Nigeria & the way forward: Buhari’s commitment to public declaration of assets will promote transparency, an enemy of corruption – Ladipo Adamolekun

We shall strongly battle another form of evil that is even worse than terrorism – the evil of corruption. Corruption attacks and seeks to destroy our National institutions and character… corruption will not be tolerated by this administration; and it shall no longer be allowed to stand as if it is a respected monument in this nation
      – Muhammadu Buhari’s Acceptance Speech, March 31st 2015

 

To ensure effective enforcement, any of the officers who has an existing account should be required to freeze it for the period of his/her service with public declaration of the amount in the account at the time of assumption of office … President-elect Buhari correctly regards corruption as an evil that is “worse than terrorism”.  As in the case of terrorism, there will be no quick fix. But reducing corruption drastically within a four-year time frame is not impossible.  Hong Kong first demonstrated that this could be done. Singapore in Asia and Botswana in Africa are two countries that have drastically reduced corruption within a short time frame.

 

This short essay is focused on the significance of having a president who has pledged to be the country’s anti-corruption champion. I also make some comments on the anti-corruption strategy that president-elect Buhari has pledged to present to the public during his first 100 days.

I. President as Anti-Corruption Champion

As the examples of countries that have succeeded in significantly reducing corruption in developing countries across the continents demonstrate (for example, Botswana in Africa and Singapore in Asia), having a president with unquestioned integrity as the anti-corruption champion is a necessary condition. Yes, it is not a sufficient condition, but without it almost all anti-corruption efforts tend to have only limited impact on reducing corruption, at best; and at worst, anti-corruption efforts end up as mere sloganeering or tools for harassing and punishing political opponents, or a combination of these negative outcomes.

Having a president who is the head of government as the anti-corruption champion is important because, as the saying goes, the fish rots from the head. Effective from May 29th 2015, all Nigerians, non-nationals who live in Nigeria, and all those within and outside Nigeria who do business with the country, will have to begin to adjust to the reality that Nigeria has a president who will strictly enforce the commitment he has made to his countrymen and women: “corruption will not be tolerated by this administration”. Strikingly, Buhari’s commitment is no more than announcing his determination to uphold Section 15 (5) of the 1999 Constitution: “The State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power”. If his predecessors had taken their oath to uphold the Constitution seriously with particular reference to the provision on anti-corruption, Buhari’s commitment would not appear as a radical new development.

A related anti-corruption provision in the Constitution that Buhari should enforce is the “Prohibition of foreign accounts” (Fifth Schedule, Code of Conduct for Public Officers): “The President, Vice-President, Governor, Deputy Governor, Ministers of the Government of the Federation and Commissioners of the Governments of States, members of the National Assembly and of the Houses of Assembly of the States, and such other public officers or persons as the National Assembly may by law prescribe shall not maintain or operate a bank account in any country outside Nigeria”. To ensure effective enforcement, any of the officers who has an existing account should be required to freeze it for the period of his/her service with public declaration of the amount in the account at the time of assumption of office.

However, Buhari’s determination to require his vice-president, ministers and other political appointees to publicly declare their assets is unprecedented and is not a requirement in any extant law in the land. When President Yar’adua publicly declared his assets and those of his wife, he failed to require his vice-president, ministers and other political appointees to do the same. And we saw that Mr. “Clean” President failed to make a dent on fighting corruption. Buhari’s commitment to public declaration of assets will promote transparency which is an enemy of corruption that thrives in opacity and secrecy. And I would recommend that the list of public officials to publicly declare their assets be extended to include the top executives in the civil services (permanent secretaries and directors) and chief executives of government agencies and parastatals. The implications of this radical approach for the toothless Code of Conduct Bureau and the grossly under-utilized Code of Conduct Tribunal will need to be addressed in the Anti-corruption Strategy.

Even when allowance is made for possible aspirational public declaration of assets by some of the concerned public officials, strict enforcement of public declaration of assets would still be a crucial step in the fight against corruption. Specifically, investigative reporters in the media would be free to expose aspirational declarations that should lead to sanctions against the public officials concerned. Buhari’s pledge to work with the National Assembly for a rapid enactment of a Whistle Blower Protection Act is a critical accompaniment to the public declaration of assets: public servants, professionals such as accountants and lawyers, media practitioners, anti-C activists in civil society, will feel protected to expose corrupt practices.

Besides public declaration of assets, the impact of the president as the country’s anti-corruption champion can be felt within his first few months in respect of the following specific pledges that fall within the remit of the executive arm of government over which he will preside:

• Inaugurate the National Council on Procurement as stipulated in the Procurement Act so that the Federal Executive Council, which has been turned to a weekly session of contract bazaar, will concentrate on its principal function of policy making.
• Review and implement audit recommendations by Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI).
• Encourage proactive disclosure of information by government institutions in the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act.

