G Fraser-Moleketi: National Anti-Corruption Bodies meeting

23 February 2007

Commissioner Julia Joiner,
Distinguished members of national anti-corruption bodies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

I bid you welcome to South Africa and trust you will experience the
hospitality and friendship of your host country. May this meeting be fruitful
and enriching, may you walk away with new friendships and partnerships, but
mostly may this meeting inspire and invigorate you, so that you may go to your
capitals with new knowledge and drive to carry on your brave fight against
corruption. I salute you for the work that you do.

May we take a moment to remember Mr Patrick Tigere from the African Union
Commission who sadly is with not us any more. You will remember the passion and
effort he invested in your first meeting in Lusaka in November 2005. May his
soul rest in peace.

Novels and travel books about Africa are full of descriptions of the
wondrous African dawn, when the light emerges and a new day begins. Dawn is a
time of great activity: mothers start cooking fires to feed their families,
they ready themselves and their families for a day of toil, farm animals are
released from the safety of kraals to forage and graze, wild animals go to the
water to drink before the heat of the day drive them to thick bushes for shade
and so the cycle of life continues. Dawn however, is not the time of the
lazy.

Dawn is also the time of great expectancy, the morning brings hope and new
energy and the light seem to wash away the turmoil and fears of darkness. Even
the most poor and downtrodden peoples of Africa welcome the new day with a
glimmer of hope that today will bring relieve and well-being. Dawn however, is
not the time of thieves and the corrupt; they hate the light that dawn
brings.

Over the past decade, African leaders have articulated a bold "African
Agenda" which rests on five key pillars: development and poverty eradication;
peace and security; governance and democratisation; accelerated economic
growth; and partnerships with the international community. The fight against
corruption is a key element of the African initiatives to eradicate poverty and
to put African countries on a path of sustainable growth and development. It is
part of the continent’s efforts to instil good political, socio-economic and
corporate governance.

As Africans, we are at the dawn of our renewal. And like the wondrous
African dawn, for us, as soldiers in the war against corruption, it is a time
of great activity and expectancy. We may have done something yesterday, or the
day before, but we have a lot of work waiting ahead and we must ready ourselves
for our work.

Commissioner Joiner, may I congratulate you for convening this meeting of
national anti-corruption bodies. This meeting comes at a very opportune moment.
As we discussed in the December 2006 meeting of the Bureau of the Programme of
Pan African Ministers of Public Service, this meeting is indeed a necessary and
critical precursor to the Africa Forum on Fighting Corruption. The Africa Forum
is aimed to develop a common understanding of corruption and will help to
consolidate and promote the African anti-corruption agenda.

In this broader debate that must involve civil society the leadership of
national anti-corruption bodies is indeed necessary and welcome. National
anti-corruption bodies play the primary role in the fight against corruption.
And as the outcomes of this meeting of national anti-corruption bodies inform
and contribute towards the debates in the Africa Forum on Fighting Corruption,
so will the outcomes of the Africa Forum inform and contribute to the outcomes
of the Global Forum V on Fighting Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity.

So you can see that we are at a dawn to post this meeting, the Africa Forum
and the Global Forum we will have a plan of action that will require
implementation and action at national, regional, continental and global levels.
I am sure that you have questions like "how might we do better in the fight
against corruption?" or "How is the fight against corruption related to good
governance?" I am convinced that the cumulative effect of these meetings will
go a long way in answering these and other questions.

The struggle against corruption has a history, both rhetorically and in
terms of action plans. Corruption was conventionally defined as the abuse of
public office for private gain. Its discursive element centred on issues of
grand corruption, and the belief that it was particularly endemic in Africa. In
1977 the United States Government enacted the world’s first strict
anti-corruption act in foreign trade, which provided sanctions against
bribe-givers. By the late 1980s, countries as diverse as China and Mexico had
anti-corruption campaigns and anti-corruption offices. However, it was only on
the late 1990s when corruption began to feature more prominently on the global
agenda.

Until then, corruption was viewed as not so bad, serving as "useful grease
for bureaucratic wheels". Many argued that it was better for business to pay
bribes and to get something done than to have bribes forbidden and get nothing
done. It is now commonly acknowledged that corruption is a complex social
practice with its own specific local variations. Recent definitions, stimulated
by the Enron and Wall Street scandals, have extended the understanding of
corruption to be the abuse of any sort of "entrusted authority", e.g. as would
occur by a board chairperson. Ethical globalisation and ethics management are
now at the forefront of corporate activity. The stark reality of corruption in
the developed world has also been exposed.

