G Fraser-Moleketi: Africa Forum on Anti Corruption

28 February 2007

Your Excellency, Deputy Prime Minister of Namibia
Commissioner Joiner
Ministers
Your Excellencies, Ambassadors and High Commissioners
Distinguished Guests
Ladies and gentlemen
All protocols observed

Corruption takes place at the interface between the public and private
sectors. It is essential to recognise this in developing a common understanding
and approach to corruption. The corollary of this argument is that effective
anti-corruption strategies must be designed to both enhance democracy in the
political sphere as well as corporate governance in the private sector.

Is William Butler Yeats referring to corruption in his poem "The Second
Coming" when he writes:

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer
Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

Chinua Achebe in his novel Things Fall Apart does in fact ask us whether
corruption has led to things falling apart and the erosion of the centre.
Corruption is anarchy that has been loosed upon the world in which we live.
Achebe and many other writers in Africa including Ngugi Wa Thiong'o and Ousmane
Sembene all point to the importance of fighting corruption because it erodes
the common fabric, undermines community and perpetuates poverty, inequality and
underdevelopment. For these reasons alone, we must be resolute and steadfast in
our fight against corruption in all spheres of society.

Corruption has been manifest in all historical epochs. As we reflect on the
root causes of corruption in the contemporary era we can trace corruption back
to the era of colonialism, but equally importantly we can acknowledge systemic
corruption in the Cold War era.

In an effort to fight the Cold War through proxy nations in the South, the
global superpowers overthrew many democratically elected regimes in Africa,
Asia and Latin America and often replaced them with malleable regimes. We are
now dealing with the legacy of the Cold War. At the same time, this legacy has
created an environment for the forces of Globalisation, which are
supra-national in character to once again exploit the vulnerabilities of nation
states.

By situating corruption in its historical context and by linking it to the
unregulated and regulated markets of capitalism, nationally and globally, we
are asserting that corruption is more than the relationship between the bribe
giver and the bribe taker. It has historical roots; it is systemic and goes
beyond the individual to the structural and the institutional levels. By
asserting that corruption is rooted in the unbridled forces of the market and
in the pursuit of profitability we are in fact suggesting that corruption,
often seen as "the price of doing business," must not be viewed as an intrinsic
element of the value system of democratic capitalism.

Seven premises of corruption

The first premise in our development of a common understanding of corruption
is that while corruption manifests itself in the relationship between
individuals and institutions, corruption as a practice is rooted in the
operation of market forces, the pursuit of individual prosperity as opposed to
the common good. Free market ideology has generated a rugged individualism that
has lead to the atomisation of society and given rise to a rampant pursuit of
individual gain. This possessive individualism has undermined the goals and
objectives of national and community level development.

Underdeveloped capitalism has lacked an independent basis for accumulation
within the economy, making access to the state and its levers critical for
capital accumulation. A connection to the state has thus become a sine qua non
for capitalist accumulation and the state connection has become a life and
death struggle for the elite. This has undermined democracy and spawned
networks of corruption that have pillaged public resources in the pursuit of
personal wealth.

Our second premise is that corruption is fundamentally undemocratic; it
undermines the legitimacy and credibility of democratically elected governments
and of responsible and accountable civil servants.

The third premise is that corruption is about the interface of political and
economic elites at a global, national and regional scale.

Our fourth premise is that the intentional preoccupation in the global
corruption discourse with bribe takers and bribe givers and particularly with
bribe takers is disingenuous, ideologically loaded, and simplistic and
certainly serves other agendas that are not linked to developmental goals. This
discourse needs to be challenged precisely because it overlooks the complexity
of the social forces, systems, processes and structures which underpin acts of
corruption. It also needs to be challenged because as democratic states in
Africa continue to strengthen the fight against poverty and underdevelopment,
this preoccupation detracts from the broad goals of development.

The fifth premise is that corruption is systemic, and the focus must
therefore be on effects rather than intentions. The effect of corruption is
that it undermines the value system, the norms and the very cohesion of
society. It may not be the intention of the corrupter to engage in practices
that undermine the values of the nation state and the values of community; but
it has this effect, regardless of intent. Colonialism distorted and undermined
the value systems of the colonised, often intentionally as a means of imposing
its rule and its values. Clearly corruption has historical roots that were
exacerbated in the period of colonialism and apartheid and today we are dealing
with the impact of this legacy. Corruption distorts and undermines the value
systems of all societies and their peoples.

