Neglected issues in the fight against Corruption

In her epistle dated 19th May 2016, titled “Letter from Africa: Is corruption just stealing? (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36316702)”, and published by the BBC, the Ghanaian writer and opposition politician- her description then- Hon. Elizabeth Ohene took on the herculean task of discussing graft, a subject not many politicians would at their own will dare discuss. I have read that piece many times, reflecting the intent and also thinking if indeed, Hon. Ohene’s bravery at that piece epitomised her rectitude when she held public office during the former President Kuffour’s era? The answer does not come easy. But, since she left office, I have not heard of a single rumour of graft against her, and that might explain her share size of audacity in discussing this topic many of her kind shy away from. In the epistle, she made one outstanding point about graft, and I quote “Corruption simply does not carry the same odium as stealing or thievery. The word [corruption] has been sanitised. And yet corruption is stealing, corruption is thievery done by public officials - except the amounts involved are large and instead of prosecutions, we deal with the phenomenon by holding conferences and commissions of inquiry”. Hon. Ohene in that piece did register her frustration regarding how corruption has been decorated and distinguished from the sister terms - sealing and thievery. By this exquisite delineation, the term corruption is fast becoming synonymous with “No action”. Same cannot be said of sealing and thievery. In fact, when you take a look at the records at most unit courts in Ghana, many cases for which accusers got convicted to custody relates to stealing - petty thievery. The law works, I guess in the minds of many watchers of the judiciary! In this piece, I discuss factors that are militating against the fight on corruption and why corruption is not treated the same as stealing. In doing so, I try not to be theoretical but simpler in explaining so that a more extensive readership can appreciate and understand the issues under discussion. Let us appreciate some basic facts about corruption/graft. Graft is an age-old phenomenon. It is a cancerous situation that pertains to all governments and public and private service providers of all countries (developed and developing). However, the suffering of corrupt occurrences varies among countries as the magnitude in some countries are of a higher degree. Corruption in an advanced country would not have the same impact as that of developing country where social amenities are lacking. The concern about corruption is that it is a major contributor to the weak economic development and also political instability. Corruption is a “mass murder” as was aptly articulated by former President - John Mahama, and the evil consequences of widespread corruption must not be underrated. The implosive consequence of graft is the insufficient hospital and education infrastructure we see all over. The poor public works everywhere, the many unacceptable accidents (road, fuel stations, and market fires), dumsor and much more. These are the beauty queens of corruption -the sanitised stealing by public officials. So, if graft is that bad, how come many alleged corrupt public and private individuals walk free in our Republic? Well, several factors can explain this sorry state of our public management and I discuss the often-forgotten factors in this piece. The factors of weak institutions, fragmentation, inadequate monitoring, legacy issues, cultural mentality and so forth are much talked about and known. The first neglected fact that has allowed graft to flourish is what I called “political authority bystander apathy”. Political authority is critical to fighting graft, but, unfortunately, politicians have shown time and time again that they care more about their own interest rather than the state. Theoretically, the impact of one’s action (negative externality) on another gets internalised through public policy. For instance, governments put a corrective tax on cigarettes to internalise smocking impact on the environment and humans. Policy makers are not apathetic towards negative externality, and they take actions to remedy such externalities. So, why do political parties who know their own instead turns to be apathetic (shield) when it comes to corruption within their own? The amount of information available to political parties is vast and varied. Many organised political parties especially those who have tested power before, can utilise national security apparatus to delve into the activities of their member and they know exactly the attitude of each member towards graft, yet they watch sheepishly as such elements are offered public office. Another level of authority that unfortunately exhibits bystander apathy is the Cabinet. The cabinet has the highest authority over decision making concerning a particular government. Cabinet has at its disposal tremendous amount of information about various players in a government. In fact, there are instances, where a cabinet would discuss graft against public office holders if the issue is of public interest. Strangely, Cabinets often protect their own and fails to internalise the impact of the current and future graft of its members on broader society. Political authority apathy at both party and government levels largely explains why corruption becomes a beauty contest and the most corrupt gets to wear the crown. The second neglected issue is the connectedness of family and friends in different political parties. This happens when you have families and friends belonging to various political parties. This is healthy for democracy. It underscores the maturity of society and free will within families to choose their party to belong to. Recently, the minister of State in-charge of Zongo Development is on record as saying…having families on both sides of the political divide is a