the fate of poor people and as long as they can
      get away with it, they will continue to plunder state resources. Driven by greed, money
      and the power money can buy, this clique has created an enabling environment for corrupt
      activities whereby it is now an accepted norm for individuals and businesses interfacing
      with government officials to expect to pay a bribe in order to obtain public services.
      Since the government is so saturated with corruption, the public has lost trust in its
      government’s ability to carry out its mandate of developing the country, and they have
      reason to feel this way because more and more people are getting poorer by the day
      while those in power are getting richer. This undermines good governance and
      consequently, democracy. Hard work, creativity, judgement and enterprise are replaced
      by bribery, extortion, nepotism, looting, plunder and embezzlement. The end result is
      continuous diversion of public resources from the majority to the minority, meaning that
      poverty is on the increase rather than on the decrease, and this is in spite of the increased
      efforts of donor countries to fight poverty through aid.

      MEASURING CORRUPTION

      Though corruption is notoriously hard to measure, the number crunchers at the World
      Bank have been busy trying. They estimate that $1 trillion is paid in bribes every year
      while what they call “tainted procurement” is worth around $1.5 trillion a year. And that
      is only the tip of the ice-berg, they say.
      (The other side of the coin: the UK and corruption in Africa, 23 March 2006)


      CORRUPTION'S BIG FUNDER

      The World Bank is a massive funder of sleaze. This is largely due to close ties between
      rich-world governments-represented on the World Bank Board of governors-and
      transnational corporations which make financial donations to these governments.
      In return the corporations get investment opportunities, finance and legal protection.
      All of which helps to explain how, according to the US Senate, an outstanding $100 billion
      of World Bank loans have been lost to corruption during the Bank’s 60-year history.
      (New Internationalist, December 2006)

      MAKE POVERTY HISTORY AND CORRUPTION

      It is hard to see how the G8’s pledge to increase aid by $50 billion a year by 2010 will
      help make poverty history unless the poor for whom it is intended actually get to monitor
      it. They, or trustworthy independent monitors working on their behalf, need to be able to
      track exactly how much has been given to whom, when and for what purpose. Those
      responsible need then to be held to account.
      (New Internationalist, December 2006, page 4)


        CORRUPTION, FINANCE AND DEVELOPING NATIONS:
      A Private Banking Solution by Samuel Gregg, D.Phil

      Since its creation in July 1944, the World Bank has poured billions of dollars in loans and
      aid into developing nations’ economies. In 2005 alone, World Bank loans totaled
      approximately $25 billion. Given the sums involved, it is hardly surprising that questions
      are increasingly being raised about the results of these direct wealth transfers.

      Even the World Bank’s strongest defenders concede the outcomes have been mixed at
      best. The Bank’s critics have long highlighted the fact that much World Bank assistance
      has ended up in the pockets of virtually every “president-for-life” that most developing
      nations have endured at some point in their history. The World Bank has uncovered more
      than 2,000 cases of corruption and related offenses associated with its projects since
      2001 alone. Now, however, signs are emerging that some World Bank officials have had
      enough and are pushing the corruption issue to the forefront of the Bank’s work. This
      involves recognition that corruption is, at its heart, a moral problem. Corruption is a moral
      evil inasmuch as it involves one person freely choosing to betray his legitimate and legal
      duties to another person or organization in order to reap personal benefit. This may
      explain why the World Bank’s President has not only made corruption an organizational
      priority, but has also addressed this theme at meetings with representatives of
      Indonesia’s Muslim communities and at a Vatican-organized conference on corruption.
      (OCTOBER 4, 2006)

        THIS SCRATCHES WHERE IT IS ITCHING

      I wish I could be in the room where the minister of finance and the WB country
      representative are discussing loans. There is more to this issue than just corruption and
      punishing the offenders. There is corruption in these transactions because there is also
      recklessness at first on the part of the WB and the borrowing countries, especially HIPCs. 
      While the borrowing countries ought to develop the culture of integrity, the WB ought to
      develop a culture of responsibility.