The sixth premise is that an anti-corruption strategy must be articulated by
leaders in the political, economic and civil society spheres and must engage
all sectors of society on the basis of a core set of leadership practices and
values. If, as we have argued, corruption has a deep and lasting impact on the
very core values of society, then an anti-corruption strategy must articulate
an alternative ethos and value system.

The seventh premise is that corruption is a direct impediment to Africa's
development. Corruption hurts the many and benefits the few. It inhibits the
ability of government to respond to citizens' needs and to utilise scarce
resources in the most efficient and effective manner. It takes away resources
from priority areas such as health, social development and education. It also
hampers the continent's efforts to instil sound political, socio-economic and
corporate governance.

The discourses of both North and South need to be rethought in this light.
One focuses on the corrupted, the other seeks to focus on the corrupter, but
both ignore the complexity and nuance surrounding the structural relationships
which are embedded in the political economic interface. This is the political
economy of corruption, wherein corruption is symptomatic of the current
conjuncture of globalisation. It is in this conjuncture that multinational
corporations and individuals can take advantage of vulnerable states, eroding
value systems and where possessive individualism overrides any sense of the
common good.

Corruption engenders perverse political dependencies, lost political
opportunities to improve the general well being of the citizenry and fosters a
climate of mistrust particularly of public officials. The losses that accrue
from a culture of permissiveness with respect to corruption include a loss of
revenue, loss of trust, loss of values, loss of credibility and legitimacy and
a loss of the democratic ethos and impulse within institutions and
organisations. A 2002 World Bank report on corruption puts the financial costs
of corruption at US$148 billion a year, and increases the costs of goods by as
much as 20%. Certainly the beneficiaries are few and the victims are the many -
and the report notes that the poor are the hardest hit.

The former secretary-general of the United Nations Kofi Annan, in his
statement on the adoption of the United Nations (UN) Convention against
Corruption noted that:

"Corruption is found in all countries big and small, rich and poor but it is
in the developing world that its effects are most destructive. Corruption hurts
the poor disproportionately by diverting funds intended for development,
undermining a government's ability to provide basic services, feeding
inequality and injustice and discouraging foreign aid and investment.
Corruption is a key element in economic underperformance and major obstacle to
poverty alleviation and development."

It is critical for us to develop a common understanding of corruption based
on a conception of the 'common good.' This derives from the state's special
obligations rooted in what we call the 'People's Contract.' This binds the
elites to the masses and lays the basis for leadership qualities that require
the promotion and articulation of values and principles of professional ethics
by leaders.

Under conditions of democracy, the state needs to take the lead in
combating, preventing, managing and eliminating corruption. The political cost
of corruption is that it undermines democracy, weakens the developmental state
and undermines responsibility, accountability and legitimacy. In eroding the
'People's Contract,' corruption alienates citizens from the very officials they
have elected and also alienates people from each other. Corruption weakens
democratic processes, public order and undermines the ability to fight for
reform. Corruption destroys trust and erodes both the sense of global
citizenship and the sense of shared responsibility as well as national
citizenship and the sense of social cohesion.

The state has the responsibility for securing the conditions under which
development takes place and security is ensured. Where states are undemocratic
this proposition becomes problematic, as the ruling group frequently abuses
state power in the interests of narrow sectional concerns. This promotes
neither development nor security but creates the conditions under which
corruption and so called predatory states flourish.

We have the opportunity at this Conference to share our experiences, our
successes and our frustrations in dealing with the challenges of corruption.
The theme of the Conference, 'Towards a Common Understanding of Corruption.' is
also a call for us as Africans throughout the Continent to work together to
tackle this scourge.

