Zimpapers Logo

Rudo Grace Gwata-Charamba Correspondent
Corruption, the most common problem in every modern society, has turned out to be a plague across both developed and developing nations across sectors in business, government, the courts, the media and civil society.

Actually, according to the Corruption Perception Index, two-thirds of the world are gravely affected by grand corruption with very few nations managing to register progress with anti-corruption, despite unprecedented investment in associated initiatives.

Defined as the abuse of entrusted power for personal gain, corruption is a major obstacle to both political socio-economic development and to a better future for all.

This is because it erodes trust, weakens democracy, hampers economic development and further exacerbates inequality, poverty, social division and environmental crises.

The notion can happen anywhere and at any level within both public and private organisations and can involve anyone including business people, members of the public, politicians and government as well as members of the civil society.

Professional enablers encompassing lawyers, managers, accountants and real estate agents, murky financial systems and shadowy shell companies ordinarily allow the associated corruption schemes to thrive hence supporting the evil.

Typical forms of corruption and associated behaviours encompass corporations bribing public officials to access lucrative deals, public servants demanding or accepting resources or favours in exchange for services, that ought to be free of charge, as well as politicians misusing public resources or fraudulently granting jobs or contracts to their acquaintances.

For this reason, the use of the word “corruption” is connected to terms that include “bribe” or “payoff”.

However, in reality, corruption goes further than paying or taking bribes. Although such action forms a part of the phenomenon, there are many other features that make it fairly complex and even difficult to define. Corruption also goes beyond financial benefits, to encompass gratuities of all kinds, encompassing immaterial elements such as political or professional ambitions, promotions or premiums.

The combination of the pervasiveness and complexity of corruption plus the generally limited understanding of the notion by citizens, notably the general public, makes the fight against it equally complicated.

This is because an effective fight against corruption demands clear understanding of how it works plus the systems that enable it.

The universal, continued inadequate performance by most anti-corruption initiatives, worldwide, strongly supports this argument.

Society needs to fully appreciate that corruption ordinarily hurts key institutions in all sectors, causing losses of opportunities, holding back advancement and thus making the lives of most people miserable.

Explicitly, it weakens the effectiveness of any given system ranging from individual entities to national economies and impedes development as citizens face uncertainty with respect to their disposable incomes and stifles capital accumulation, as significant amounts are diverted to paying bribes.

Besides, when recruitment becomes a question of network and resources rather than competence, capacity building for meaningful development is discouraged.

Lives may also be exposed to serious risk from the ensuing delivery of poor quality services; a situation that also further inhibits development.

Moreover, corruption inhibits citizen participation when individuals and groups lose trust in their government, compromises their freedom and the rule of law as well as the chance to enjoy a healthy environment plus a sustainable future.

Desolately, both the meaning and consequences of corruption are often not fully appreciated among many, particularly the general public with perceptions of the notion seemingly removed and unreal.

For example, individuals take for granted the fact that they may never be able to access their legitimate rights and interests without resorting to corruption.

Typical examples are the generalised perception that one cannot obtain an authorisation, from administrative bodies such as obtaining a driver’s licence, without paying a bribe or that one cannot win a court action without corrupting the judge.

Similarly, there is also a general misconception that corruption is useful for “greasing the wheels” of business; an element that needs to be fiercely tackled.

Consequently, apart from fighting the notion itself, society is compelled to also fight against the fact that corruption has been normalised and embedded into the prevailing culture.

This complicates the anti-corruption process as different strategies for the two different fights become essential.

In the same context, a distinction is ordinarily made between petty and grand corruption with the former given very little regard or even ignored. Such understanding and perception cause society to legitimise corrupt activities and thus hampering the fight against the same. Again, the reality is that corruption is corruption, whether it is petty or grand corruption, because both of them have significantly negative impact on societies.

Relatedly, some actions and behaviour, including tips to providers of certain liberal services, administrative abuse, negligence, miscarriage of justice, incompetence and conflict of interests are often erroneously regarded as corruption.

However, in reality, any action or behaviour can only constitute corruption if committed for the purpose of personal gain or satisfying personal interests while disadvantaging other members of society.

The complexity of corruption is also aggravated by the fact that the notion evolves in response to changing rules, regulations even technology thus allowing it to adapt itself and continue to thrive in all circumstances.

Accordingly, any fight against it calls for adjustment or complete change in several elements including structural systems, the way people are educated as well as the way business is conducted, also need to be adjusted or changed.

A typical and desirable example of such change in education can entail teaching, society, starting from children through to adults, hate corruption, regardless of who its practitioner is plus consistently confronting it with an uncompromising and ruthlessly attitude.

Business schools can also play an effective role in reducing corruption through emphasis on the value of integrity and ethics as well as modelling ethical behaviour.

This can include recognising and rewarding diligence, honest hard work plus demonstrating respect for rules and regulations.

In addition, providing graduates with the skills of recognising the risks of corruption to entities plus identifying appropriate mitigation strategies can prove to be worthwhile. In the long term, these graduates can form a sustained network of ethically responsible and capable individuals within society and lead by example.

Again because of limited understanding, members of society often relegate the responsibility for fighting corruption to the government or anti-corruption entities.

During the implementation of anti-corruption initiatives, they assume the responsibility to merely monitor progress from a distance.

In the process, they get excited, or even impatient about prosecutions and prison terms, for individuals, regarding the same to be the goal of anti-corruption initiatives when, in fact, the goal is a lot more profound.

That is, while avoiding impunity and sanctioning the perpetrators are essential elements, the idea is, in the long term, to foster changed behaviour as well as mould a society that fully understands and hates corruption plus building capacity to heartlessly fight it. Achievement of such a goal calls for continued, profound analysis and understanding of the phenomenon and associated actions.

Ultimately, focus is on the work processes and systems that drive corruption towards getting rid of the same, rather than focus on individuals and groups.

Because corruption is a multi-dimensional problem, it thus also demands a similarly multi-dimensional solution, comprising a variety of stakeholder groups, apart from lawmakers and enforcing agents.

To effectively promote success, these stakeholders ought to consistently coordinate and cooperate primarily because corrupt elements are always doing the same among themselves.

Moreover, the many features plus the gravity of the notion needs to be fully appreciated thus implying the essence of concerted efforts to raise awareness regarding corruption and its effects on everyone’s life plus fostering a culture of integrity.

This also entails inculcating a conviction in society that it is possible to make a difference in fighting corruption and everyone has a role to play. Such conviction can be augmented through the use of platforms where stakeholders can connect and share ideas on the continued fight against corruption.

Dr Rudo Grace Gwata-Charamba is an author, development project/ programme management consultant and researcher with a special interest in Results-Based Management (RBM), governance and leadership. She can be contacted via email: [email protected]