Setting up anti-corruption agencies to
prosecute corrupt individuals may be a good idea, but it is just a popular way
known globally to address the issue. Establishing anti-corruption laws and
agencies is a strategy that also gives the country political and diplomatic
perception of fighting corruption. Instead of relying solely on them, the
country needs to evolve indigenous strategies in line with our culture and
values. There is need to harness aspects
of our culture and values that show disdain to corruption. Such would require
working with the people from both urban and rural settings, to ensure that
there is a collective resolve to eliminate corruption, as against ‘the
government is fighting corruption’ perception which promotes the image of the
government in power per time.
Nigeria scored 27 out of 100 points
and is ranked 136 out of 175 countries in the 2014 Corruption Perception Index
(CPI) of the Transparency International. Though some people have argued the
authenticity of this result over the years, the CPI report remains a globally
accepted basis for rating countries on corruption. As the government keeps
making efforts, the result would keep improving. Yet corruption may remain and
grow within because corruption in Nigeria has economic, social and political
dimensions.
Economically, Nigeria has an
underdeveloped capitalist economy in which the state plays a major part in
driving the growth and development. The country is also largely a mono-economy,
with crude petroleum dominating economic activities in the country, leaving few
other economic opportunities available. Furthermore, Nigeria has high levels of
poverty at approximately 69 per cent in 2012 as a result of wide economic
inequality.
In
social context, Nigeria
is a society of two “publics”: the national public and the communal public. It
is believed that primary loyalty appears to favour the community at the expense
of the nation. Thus, it is quite tolerable in Nigeria to divert and illicitly
appropriate public funds at the national level and use it for personal, family
and community projects. By the same token, it would seem to be quite legitimate
in the eyes of most Nigerians, to use one’s official position to facilitate the
employment of one’s own kith and kin. Indeed, not to do so may attract local
sanctions for the ‘deviant’ public officer at the community level. No wonder
upcoming politicians seek relevance at the grassroots and elections when
conducted well, is usually won at the grassroots.
The political context manifests in the
centralization of power at the federal level. This centralization of power is
compounded by its fusion. Apart from the fact that the President has immense
powers, the separation of power between the executive, legislature and
judiciary is in practical terms, nominal. The executive controls the judiciary
through its control of the Judicial Service Commission and its power of
appointment. The power of the legislature to make laws is, in practice,
ineffective because the President is so powerful that any law which he does not
wish to enforce is, to all intents and purpose, inoperative. Some experts
believe that this centralization and concentration of power undermines the
effectiveness of anti-corruption agencies and contributes significantly to
making political competition intense and prone to lawlessness.
In the light of above peculiarities,
and in addition to earlier recommendations on how to strengthen the fight
against corruption; I believe that there should be social change programme at
socio-political level and communication level to address corruption from the
roots. Socio-political level is concerned with establishing an effective and
efficient rapport between the orientation agency of government and the target
social systems in order to create a conducive atmosphere for exchange of ideas
about an advocated change, in this case, corruption. Communication level is
concerned with what to say, to whom, when and how, through what medium/media
and by whom.
Socio-political level approaches would
help in partnering with community based organizations at the rural and urban
settings, including socio-cultural and religious groups in reaching the people
to educate them on corruption and its consequences, persuade them to reject
corrupt proceeds, coerce them to expose corrupt individuals and practices and
ultimately help them to ensure that corruption is not perpetuated in their
communities.
Communication level approaches would
help them adopt the necessary message exchange in creating awareness and
feeding the various traditional networks identified at the socio-political level with relevant information.
This information would generate positive discussions which would in turn lead
to an understanding of each person’s or group’s role in fighting corruption and
stopping it. Communication messages in this regard should adopt contents
that share cultural values that promote anti-corruption, the shame that goes
with being prosecuted for corruption and the pains that result from possible
incarceration as consequences of corruption.
Talks
Post a Comment