Corruption and development

Developmental states are about the interface between the political, economic
and the bureaucratic elites. Democracy keeps politicians honest and accountable
while sound corporate governance and systems of accountability keep the
economic and bureaucratic elites honest. Central to the developmental state is
the strong interface between key state actors, institutions, business and civil
society. As the developmental infrastructure is created, the interface
intensifies, and there must be requisite levels of trust to ensure that public
goods and resources are well managed and not squandered. The critical
interfaces between politics, economics and the bureaucracy must be kept
clean.

Critical to this is firstly reclaiming a value system that sees the
individual as part of a broader community. In the South African context we talk
about ubuntu. In kiSwahili we talk about ujamaa, the values that relate to
neighbourliness and utu, possessing the values of a human being, humanity and
co-operation. The word ubuntu comes from the Zulu and Xhosa languages. A rough
translation in English could be "humanity towards others." Ubuntu also means "I
am what I am because of who we all are." The Zulu maxim is umuntu ngumuntu
ngabantu ("a person is a person through other persons"). Ubuntu is "The belief
in a universal bond of sharing that connects all humanity."

If we take the second meaning of Ubuntu we realise that if one in our
community or our society is corrupt, then we are all affected. If one is in
need we are all in need.

So by combining the many complementary meanings of Ubuntu, we are in fact
saying that we are human by virtue of doing for others and not just ourselves.
This must be the essence of a value system that underpins our commitment to
anti-corruption. This is the spirit we must continue to encourage in all
sectors of our society. This is the spirit that is necessary for the creation
of a socially cohesive and inclusive Africa.

Secondly, we need strong robust democracies where all sectors of society
including the media and organisations of civil society, private sector, trade
unions and faith based organisations have a responsibility to educate and
promote the values of ubuntu and anti-corruption.

Thirdly, there is the need for the establishment of a professional
meritocratic public service that is able to uphold the values and principles of
democracy, good governance and ubuntu.

Government intervention in the economy to promote development implies
extensive interaction between politicians, bureaucrats and business people. The
interaction could take the form of collaboration, collusion and corruption, or
all of these. The experience of developmental states across the globe has
problematised the close relationship between government and business. It can be
seen as benign collaboration or crony capitalism or corruption. In pursuing a
development agenda the collaboration between government and business is
critical, because information exchange is a prerequisite for effective policy
formation and implementation. A professional, meritocratic bureaucracy is a key
condition for preventing collaboration from degenerating into collusion and
corruption. But the bureaucracy itself must also be steeped in a strong code of
conduct and a code of ethics. These codes need to be implemented and rigorously
enforced. Similar codes must be established, implemented and rigorously
enforced for elected officials and for the corporate sector.

Corruption undermines growth and development by diverting resources away
from development programmes thus increasing poverty, inequality and
underdevelopment. Corruption is therefore a critical channel through which
inequality undermines economic growth.

It is important to note however, that developmentalism and state
intervention do not necessarily lead to increases in corruption, although some
forms of state intervention may lead to corruption. The sale of state
properties, extensive ownership by the state of large corporations, the
favouring of big conglomerates, and the manner in which some huge tenders are
awarded to national and or international bidders has led to corruption in some
developmental states. Nevertheless, linking the extent of state intervention or
the scale of state participation in the economy to corruption is highly
problematic.

There are objective factors which determine the levels of corruption beyond
the simplistic notions that state intervention in economic development produces
corruption. Corruption is more likely to be found under conditions where policy
failures have increased redistributive pressures to address inequality than
where development policies have been successfully implemented by a meritocratic
bureaucracy, thus decreasing inequality. The deepening of democratic
institutions is likely to reduce corruption due to enhanced monitoring and
accountability mechanisms. These are critical elements of National Integrity
systems that link values and principles of good governance with the
institutional structures and practices that give effect to these values.

Nationality Integrity Systems

Good governance is a prerequisite of preventing and combating corruption;
while the scourge of corruption undermines good governance. Corruption can
therefore be viewed as a governance challenge. The concept of a National
Integrity System is fundamental to the development of an anti-corruption
discourse. It comprises the building blocks necessary for the long-term fight
against corruption and other forms of unethical and anti-social behaviour. Its
core elements are constituted by a society's value system.

The National Integrity System's values must permeate the structures,
practices and principles of the state, the corporate sector and civil society.
These values include accountability, transparency, equity, efficiency,
developmentalism, and fundamental rights and freedoms including freedom of
speech, access to information, democracy and participation.

