Fighting Corruption Independently

Corruption is one of the several factors that militate against economic development and transformation in Africa. Corruption is a bane or the key nemesis of the economies of Africa. It is satanic and destroys the systems and institutions built by managers of the various economies in Africa. The various acts of corruption take away financial and non-financial resources and create a lacuna which must be filled later with borrowed funds or income generated from taxes. There are varied ways of fighting corruption in the world. State institutions can be relied on to prosecute persons charged with acts of corruption. Elsewhere, independent and internationally recognised agencies step in the fight against corruption. Fighting corruption should be a priority of governments everywhere in the world. The setting up of the Special Prosecutor’s office in Ghana was lauded by every development-oriented person in Ghana. It is an innovative way of beginning a radical action against the number one enemy of development. Colonisation, which is often blamed for the under-development of Africa and some other countries is far better in some form than corruption. It is estimated that corruption costs Africa $ 148 billion a year which is more than 4 times the $35 billion Africa receives as foreign aid from all sources (Applied Economics for Africa, George B.N Ayittey page 258). Corruption is not a myth in this part of the world. It is a real phenomenon that is being experienced.

There is a culture of corruption that is crafted and shared among leaders and people in Africa. Corruption has been included in many business ventures and contracts of states. There is a pervasive incidence of corruption in Ghana and some countries in Africa. Corruption is almost an allowable custom that is practised by citizens in all institutions of the states in Africa. As such, measures that are being instituted do not yield the needed results. The agencies required to fight this act are themselves weak and toothless. The method for fighting corruption in Africa is weak as there are weak institutional linkages in this part of the world. Government institutions such as the Attorney General in Ghana won’t have the political will to properly probe and prosecute corrupt officials of its government. Political power is giving leaders the space to become more corrupt than we experienced in the past. The invention of technologies in the financial space has paved way for political corruption and its detection has become a difficult undertaking. The frauds and scams that are being experienced in the various sectors of the economy are as a result of corruption. There are no properly set-up systems for checks and balances.

There are institutions that must ensure checks and balances. However, these institutions are corrupt in themselves. In Ghana, the Controller and Account- General, the Auditor-General and the Attorney-General are the key state institutions in charge of the war against corruption. These institutions and their agents are not run independently. Their resources including personnel (the human resources ) are employed by the state (the government). The fight against corruption seems to be relaxed and people who were or are found corrupt leave their offices without being punished. The institutions and systems are so weak that they breed corruption.

Besides the fight against corruption being an institutional problem, it’s also an attitudinal one. The personal orientations of the people in charge of public offices have the potentiality to check acts of corruption. The moral issue with regard to corruption will help do away with this canker. Fighting corruption with state institutions that are dependent on the government of the day for their administrative resources in carrying out their daily functions cannot meet their intended purposes of establishment. Acts of corruption are not spontaneous, they are webbed and designed by political parties and other actors to achieve a particular end. It is an intentionally- designed human activity for personal gain.

Many thought the creation of the Special Prosecutor’s office will bring some hope and ease. However, the situation seems to be the opposite. The Special Prosecutor’s office must be a well-established unit that will aid in the fight against corruption. It’s functions should augment those of the other institutions of the state that are into the combat against corrupt practices. The government and the people involved in the creation of that office (SP’s office) should have assessed the situation at hand, viz corruption, very well before its operation. The Special Prosecutor bemoans frequently the lack of logistics to operate effectively to achieve its mandate successfully. There is no room for such vociferations as there other agencies of state that can support the Special Prosecutor’s office in carrying out its functions. State agencies such as EOCO, CHRAJ, BNI, the Auditor General, the Controller and Accountant General’s Department and the Attorney General can complement the Special Prosecutor in dealing with corrupt issues. The SP’s office can begin with smaller issues captured by the Auditor General while working to procure sophisticated logistics to advance its work into serious and deeper crimes. Such an office should work hand in hand with other units that chase after corrupt people. There is no chance for excuses at all. The office must work with others already into that business.

From the practical experience at hand, it will be most appropriate to look into issues of corruption from an independent perspective. The fight against corruption be must be done with concrete evidence which will be very difficult to be had by state established institutions. The reason is that, there are agents that fight against the process. Revealing accurate information to the personnel to prosecute cases won’t be easy. Some people will fight against the system of cleaning the waste in the public sector. An independent establishment needs to be engaged in the fight against corruption. The Special Prosecutor’s office may function like the already weak established state agencies that find the fight against corruption invariably impossible.

There is the need to look for external support from organisations that already have sophisticated devices for fighting corruption to partner the Special Prosecutor. The work of an institution in fighting corruption begins with getting limpid evidence. The persons in charge of the office for such purposes may have the entire law in the world, firmly-established evidence is the solution. Yet this evidence is difficult to have by organisations established by states. It is time to look for partnership from independent institutions in fighting corruption as the hope in the newly- created Special Prosecutor ‘s office is near quashed.

Emmanuel Kwabena Wucharey.