      We know that the WB is not a normal bank as we have standard banks or commercial
      banks that lend the money to individuals for development. While borrowing is normal, the
      question is borrowing for what? Should the WB keep lending its precious and limited money
      for the sake of keeping the bank in business? Is that moral integrity? I assume the mission
      of the WB is commendable, but the officials ought to have the poor in their hearts as they
      run the business. Lending should not be done only from a standpoint of business
      convenience, looking only at what accrue interest (which would be called usury) will bring
      to the bank. Moral business also takes into consideration the welfare of the borrowing partY,
      especially that in many instances the poor being committed to repay the loans are not
      even the beneficiaries.

      Who benefits when the WB gives a loan for a project that the government officials
      themselves get the contract? Is it morally sound when the WB knows that the poor people
      are being committed by the government officials, yet those very officials will not be in
      office after 10 years? Is this type of borrowing made to alleviate poverty or is it a business
      created for the already economically strong? Should the WB be the marketing agent of
      certain industries through that loan? What is the basis of knowing that the project at stake
      is what the people NEED for it to necessitate a loan?

      I wouldn’t be against a government official getting a contract for a project funded by WB.
      I wouldn’t mind the WB giving loans for projects if there is a realistic plan to repay the
      loan. However, the GNI requirement is not even close to reality in poor countries, and the
      WB knows that. If the HIPCs tax base is not even enough to sustain their economy, how
      can it be enough to repay huge debts of many years accrue interests? The loans from the
      WB at least in the developing countries like Africa, sustain the lies of political leaders who 
      promise this and that during their campaigns. By the end of the day, those loans will not
      be honored because they were obtained with wrong motives. This is one aspect of corrupt
      practices I find the WB participating in, while accusing the borrower of corruption. If the
      WB ought to keep its business moral tone, it should NEVER lend money for projects that
      have no realistic plans. New governments of HIPCs ought to pay the debt as a moral
      obligation, but how do they pay the loan that was created out of corrupt ambitions while
      the WB knows it? I am not advocating for debt cancellation, but I am calling for a serious
      analysis of this issues that keep oppressing the dignity of the innocent poor citizens.

      The WB should find a new way of debt management that the innocent poor will not be
      implicated in the debt disgrace that assaults their dignity. Also the WB should be more
      responsible in dishing out its loans if it cares seriously about poverty reduction. The WB
      needs to know that morality is most of the time lip service in many governments worldwide. 
      As long as the approach remains state-to-state, the WB will have to accept the default
      consequences. This does not mean private institutions will not default, I am not
      encouraging default either, but the risks are high in government than private institutions.
      Chanshi Chanda: chanshi@coppernet.zm (2006-10-07 08:25:21)

      AFRICAN CORRUPTION IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY

      As long as corruption exists in Africa at current level, and as long as donors continue to
      look the other way, foreign aid will simply serve to keep African kleptocrats in power.
      Sub-Sahara Africa has received an estimated $114 billion in bilateral and multilateral aid
      from 1995-2002. Yet African countries continue to be at the bottom of the United Nations
      Development Program’s Human Development Index, which measures life expectancy,
      gross domestic product per person and literacy. Where did the money go?

      Sub-Sahara Africa has seen the likes of many gluttons. Some of the most infamous
      include Mobutu Sese Seko, the former president of the Democratic Republic of Congo,
      who allegedly stole $5 billion, and Sani Abacha, former president of Nigeria, who allegedly
      stole $2 billion. Both men are dead, but their legacy of corruption continues to afflict their
      nations. Corruption may no be as bad as genocide, but it is also a crime against humanity.
      It is a killer of initiative and trust. It drives away foreign investment and undermines the
      development of the rule of law. But most callously, it robs African children of a better future.
      (The Christian Science Monitor, August 9, 2004)

 

      CANADA TO GIVE $40 MILLION TO NGOs

      CIDA announced that it will give $40 million to help poor people in developing countries
      access formal financial services to improve their own economic and social well-being. The
      funding will be made through three Canadian non-governmental organizations with a proven
      track record in micro financing initiatives.
      (CIDA news release, November 12, 2006)