The successful practice and implementation of a National Integrity System is
predicated on strong leadership and the ability of leaders to set a vision,
based on the values of the society. Governments can create a National Integrity
System infrastructure with laws, systems and structures, but ultimately there
needs to be on the part of leadership, a voluntary submission to a higher code
of probity, which goes beyond strictly legal prescriptions. This submission to
a moral code ensures that institutions do not become vacuous without direction
or purpose. Ethical behaviour, while highly desirable, respected and valued,
cannot be assumed. This is why specific measures and institutions to safeguard
integrity and to promote ethics are necessary. The lack of these measures and
institutions, or their ineffective implementation and functioning, opens the
way for all manner of unethical behaviour, including corruption.

The values expressed in the National Integrity System need to permeate all
institutions of state, the corporate sector and civil society and specific
measures or actions relating to anti-corruption need to be identified within
particular institutions. A National Integrity System therefore provides both
the institutional and philosophical basis for both enforcement and preventive
action against corruption.

Towards a broader definition of corruption

Thus far, corruption has largely been perceived as an African and
'developing south' phenomenon. Definitions of the problem have often been
limited to the abuse or misuse of public power or resources for private
benefit, thus focusing on the behaviour of politicians and those in the public
service. Corruption and bribery have also frequently been used interchangeably
and in a manner that conceals that bribery is a two way transaction involving
both bribe givers and bribe takers. There has also been a projection of
particular societies or people as endemically corrupt, so that an outsider is
required to pay bribes in order to conduct legitimate business.

There has also been a tendency to propose solutions and strategies for
combating corruption as apolitical, largely legalistic and technocratic, devoid
of ideology and values, while ignoring the value laden definitions and
perspectives of those who defined the problem and prescribed the solutions.

The result of this approach is that the role of the private sector is rarely
addressed, and the prevalence of corruption in the developed north, if noticed
at all, is perceived as an aberration or deviation from the norm.

Yet our experience has been that corruption is prevalent in both developed
and developing countries. People occupying the highest political offices have
abused their offices for private gain or to further their own personal or
political party's ambitions. Many corruptors have been exposed. Legal action by
governments, including that of Lesotho, has led to international corporations
being found guilty of paying bribes.

There is a long list of northern politicians, Chief Executive Officers
(CEOs), lawyers, lobbyists, accountants, public and private officials who have
abused their fiduciary responsibilities and professional codes and duties by
engaging in activities that are corrupt. This does not absolve Africa from the
responsibility of addressing corruption on the continent.

Globally we have witnessed the abuse of political power and resources for
personal benefit and for ruling elites, at the expense of ordinary citizens,
including shareholders, private clients, workers and the poor. We have also
seen abuse by the rich and militarily strong countries that promote their own
ideology, and impose leaders on others. This is done in pursuit of their own
national interests at the expense of the populations of entire countries and
regions while in the process weakening multilateral co-operation and
institutions.

South Africa understands corruption to be a societal problem, which affects
all sectors of society differentially. Over and above our common colonial
experience, the experience of apartheid exposed us to the reality of systemic
corruption, which infused the entire society and was used to sustain those in
power. The collusion of the elite with the ruling party amounted to a takeover
of the state. The security of the state and protection of the rulers shaped the
institutions as well as policies of governance and conditioned the behaviour of
politicians, diplomats, business people and the security services.

Apartheid was a criminal system and was maintained by criminal means, with
scant regard for public or private morality, or respect for human life. The
activities of agents of the state were unconstrained, institutions lost their
legitimacy, and growing numbers of citizens abandoned previously accepted norms
of behaviour as they were required to condone, rationalise and legitimise
injustice and oppression.

Repositioning the discourse on corruption requires us to go beyond the
simple corrupter-corrupted relationship. Current discourses privilege one or
the other and focus on the perceptions of one or the other. It is far more
useful in developing a common understanding to focus on the interface between
politics and economics. It is the premises identified earlier that provide the
basis for a far more rigorous conception of corruption.