The current struggle against corruption can be described as trans-national
in two respects. Firstly, it is springing up all over, from treasury offices in
Norway to aid offices in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to city
governments in Brazil. Secondly, it has become the focus of global
co-operation. Most major governments have a high level anti-corruption unit, an
action plan, and various campaigns in the works.

The understanding of corruption still differs among societies and has
changed over time in each society. Globalisation has brought about not only
trans-national economic exchange, but it has also resulted in the diffusion of
certain discourses and practices. Corruption and anti-corruption as concepts
cannot be understood separately from the process of globalisation. This
provides an interesting window for understanding how international and local
processes intersect, be they processes of global economic restructuring or
processes of accountability linked to respect for justice and fairness.

If the fight against corruption is to make the world a better place we can
very well ask "For whom?" Is it for those who cast stones, yet refuse to live
in glass houses? Does it effectively address the plight of the hapless victims
of corruption: an illiterate entrepreneur who must confront an unresponsive
bureaucrat, the innocent defendant who must bribe a lawyer or judge, the
hospital patient who must pay off a nurse, the women and children who are
unprotected from corrupt police?

The definitions of corruption are hardly neutral, and for obvious reasons.
Any new, more comprehensive definition of corruption is an instrument to enter
new projects. It follows that corruption is tied not only to individual
strategies and opportunities, but also to manipulation of value systems and
legal norms.

Discussion of corruption used to be taboo in development discourse. Donor
accusations that African regimes were pilfering aid were considered
interference in these countries’ internal affairs. Today, the struggle against
corruption has become a cornerstone of international development initiatives.
An obligatory anti-corruption programme is now one of the conditions written
into most foreign aid co-operation agreements. The irony of this is that there
is evidence to support the notion that the self-same "givers" of developmental
aid would fair poorly in a bribe "givers" index.

The anti-corruption campaigns of many African countries are at a stage in
which projects are intertwined with money and power. Anti-corruption activities
can therefore lead to and reinforce an entire complex of discursive practices
which may have little to do with fighting corruption as such. In some
instances, international involvement increases corruption, because of
competition by major powers for natural resources, leading to corrupt deals
with the rulers of resource-rich countries in order to obtain concessions.
Post-war reconstruction contracts come to mind. The world of anti-corruption
with all its cries for transparency remains somewhat sadly opaque.

It is commonly acknowledged that political will to root out corruption is a
vital part of any anti-corruption campaign. This political will is influenced
by popular attitudes to corruption, which in turn depends on what ordinary
people consider as "right" and "wrong." People adhere to social norms because
they fear sanctions ranging from dirty looks and unfavourable gossip to loss of
job opportunities and business relations. Social norms may be more influential
than law in shaping behaviour relative to corruption.

It is postulated that this soft law approach would result in effectively and
sustainably addressing the scourge of corruption in any society. What matters
is having cultural norms that operate within the business community, the
professional legal community, including the judiciary and the civil service,
and within the political class that sees corruption as wrongful and unethical.
It also is essential for the broader society to find corruption to be abhorrent
rather than part of the national culture.

Changing norms within a distinct professional or political class or within
the society generally is not impossible, but it is difficult and takes time. It
certainly takes a sophisticated understanding of existing norms and how they
operate. The following examples illustrate the complex paradigms which any
exercise to understand corruption must explore:

* Expectations of when a monetary transaction is appropriate can differ.
Tipping is considered bribery in some societies, while in others the two
concepts may be interchangeable. In Spanish, bribes are referred to as "la
mordida", in Middle Eastern countries they are Bakshish.
* In the music industry, payola is the commonplace practice where record
companies buy airtime from radio and television for songs they are
promoting.
* Pharmaceutical corporations may seek to reward doctors for heavy prescription
of their drugs through gifts. Doubtful cases include grants for travelling to
medical conventions that double as tourist trips.
* Politicians receive campaign contributions and other payoffs from powerful
corporations or individuals when making choices in the interests of those
parties, or in anticipation of favourable policy. In most instances, such a
relationship does not meet the legal standards for bribery without evidence of
a quid pro quo.

For many countries doing business in Africa, small "facilitation" payments
do not constitute payments that are frowned upon, or even prosecuted as an
offence of corruption. Such payments are made to induce public officials to
perform their function, such as issuing licences or permits, and even though
they are generally illegal in the foreign country concerned, it is regarded as
the only way to conduct business.