      BILL C-293 PASSES SECOND READING

      Bill C-293 is a private members bill introduced by MP John McKay. It passed second
      reading in the House of Commons by a vote of 159 to 108. It has now been referred to the
      Foreign Affairs Committee hearings. If passed, it will enhance accountability in Canadian
      Overseas Development Assistance, thus making aid more effective in making poverty
      reduction a reality.
      (House of Commons, Canada, Thursday, September 21, 2006)


      AID AND CORRUPTION

      An often repeated argument is that corruption in poor country governments is so prevalent
      that aid should not be channeled through governments at all. The truth is that there is
      some leakage of resources from government budgets in many African governments. In
      the long term, development depends on strong national institutions that can manage
      resources in an accountable manner.
      (Trocaire, July 11, 2005)

      THE OTHER DIMENSIONS OF THE CHARLES TAYLOR SAGA:
      RETURN OF STOLEN FUNDS

      The arrest of Mr. Taylor, the former president of Liberia, with bags of cash and his
      subsequent turning over to the criminal tribunal, while laudable, might be meaningless as
      long as the money he stole is not repatriated to Liberia.
      The Sirleaf administration diplomacy should be able to use its own argument in
      Washington that ties between the US and Liberia run deep along with America’s clout as
      the world’s preeminent superpower to secure the return of stolen wealth stashed away not
      only in the US, but also in banking institutions of other countries, particularly Switzerland
      and the UK. According to some conservative estimates by organizations such as Global
      Witness, Charles Taylor and his cohorts reportedly stashed more than $3billion in US,
      Swiss and other international banks.
      (The Perspective, by Cecil Franweah Frank, Atlanta Georgia, April 18, 2006)


      FORMER MALAWI PRESIDENT SUMMONED FOR
      QUESTIONING BY ANTI-CORRUPTION BODY

      Former president Bakili Muluzi has been summoned by Malawi’s official anti-corruption
      bureau to answer questions about the source of his personal wealth, which is believed to
      be in the millions of dollars. The bureau alleges that Muluzi diverted about $11.5 million
      into his personal accounts.
      (News from Russia, October 18, 2005)


      EX-FINANCE MINISTER CHARGED WITH CORRUPTION

      It was reported that Katele Kalumba, Zambia’s former Finance Minister, and three
      ex-senior Treasury officials have been arrested and jointly charged with corruption
      involving $20 million. (SABC News, August 14, 2004)


      ZAMBIA'S EX-PRESIDENT QUESTIONED OVER NEW CORRUPTION CHARGES

      Zambia’s ex-president Frederick Chiluba, facing charges of stealing from state coffers,
      was questioned in connection with new charges that he used government funds to buy
      personal houses.  (Agence France Presse, April 19, 2004)


      CHILUBA AIDE FLEES ZAMBIA

      A close aide of Zambia’s former president Frederick Chiluba, who is on trial for
      corruption, has fled the country. Attan Shansongo is alleged to have been used by
      Chiluba to steal over $40 million in public funds.  (BBC News, March 31, 2004)


      CONCERNS OVER IRREGULARITIES IN HIPC FUND SPENDING

      According to reports, Zambia’s debt relief monitors have raised concerns over alleged
      irregularities in spending on poverty relief under the Highly Indebted Poor Countries
      Initiative. It identified abuses involving top civil servants.
      (IRIN News, February 17, 2004)


      IT ALL STARTS AND ENDS WITH MONEY

      For Zambia’s former president Frederick Chiluba, everything started and ended with
      money. The Church was corrupted with cash hand-outs. When his government was
      saying that they had no money to fund essential services, they always had money
      to buy designer clothes. Chiluba himself is reported to have spent $1 million to buy
      personal clothes in a European boutique. When children were dying of hunger and a
      legion of street children were being unleashed to a life of despair and parentless
      existence, Chiluba was swimming in luxury from stolen funds.
      (The post, September 21, 2006)


      CHILUBA WAS BEHIND MAIZE SCAM-MAHTANI

      Finance Bank Chairman, Dr. Rajan Mahtani yesterday charged that former
      president Frederick Chiluba was behind the Carlington maize scam in which
      government lost millions of dollars
      (The post newspaper, September 20, 2006)

 

      ARCHIVE: CORRUPTION BRIEFS PRIOR TO 2004