Points to ponder for EACC chairman from Transparency International’s report on graft

It is impossible to go for a week in 2017 without any mention of US President Donald Trump.

Forget about the now scrapped Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), initial steps to repeal the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) or the renewed promise to build “the wall” and make Mexico pay for it.

Most interesting for Africa was a quote attributed to him by the press, thus, “Most… AGOA imports are petroleum products with the benefits going to national oil companies. Why do we support that massive benefit to corrupt regimes?” He was referring to the fact that oil exports — mainly Nigeria and Angola — account for 90 per cent of all exports to the US under the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act.

The other snippet from Africa concerned former Gambia President Yahya Jammeh’s flight to exile in Equatorial Guinea after “agreeing” to hand over power to new President Adama Barrow.

Apparently, he walked out with at least $10 million (Sh1.04 billion) in cash and a fleet of high-end vehicles (including personalised Rolls Royce vintages) and luxury goods. He needed two planes to transport this booty. Peace trumped justice, again.

So I was interested in where Gambia is rated in Transparency International’s (TI’s) 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). Guess what, right next to Kenya, with a score of 26 out of a possible 100 on a rating scale in which 0 means irredeemably corrupt and 100 means “snow white” clean.

No country achieves these extremes. Denmark and New Zealand top the scale at 90; Somalia at the bottom on 10, its first ever improvement since the CPI was recalibrated and standardised in 2012.

Politicians and government technocrats will be quick to dismiss this latest assessment, especially given the fact that Kenya slipped six places down and now lies in position 145 out of 176 countries.

Yet, TI made two points that are important for our 2017 context. First, they observe that 2016 pointed to a growing link between corruption trends and electoral outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Witness Ghana, Gambia and (one day) the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Second, they note that corruption ratings have remained largely stagnant in important African countries; specifically naming South Africa, Nigeria, Tanzania and Kenya.

On Kenya, they note that we have a long way to go “despite the adoption of a few anti-corruption measures including passing a law on the right to information”.

They advise that President Uhuru Kenyatta “may need new strategies as Kenyan citizens go to the polls in 2017”. It is probably too late for that now.

However, we do have a new chairman at the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission.

Roughly one year after President Kenyatta asked religious leaders to declare corruption a sin and (ahem!) crime against humanity, retired ACK Archbishop Eliud Wabukala was sworn in as the new EACC chairman.

During his vetting by Parliament, Mr Wabukala, who previously served for 12 years as the chairman of the advocacy-driven National Anti-Corruption Campaign Steering Committee, promised an approach to the war on graft that combines punishment and reward. One MP’s retort was that he was Kenya’s last chance, failing The Lord himself, if we are to win this important fight.

As he settles into his new office and familiarises himself with criminal investigation files, and past promises such as the proposed systems review of the government’s Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS), and expected actions like vetting and clearance of electoral candidates, he may also want to take some time to better understand TI’s 2016 CPI report.

Here are a couple of things he will find. First, Kenya’s CPI score of 26 in 2016, though improved over 25 in 2015, falls below the baseline of 27 achieved in 2012 (and 2013). Why should this be the case if the Jubilee administration continually and endlessly argues that it has done the most of any regime in our brief history to combat corruption? Why isn’t the perception changing?

He may then want to do some benchmarking. According to the government’s own Sector Performance Standards for tracking Vision 2030, we targeted to have achieved Botswana’s “level” of corruption — 2016 score 60 — by 2017.

Why is it that we remain basically twice as corrupt as Botswana today, and almost four times as corrupt as the world’s least corrupt countries, even in perception terms?

Dream target
Botswana may be a dream target, so Mr Wabukala could look elsewhere in Africa. In 2012, Kenya and Nigeria achieved the same CPI score (27). In 2016, Nigeria lies slightly ahead (28 vs 26).

Is there a significant difference that has happened? He might also look at South Africa and Ghana, which, though criticised in this year’s TI report, lie a significant distance ahead of Kenya (in the 40s on CPI score). Again, what is the difference?

Finally, he may want to come closer to home. Mauritius has moved from 57 in 2012 to 54 in 2016 CPI score but falls within the world’s top 50 “least corrupt countries”. Ditto Rwanda — score 53 in 2012 to 54 in 2016.

Faster-growing Tanzania and Ethiopia are also steps ahead of Kenya, with CPI scores in the early 30s. All of these countries score above the African average of 31 in 2016 below which we fall.

The only neighbour that has done worse than Kenya over time is Uganda (score 29 in 2012 to 25 in 2016). And we shouldn’t really be peer-reviewing ourselves with Burundi, South Sudan or Somalia, the only neighbouring countries other than Uganda that are ranked below Kenya.

Digging deeper, Mr Wabukala will then find the 12 sources of information for these scores. Against Botswana, Rwanda, Ethiopia and Tanzania we are rated worse by the World Economic Forum, Global Insight, World Bank, African Development Bank, World Justice Project and Economist Intelligence Unit.

This could be the beginning of a fresh round of thinking on corruption led by an EACC that finds a better balance between enforcement, education and actual research.

Yes, the headlines will still scream, but, Mr Wabukala has the opportunity to bring a more thoughtful approach to our war on graft.[email protected]