good thing. His example of having a brother on the side of NDC and the fact that he had not seen “opposition” before was quite interesting. Of course, I need not take him out of context. He was admonishing young foes on why they should not take to fighting because of politics. I must say, I shared the video on my Facebook wall and applauded him for the wise counsel- (Politicians eat, drink together; don’t fight for them–Boniface [http://citifmonline.com/2017/10/05/politicians-eat-drink-together-dont-fight-for-them-boniface/]). But, could this high level of bond- family or friendship affect the fight against graft? Yes! I cannot fathom by a whisker if any sitting Cabinet member or Minister would have the courage to prosecute his or her blood brother or sister. I have not seen it, and I am not sure if it would happen. If you are a student of politics, you very much understand that human factors very much influences what get done and what gets not done especially in our part of the world. I am not for once conjecturing that the seemly increase in families having members at top positions in both sides of the political divide is a grand scheme to dodge accountability but hypothetically, it is a possibility. Political watchers are observing to see what happens when prosecution finally commence under the current administration. The third factor is the naming and shaming antidote for public officials and public cry for “political correctness” when corruption involves private firm(s). We seem to think that naming and shaming of public officials is enough punishment to deter others from travelling that same route. For instance, when you read the Auditor General’s annual audit reports, various infractions, corruptions are documented in the reports. In some instance, the report name names and yet the graft seems not attenuated. Again, the Public Account Committee of Parliament, the bipartisan committee charged with the responsibility of perusing the audited reports does not have legal powers to prosecute. The PAC has been reduced to naming and shaming people through their public fora. Naming and shaming have not worked, and I am not sure if it would ever work in the kind of divided media we have in Ghana. It is possible for a named and shamed official(s) to result to the “gullible” media houses to spine the news, and in the era of fake news, they get public sympathy, and the matter is closed for good. Sad, isn’t it? That is the side of public officials. Now, let’s turn to corruption in private firms. It is very common to see ferocious resistance from all facets of society when you dare to raise corruption about private individuals. At least, the life of Mannessah is a testament for all. It is required, by public default- cognitive bias- that citizens be “politically correct” when discussing private firms alleged to have been involved in corruption. Why? Because, such discussions destroy their brand, market and their business. People even fault you for not celebrating your own but working to destroy them. Needless to say, however, that corruption is corruption. It has to be called its name and damn the consequence. The truth though is that any business built on solid principals and invests in research and development (R&D) and is open to innovation is more likely to survive even in most turbulent macro-environment. Political entrepreneurs “Polipreneurs” would not survive competitive environment because they invest profits and sometimes their working capital in paying bribes. Such businesses, certainly cannot survive but for political patronage. If we are serious about fight graft, we have to begin to fight private firm corruption and call it by its name. We read about South Korea prosecuting ex CEO’s of Samsung and the likes, and we think that should not happen in Ghana! God save us. The last point I wish to discuss relates the occasional defection of members of one party to the other. Defection is good politically. I have seen and read stories about executive(s) in party A defecting to party B, and from party B to party A. They are a welcome news for all political parties. After all, politics is a game of numbers. Each party aims to win power and as long as you get the numbers, you careless. In theory, especially with the neo-institutionalism theory, the group culture often influences the individuals. So, defectors with different ideology and different perspective on corruption, we often hope, the group ideology would shape them and reorient them. Unfortunately, this does not come that easy. Humans by nature are not rational, and we suffer cognitive bias in many of the decisions we make. The cognitive limitations of people including defectors mean the adaptiveness of the new ideology might not occur, and even if it does happen, it comes with some modifications. Under such circumstance, the group’s identity is adulterated, and if such people begin to push their agenda, it turns to affect the original group. For instance, if the defectors are liberal on corruption, and they occupy high office in the new party, they would push their liberal ideas as far as corruption is a concern. This is a subtle point but is very potent at diluting firm stands of a group on some issues including corruption. I conclude by saying, the beauty contest of graft seekers is nearing end of life with the surge activeness of young people about public matters with the advent of social media. Social media has allowed people to express their sentiment on all aspect of their lives freely. Peoples sentiment about corruption and policymakers as well as politicians attitude towards it is one of frustration and resentment. With the dwindling public rating of politicians, a fight on graft is likely to earn any politician the “hall of fame” accolade and respect among the general public. Remember, graft/corruption is equal to stealing, and graft is mass murder, and we must all end the beauty contest now or forever live with it. Henry Kyeremeh kyeremeh@gmail.com