As we have argued throughout, a broader conception and definition of
corruption must recognise that corrupt practices take place in the interface
between the public sector, the private sector and even the civil society
sector. The African Development Bank (ADB) has gone a long way towards
articulating a common definition of corruption by arguing that corruption is a
cross-sectoral and cross-boundary activity, and involves practices such as
theft, fraud, bribery, extortion, nepotism, patronage, and laundering of
illicit proceeds. Private sector corruption is as serious as public sector
corruption, and the costs are just as great. The ADB also points us to the
reality of Grand Corruption, that stems from the interface between the private
and public sectors.

It is also important to acknowledge that corruption is not restricted to
purely commercial transactions but may also be present when citizens seek to
access social services such as health, welfare and education services. A bribe
may be demanded by a public official in order to deliver the service or grant
access to the service to which the citizen is entitled, and which the public
official is obliged to deliver. The failure to deliver leads to a culture where
citizens feel forced to offer bribes in order to receive that to which they are
entitled, hence strengthening a climate of corruption.

A more appropriate definition of corruption including these additional
facets of the problem is proposed to enable African countries to individually
and collectively develop targeted strategies and practices to combat corruption
as it confronts us. Such a definition may see corruption as a transaction or
attempt to secure illegitimate advantage for national interests or private
benefit or enrichment, through subverting or suborning a public official or any
person or entity from performing their proper functions with due diligence and
probity.

We need to reflect on this definition in order to collectively as Africans
build democracy in our respective countries and promote economic growth and
development in order to create a better life for all our people. We need to
understand how corruption flourished under colonialism as well as in the
post-colonial period. We are now able to recognise that corruption has
implications for the commercial gain and benefit of its protagonists while
simultaneously undermining democracy. Corruption compromises democratic
political process and generates apathy and disengagement amongst citizens.

In developing an African conception and understanding of corruption, we need
to recognise the colonial legacy and its impact on the coloniser and colonised
alike. Reflecting on the South African case, President Thabo Mbeki in
delivering the Nelson Mandela memorial lecture in 2006 said:

"Within the context of the development of capitalism in our country,
individual acquisition of material wealth, produced through the oppression and
exploitation of the black majority, became the defining social value in the
organisation of white society�it entrenched in our society as a whole,
including among the oppressed, the deep-seated understanding that personal
wealth constituted the only true measure of individual and social success. The
new order, born of the victory in 1994, inherited a well-entrenched value
system that placed individual acquisition of wealth at the very centre of the
value system of our society as a whole. In practice this meant that, provided
this did not threaten overt social disorder, society assumed a tolerant or
permissive attitude towards such crimes as theft and corruption, especially if
these related to public property."

"Whilst apartheid bequeathed us a value system that had injustice and
materialism at its core, we had the opportunity to negotiate a new set of
values for the democratic era in the process of the transition from apartheid
to a democratic constitutional dispensation. As was the case in liberation
struggles across the continent, our own liberation struggle in South Africa was
informed by a democratic, human rights culture. These values have now entered
the mainstream of our society. Our much-lauded Constitution contains many of
the fundamental principles and values that will help to refocus our society to
sound communal values based on the African philosophical concept of 'Ubuntu'
(humanity)."

The principles of democratic administration, transparency, accountability
and the rule of law form the basis of a more comprehensive understanding of
corruption. Within the public sector the South African ethos of Batho Pele,
'citizens first,' is being progressively entrenched amongst public servants to
ensure that they become service oriented and understand their role in providing
essential services to the people of South Africa. Their efficiency and
effectiveness in rendering these services is critical in giving substance to
the expectations of the people, and enabling the state to promote the
conditions for development that will eliminate inequality and alleviate the
plight the poor.

The philosophy of Ubuntu as articulated in South Africa finds resonance
across the Continent. This philosophy does not represent values that are
exclusively South African. It contributes towards a definition of the common
good at a broader continental level. Traditional African society was forged on
the basis of communal values. This contrasts with the values of rampant free
market capitalism under globalisation which emphasise individual wealth
acquisition.

This is why we need to reflect on the functioning of our national, regional
and global political economies. In doing so we need to understand the objective
social forces that shape our nation states, our regions and our continent and
the material context in which corruption occurs. The purpose of this analysis
is to enable us to design and implement appropriate structures and strategies
to combat corruption, and not to shift the blame for corruption to external
forces.