The other specific actions aimed at curbing corruption that Buhari has highlighted in his “Covenant with Nigerians” would best be folded into the anti-corruption strategy that he has pledged to present to the public before the end of his first 100 days in office.

II.  Anti-corruption Strategy

Buhari’s decision to anchor the fight against corruption on an anti-corruption strategy that will be presented to the public during his first three months in office contrasts sharply with the long wait for the production of a draft “National Anti-Corruption Strategy” (NACS) by the Federal Ministry of Justice in 2013. And because NACS was produced in order to comply with an obligation under UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a signatory, it only served that formal purpose.

Although there was some degree of public participation in the preparation of NACS, I would recommend broader and deeper public participation in the crafting of the Strategy that Buhari will champion as distinct from NACS that was produced in conformity with an external obligation. Next, I will make some observations on the issues to be addressed in the strategy.

Broad and Deep Participatory Approach

The draft Strategy that Buhari Transition Committee would have prepared should be subjected to extensive public debate before a final draft is formally adopted in a National Anti-Corruption Forum. The adopted Strategy should then be sent to the Federal Executive Council for consideration and approval. The launch of the Anti-corruption Strategy for implementation should be part of the activities to mark the first 100 days of the Buhari Administration. The proposed pre-National Anti-corruption Forum debate could be organised through volunteer written contributions (memoranda, emails and so on) and debates on radio and television to be collated by an appropriate small secretariat established in the presidency for the purpose. The volunteer contributors should be requested to, among others, address the following question: What has worked and what has not worked in the fight against corruption in the country from 1999 to date? Participants at the Forum should include representatives of existing anti-corruption institutions (notably ICPC and EFCC), some of the volunteer contributors, selected anti-corruption civil society groups and the notable champion of anti-corruption in the private sector, the Convention for Business Integrity (CBi). Participants at the Forum should be hosted by the secretariat but there should be no payment of honoraria.

Contents of the Strategy

In addition to drawing on NACS, the contents of the strategy should take into account the lessons learned from the limited impact of the anti-corruption efforts in the country since the early 2000s especially in respect of both corruption education and the punishment of corrupt officials.

Regarding extant laws, the use of plea bargaining in the country (first introduced in 2005) would need to be revisited. Because it has been largely abused to date, I would recommend that it should be abolished. Instead, I would recommend an amendment to the criminal code that would presume public officials to be guilty of committing a crime if they fail to give a clear account of the sources of their wealth. Such unknown sources of wealth would be presumed to be the proceeds of corruption. The UN, Singapore, the UK, Hong Kong and Malaysia have adopted similar regulations.

Two specific actions that Buhari has identified as essential for the war against corruption must feature in the strategy: (a) work with the National Assembly to strengthen ICPC and EFCC by guaranteeing institutional autonomy including financial and prosecutorial independence and security of tenure of officials and (b) make the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) an autonomous and operational agency. I would add the review of political campaign finance law/regulation and associated corruption with the objective of enhancing both transparency and enforceability, drawing on international good practices on the subject.

Furthermore, Buhari’s desire to “ensure that all MDAs regularly comply with their accountability responsibilities to Nigerians through the National Assembly” would require attention to measures focused on corruption-free legislative oversight and enforcement of public officials’ responsiveness to citizens in the strategy.

The critical interface between the country’s anti-corruption strategy and existing strategies focused on public service reform and judicial sector reform will need to be explicated in the strategy with a view to ensuring synergy and complementarity. For example, there is a National Strategy for Public Service Reform that the in-coming administration will inherit and modify as appropriate. The strategy’s component on public financial management reform includes actions focused on reducing corruption. And the strategy’s component on civil service administration reform includes some measures for enhancing ethical standards in public service. Similarly, on-going reform efforts in the judicial sector include actions focused on reducing corruption at the levels of lawyers and judges.

Finally, the anti-corruption strategy must have an implementation plan. I would suggest that the plan should comprise decentralised implementation responsibilities at the level of the key anti-corruption agencies (notably ICPC and EFCC) and a small coordinating secretariat in the presidency. The secretariat should be responsible for producing quarterly or bi-annual and annual reports on the results achieved in the fight against corruption, using benchmarks articulated in the strategy. And for obvious reasons, the financial resources and human capacities for assuring effective implementation should be addressed in the plan.

Last Word

President-elect Buhari correctly regards corruption as an evil that is “worse than terrorism”. As in the case of terrorism, there will be no quick fix. But reducing corruption drastically within a four-year timeframe is not impossible. Hong Kong first demonstrated that this could be done. Singapore in Asia and Botswana in Africa are two countries that have drastically reduced corruption within a short timeframe. Sadly, Nigerians’ entrenched tolerance of corrupt practices by townsmen/women and “sisters”/”brothers” from their respective ethnic groups poses a big challenge. Tackling the challenge would require fairness, firmness and transparency in the punishment of corrupt officials.

Professor Ladipo Adamolekun lives in Iju, Akure North, Ondo State.

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2015.  10:00 a.m. [GMT]