KB Asante: Voice From Afar column

So many wise, pregnant and pedestrian observations were made as we focused on corruption last week.  Those without blinkers realised that corruption was a worldwide phenomenon which was being contained in many countries but which was seriously impeding social and economic progress in Ghana.  

It was reported that a study revealed the police as the most corrupt institution in the country.  That only confirmed the endemic nature of the malaise and its cover-up at the top echelons of society.  

It confirmed the belief that the lower echelons had to be mindful of their superiors as they did their duty according to the rules and procedures.  

For example, when the police officer on duty records an incident faithfully does the senior officer sanction the follow-up procedure or exclaim, “Don’t you know that the culprit involved is the nephew of His Excellency Dr Kwaku Ananse?” 

When procedures depend on who is involved, the corrupt throw their weight about or offer inducement to prevent action according to law. The “wise” policeman, who “does not want trouble,” will therefore take a bribe which “will help feed the children” rather than court trouble.  

The attitude of the police became prominent because they were in the first line of insisting on correct behaviour and law enforcement. But corruption has been normal at the lower echelons of many institutions for some time.

Senior officials sometimes allow wrong things to be done because they are corrupt or because they are afraid of arbitrary action against them by their superiors.  

When corruption so affects the entire administrative system of a nation, it is difficult to uproot.  But it can and must be rooted out by bold leadership.  

Heads of institutions should find the practice intolerable and the President and his ministers should take ruthless action to root out the practice which is most seriously frustrating their development plans.  

Unfortunately, not all the President’s men and women care so much for national development and reports from Parliament do not sound that hopeful.

Civil society should, therefore, do its duty.  Corruption at high levels diverts the money of the people into a few hands and impedes development.  

People should not only speak against corruption in general terms.  They should name names and assist organisations which fight corruption.

We should be prepared to accept the laid-down procedure and system even if they do not favour us in a particular instance.  

If our daughter does not gain admission into Wesley Girls High School by the official procedure, we should not try to see somebody to change the procedure in our favour.  

In the same way if we learn that after the computer has completed its selection, a list is sent to the Headmistress of Achimota School to admit additional students not selected by the computer we should be prepared to join a loud protest at the offices of the Education Service or the Ministry.

Corruption can only be contained and uprooted by eternal vigilance and action.  The action should not exclude legal action and punishment.  And punishment should involve what is a real deterrent.  Imprisonment is not so much a deterrent in Ghana for the higher echelons who fuel corruption and promote it.  What they would do anything to avoid is disgrace.

A minister or similar high personality who is found guilty of corruption leading to pathetic impoverishment of the people should be convicted not to seven years imprisonment but to seven days sweeping of the ministries while in sack-cloth shorts and jumper, followed by seven days of cleaning the centre of his or her hometown in similar attire.

We should also consider charging those in high positions with dereliction of duty which often fuels and hides corruption.  Why should someone be asked to source money or the execution of a project for us when we pay so many competent officials in the Ministries of Finance, Works and Housing, Attorney-General’s office and Foreign Affairs etc. to do that work for us? 

The one who went outside the establishment and landed us in unnecessary expenditure should be charged with dereliction of duty and with causing grievous financial loss to the state.

To deal with corruption, we should clarify our procedures and make it clear who takes the decision.  

Corruption breeds in a system of confused direction and lack of clarity as to who takes the decision.  

In colonial days and early independence times, even the minor government auditor irradiated waves of financial probity when he entered a state establishment.  

It was some disgrace to receive even a minor query from him.  When did corruption become so rampant? What fuels it? And how do we combat and eradicate it? 

As indicated, history should be a guide.  We should find out what happened not long ago.  Moreover, we should question some aspects of our culture such as the expectation of gratitude in a material way.  

We should also examine the punishment we give to those found guilty of corruption.