The market fundamentalism of contemporary global capitalism and its
atomising effect has created the conditions under which corruption flourishes.
Self-interest has taken precedence over the collective good. Our people no
longer see themselves as an integral part of their communities with the
attendant responsibilities that this entails.

The State has a critical role in counteracting these tendencies through
democratic practice. At the core of defining the common good lies the need to
bind the elite and the impoverished through the implementation of a People's
Contract. The commitment to development, alleviation of poverty and the
reduction of economic inequality lies at the heart of a contract between the
government and its people. Corruption undermines the ability of the state to
meet its development objectives. A people's contract must therefore contain
effective regulatory frameworks and mechanisms for the creation of sound
National Integrity Systems.

The state plays a central role in binding the political and economic elites
to the masses of the people. This can be achieved through the articulation and
agreement of a set on common goals for the common good. By creating the
conditions for effective implementation of a programme of action for the common
good, the state must entrench the links between the elites and the masses.

There is an onus on leadership, to articulate and sketch a vision based on
the values of a society and to design programmes to give meaning and content to
this vision. Strong leadership in all sectors � political, economic,
administrative and civil society - must be based on integrity and through
example must give concrete expression to the codes of good practice contained
within the National Integrity System.

There has been extensive debate on what needs to be done in order to tackle
corruption and many initiatives have been taken at national, regional and
continental levels. Sound frameworks are already in place. The time has now
come for action and implementation: we need to focus on practical action and
share our hard won experiences of best practice.

Our approach needs to be multi-faceted and it is important to put in place
anti-corruption strategies that consist of a myriad of tools to fight
corruption. The strategies must look at prevention, education and awareness as
well as detection and the enhancement of capacity of the law enforcement
agencies and other institutions fighting corruption.

We need to examine how to counter corruption more effectively through
co-operation and co-ordination including cross border support. We need to
operationalise our structures and lobby and pressure the countries of the
developed world to support our initiatives in order to close the loopholes that
may exist in their jurisdictions.

We must also take the opportunity of this gathering to develop a plan of
action that will serve as a guide as we continue the fight against corruption.
This plan of action must include developing a methodology to measure corruption
more accurately than simply relying on the 'perception' indices that have
dominated corruption and anti-corruption discourse. Once many low and middle
income countries have been labelled and perceived as corrupt the 'perception'
is very difficult to dislodge and their efforts at development are
significantly undermined either by failure to invest or by disinvestment.
Surely this cannot be right and 'perceptions' ought not to dominate the
development trajectory of particular countries let alone the development
discourse writ large.

Conclusion

We can all agree that corruption undermines democracy and negatively impacts
on sustainable growth and development. The most effective antidote to
corruption therefore has to be a strengthened National Integrity System that
puts issues of good governance in all the spheres of society (the political
sphere, the corporate sector and in civil society) at the very heart of the
anti-corruption project. The perception discourse that focuses on the corrupted
and the discourse of blame that focuses on the North do little to illuminate
the complexities hidden beneath the surface. They are simplistic and glib and
avoid a more holistic approach that is structural and systemic and looks at
social forces that are conjunctural. A structural approach to corruption is a
far better point of entry into the debate for it locates corruption precisely
at the interface between the public and private sectors and thus allows us to
focus our attention more sharply on the critical issues that confront us in
Africa today.

As we engage more rigorously in our analysis of corruption, let us as
Africans imagine a world that exists without corruption. As Ben Okri has
said:

"The worst realities of our age are manufactured realities. It is therefore
our task, as creative participants in the universe, to re dream our world. The
fact of possessing imagination means that everything can be re dreamed."
(www.thinkexist.com/quotes/ben_okri/)

In this way, let us exercise leadership and judgement in the building of a
world that rests on the principles of ubuntu. This is not an impossibility for
as Okri continues:

"The most authentic thing about us is our capacity to create, to overcome,
to endure, to transform, to love and to be greater than our suffering."
(www.thinkexist.com/quotes/ben_okri/)

I thank you.

Issued by: Department of Public Service and Administration
28 February 2007