Let me return to the work that await us at our dawn and take a step back to
your first meeting in Lusaka, Zambia, in November of 2005. That meeting made a
range of recommendations, including that the African Union Commission present
the recommendations to the Ministers of Public Service for their consideration
and transmission to the next ordinary session of the African Union Summit in
2006. In December 2005 these Ministers considered your report and indeed
promoted the recommendation to the Summit in Khartoum in March 2006.

But what of the implementation of the recommendations, how have these
decisions been put into action and can we now congregate here today to shake
each others’ hands and say "well done, good progress?" In this meeting, in this
room, you be the judge of your progress. Outside of this room are the peoples
of Africa, the prosperous and the poor, the educated and the ones that cannot
write and read the victims and the perpetrators of corruption, they ask and
have the right to ask, what have you done and what are you doing to fight
corruption? How have the Lusaka recommendations affected them, does it matter
that the AU Assembly considered the report, has that made a difference?

Reading the Lusaka report, it is clear that many issues raised are still
with us:

* The role of civil society is still not defined within clear national
compacts where all stakeholders understand and respect the roles of all. The
limitations in resources and support are still prevalent. Civil society
organisations still also make themselves guilty of acts of corruption.
* Mutual legal assistance remains a challenge.
* The need for exchange of information and good practice still remain an
identified need.

When we look at the specifics of the Lusaka recommendations I am heartened
by the fact that the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption came
into force in August 2006 but only 28% of countries have ratified this
Convention. There are other key recommendations that we should assess:

* How, in practical terms, does the African Union Commission (AUC) and
Member States support the "domestication of the Convention into national
laws?"
* How can the AUC and regional economic communities fulfil the envisaged tasks
of monitoring, supporting domestication, facilitating cooperation and mutual
legal assistance and coordination? Are there good examples of where this is
done? Can this be done at all if these bodies do not have the capacities to do
so?
* What has been done to obtain the buy-in of non-governmental organisations,
including business organisations and parliamentarians so that they can work
towards implementation?

Many of the recommendations are in essence matters for domestic
implementation and unless we can find a structured way to collect and analyse
country information, we would not know what progress we are making. For all we
know progress is phenomenal and if it is it will be a sad day if we cannot use
this progress to support each other and at the same time dispel some of those
very negative perceptions about Africa.

I think by now many of you would want to say but many of the above
challenges can be addressed if only we can get the Advisory Board on Corruption
within the African Union established as a matter of priority. As contained in
Article 22 of the AU Convention this Advisory Board must-

* promote application of anti-corruption measures
* collect, document, analyse and share information on corruption
* provide advice to governments
* analyse the conduct of multi-nationals
* promote harmonisation of codes of conduct
* build partnerships and facilitate dialogue between all sectors.

Quite a task awaiting the Advisory Board, but quite a task awaiting us to
set up the Board! What is the roadmap for achieving this important milestone?
May I take this opportunity to share some of the work forthcoming in the next
week, some of which you will be participating in:

* On Monday Pan African Public Service Ministers will meet to discuss
progress with the Ministers’ Programme. This programme deals with post-conflict
reconstruction, innovations in service delivery, capacity building and two
other work-streams that are relevant for you, namely the Charter for the
African Public Service and Anti-corruption. Nigeria is championing the
anti-corruption work and Algeria the Charter.

On Monday Nigeria will present a research paper that was conducted on an
effective anti-corruption strategy in the Nigerian and Economic Community of
West African States (ECOWAS) context. I trust this case study will contribute
towards our ongoing debate on how best to fight corruption.
* On Tuesday the Southern African Forum on Corruption is meeting to discuss
Southern African Development Community (SADC) progress with the implementation
of the SADC Protocol against Corruption and the SADC Regional Anti-corruption
Programme.
* On Wednesday the Africa Forum on Fighting Corruption starts and I trust you
have all registered and will participate actively. The overarching theme for
the Forum is towards a common understanding of corruption and the Forum will
amongst other areas look at national integrity systems, law enforcement and
cross-border cooperation and challenges and solutions to implementation of
national, regional and international anti-corruption instruments. Clearly your
work here today and tomorrow is a key precursor to participation in the
Forum.

All of the above is an intimidating programme of work that will, as I
indicated earlier, continue well into our collective future. It is thus by
design that I talked about the dawn and the great activity and expectation that
comes with the new light of day.

May your work be fruitful and may you undertake your task with the joy and
dedication expected of public officials.

I thank you for the opportunity to address you this morning.

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