Has Uganda discovered the graft antidote?
Recently, the President admitted to the existence of ‘parasites’ in his government. This comes amid news of top management changes in Uganda Revenue Authority (URA), National Identification and Registration Authority and Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA).
Speculation on the reasons for the changes most of which have concluded that it is in line with the fight against corruption.
An intriguing court ruling against a senior police accused of facilitating the illegal acquisition of a vehicle that had hitherto been announced missing also found its way into the limelight.
The President’s lamenting about the escalation of corruption was therefore definitely surprising but even more surprising was the sound of the clapping audience who are no strangers to Uganda’s daily corruption scandals, some within the very institutions they superintend.
Recent surveys and nationally produced data indicate that corruption is a problem in Uganda.
It manifests itself in various forms such as bribery, financial leakages, conflict of interest, embezzlement, false accounting, fraud, influence peddling, nepotism, theft of public funds or theft of public assets.
In the Global Integrity Index 2009, Uganda was applauded for having a very strong anti-corruption legal framework; one could argue however, and justifiably so, that the strength of this framework only goes to highlight the wide gap between actual implementation of measures to prevent, detect, and enforce anti-corruption and the regulatory provisions from which the measures derive their legal basis.
A key finding from aforementioned report indicates that aid dependent countries “are often times adept at engineering laws and institutions to meet foreign donor requirements despite their failure to deliver for ordinary citizens”.
The 2019 Uganda Police Annual crimes report indicates a 100 per cent rise in corruption cases from 32 reported in 2018 to 64 in 2019.
On the other hand, there is another school of thought that believes that the President has indeed stepped up efforts in the fight against corruption, the same Police Annual crimes report for instance indicates a recovery of Shs1.35b from corruption through the presidential initiative to combat corruption- the State House Anti-Corruption Unit. Then there is of course the long standing ‘big fish’ versus ‘small fish’ debate.
In Ayi Kwei Armah’s 1968 novel on post-colonial Ghana, The Beautiful ones are not yet born, he examines the extent of corruption in Ghana, this person called Abednego Yamoah who sells government petrol for himself, but there is always someone else, a cleaner, to be jailed and never Abednego.
The whole world says he is a good man, and the people around the society ask themselves why they shouldn’t be like him. Ayi Kwei further describes the life of an unnamed rail worker who is pressured by his family and fellow workers to accept bribes and involve himself in corrupt activities in order to provide his family with material goods.
The above two scenarios brought to life by Ayi Kwei’s words reflect so simply Uganda’s own situation.
With the above in mind, is the “parasite” purge the long awaited solution? In my opinion, the President needs to address three core challenges in order to fight against corruption.
First, he must bridge the implementation gap and empower agencies like the Inspectorate of Government to effectively support corruption prevention and detection, and anti-corruption enforcement.
Secondly, bribery strongly thrives on citizen and government official interactions there must be a deliberate effort to make these processes transparent.
Finally, safe and open climate/spaces for reporting corruption. It has been reported that journalists bear the brunt of reporting on investigative stories on corruption scandals.
Mr Edward Serucaca Jnr is a lawyer
