The
reason that corruption is endemic to the African continent is because it is
rooted in its leadership, argues Pregala Pillay and Chris Jones.
African
Anti-Corruption Day, which is commemorated annually on 11 July, wants to give
prominence to the anti-corruption fight on the continent, marking an important
step towards the Africa we want.
It would
not be farfetched to assume that we all want a prosperous Africa, based on
inclusive growth and sustainable development. In this regard, we think of Agenda
2063: The Africa We Want which is the blueprint and master
plan for Africa to transform itself into a global powerhouse of the future.
Unfortunately,
as we indicate in our recently published book, A Multidimensional Perspective on Corruption in Africa
(2019), the one major challenge that stands in the way of inclusive growth and
sustainable development on our continent, is the nature, scale and complexity
of corruption.
However,
corruption is not a uniquely African phenomenon; it is a global occurrence. No
continent, no government, and no society is free from corruption. Wherever
there are human beings, there is corruption too.
And yet,
amid the prevalence of corruption and impunity, many nations in other
continents forge ahead and still find ways to thrive economically, politically,
scientifically and socially. They are still able to flourish and cultivate
their civilisations, technologies, sciences, and economies for the greater good
of their citizens.
Corruption
is endemic
Sadly,
Africa has become somewhat of an exception. Why and how is our continent
different? And what needs to be done to make Africa reach its full potential?
Without
comparing African countries specifically with other nations, a number of
chapters in our book indicate that the scourge of corruption in Africa is
endemic, and that it is rooted in the nature, performance and ethos of its
leadership.
Without a
doubt, the maleficent theft of public resources in African states is a symptom
of a political-moral crisis. A close examination of the democratic state
structure in African countries leads one to conclude that although the
architecture of the African neo-colonial state is imperfect and defective, the
real obstacle lies in the self-serving, predatory political and bureaucratic
leadership.
Although
several African states have moved towards democratic governance, in many
instances, it is merely in form and not in substance. Through the years, it has
been observed that successive political leaders are the primary cause of failed
governance, and thus ignites the source of widespread, endemic and systemic
corruption. The presidents and their cronies, as is evident in so many African
countries, have become laws unto themselves.
One
important perspective in our book, as specifically argued by Anglican Bishop
Zac Niringiye from Uganda, focuses on the link between corruption and
colonialism and asserts that the legacy of colonialism has become the modus operandi of democratic
power across Africa.
But what
does he mean by this? He argues that colonial administrations (originally)
designed and established state machinery that would ensure control – securing
the obedience of all people, and extraction of resources – in order to pay for
the costs of running the state, as well as profit the British government.
These
newly created countries, under the authority of the colonists, became their “property”,
and the inhabitants were dominated under a system in which public officials
exercised their power not for public good but for private gain, without any
rights to the resources of the land for the indigenous citizens.
Mafia
state
Niringiye
strengthens his argument by referring to academic Paul Gifford who in his book, African Christianity: Its Public Role in Uganda and other
African countries (1999), summarises it as follows:
“Colonial administrations were both centralised and authoritarian. Just as
important, the rulers manifested a sense of superiority over those they ruled,
and power was experienced as coming from above rather than flowing from
below.”
In his
book, Africa in Chaos (1998), Ghanaian
economist and author George Ayittey explains Niringiye’s viewpoint succinctly
and profoundly: “After independence, African nationalist leaders did not
dismantle the authoritarian colonial state. Rather they strengthened and
expanded its scope.
“Subsequently,
they abused and misused the power of the state to achieve their own selfish
ends. Gradually, a ‘mafia state’ evolved – a state that has been hijacked by
the vampire elites, hustlers and gangsters who operated with their own
notorious ethic of selfish aggrandisement and self-perpetuation in power. The
institutions of government were debauched, the country became the personal
property of the ruling elites, and the meaning of such terms as ‘development’
was perverted.”
According
to Niringiye and Gifford, state power in many African countries is personalised
rather than institutionalised, in the sense that there is no distinction made
between the office and the person holding that office, or between what is
political, economic or social, in the sense that the search for state power and
the search for wealth are one and the same.
State
power has become the only means to acquire wealth. Hence, we have two root
problems: a “personalised” state, and leaders who have entrenched the
“personal” state in such ways that they have only peripheral or no
interest in the common good.
Moral-ethical
problem
This is
why many scholars reason that the problem of corruption is a moral-ethical one.
It reflects the manifestation of a fundamental political crisis. Therefore, the
political-moral crisis, which is both part and consequence of the character of
the neo-patrimonial state, is the death of citizenship.
Because
ordinary people are not truly citizens anymore, but rather clients of powerful
patrons, who themselves are clients to more powerful patrons. This is the
culmination of the dual crisis of a predatory state and leadership.
We
believe it will require strong introspection, self-reflection and
self-criticism from politicians about their role in establishing these
neo-patrimonial states and patronage-clientelist politics. It is of utmost
importance that they root this self-criticism in deep political-moral
reflection, aiming at an ethos of enhancing human dignity and the common
good.
Religion
can also play a significant role in achieving this, but sadly many religious
leaders have capitulated to corrupt political leadership instead of speaking
truth to power, according to Niringiye.
We aptly
cite the brilliant quotation adapted from Kwame Nkrumah: “We are Africans,
not because we are born in Africa, but because Africa is born in us.”
– Professor
Pregala Pillay is vice-dean for social impact and transformation in the faculty
of economic and management sciences at Stellenbosch University. Dr Chris Jones
heads the unit for moral leadership at the same university. They co-edited A Multidimensional Perspective on Corruption in
Africa with Sunday Bobai Agang.
