Are anti-corruption measures a pipe dream for African countries?

African Anti-Corruption Day is observed on 11 July annually to commemorate the adoption of the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combatting Corruption in 2003. Corruption remains a major obstacle to economic development and continues to deepen poverty across the continent.

The Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) measures and ranks 180 countries for the perception of corruption using a scale of 0 to 100 where 0 is highly corrupt and 100 is very clean. According to the 2024 CPI, Sub-Saharan countries continue to score the lowest with 90% of countries below 50. 

For example, Equatorial Guinea, South Sudan, and Somalia scored dismally with the lowest scores of 17, 13 and 11, respectively. Seychelles, Cabo Verde and Botswana show positive progress in controlling corruption and are regarded as the region’s top performers, scoring 71, 64 and 59, respectively. South Africa, on the other hand, has shown a worrying trend, scoring 41— a drop of three points since 2019 and below the average of 50. 

Lifestyle audits 

Countries such as South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, Malawi, Namibia and Zimbabwe have adopted lifestyle audits as a tool to prevent and detect corruption. While this measure is laudable, implementation often falls short of achieving success. For instance, South Africa has prioritised the compulsory implementation of lifestyle audits across its public service by publishing a comprehensive guide in March 2021. 

By March 2023, more than 11,000 public servants had undergone these audits, according to an article by the South African Government News Agency published in September of that year. However, the effectiveness of these audits is consistently hampered by legal frameworks that prohibit the public disclosure of their findings.

A case in point is that of Gauteng Premier Panyaza Lesufi who announced recently the removal of three Heads of Departments after they reportedly failed lifestyle audits for a second time. This raises critical questions—why were these public servants given a second chance after an initial failure and why wasn’t immediate action taken the first time? In this instance, the public remains in the dark, as the audit reports have not been released for public scrutiny. 

Alternative dispute resolution 

The lack of transparency and accountability is one of the key reasons why corruption continues unchecked. It also does not help that those who shine a light on corruption are often victimised, threatened, or even killed. South Africa is witnessing a disturbing trend: an increasing number of disciplinary proceedings being instituted against whistleblowers who have courageously reported wrongdoing within their organisations. 

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms, particularly mediation, are being used to pressure whistleblowers into signing non-disclosure agreements and accepting settlement packages. This raises a serious concern: is ADR deliberately being used as a convenient escape route from accountability and transparency, particularly in cases where wrongdoing has been exposed?  

The use of ADR measures in criminal matters or whistleblowing cases poses a significant threat to justice and the protection of those brave enough to speak out.

On the surface, this may seem like protecting the whistleblower from further career damage and the often-traumatising process of traditional litigation. However, the misconduct may remain unexamined, unpunished or even ripe for recurrence. This makes it harder for whistleblowers to be protected, as their silence is bought rather than their concerns addressed. On the flip side, it makes it easier for wrongdoers within organisations to silence their critics, bury uncomfortable truths and evade accountability. When settlement agreements become shields protecting perpetrators, transparency and governance collapse.

 The predominance of lawyers serving as mediators and arbitrators is deeply troubling, especially when considering the Legal Practice Council's recent struggles in instances of misconduct amongst its members and its slow disciplinary processes. This undermines public confidence in the use and effectiveness of ADR.

Distant dream 

Despite countries such as Botswana, Ethiopia, Ghana, Namibia, South Africa, Malawi, and Mozambique enacting whistleblower protection laws, the reality paints a grim picture. These countries continue to struggle with effectively safeguarding those who expose wrongdoing. 

A glaring example is the case of Biswick Kaswaswa, a Malawian chartered accountant and former Financial Manager at Trinity Energy Company Ltd, South Sudan's largest privately owned energy company. According to Platform to Protect Whistleblowers in Africa, a whistleblower protection support organisation, Kaswaswa faced severe retaliation after reporting the company’s lack of financial management regulations and policies shortly after his appointment in 2018. His ordeal included forced dismissal, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and being driven into hiding. 

South Africa is no exception. Since the release of the State Capture Report in 2022, whistleblowers who bravely testified have received virtually no protection. The vast majority, if not all, are currently unemployed. 

This situation begs the following critical questions: What impact did the State Capture Report and the courageous testimonies of these whistleblowers have if South Africa continues to drag its feet on amending crucial legislation? If whistleblower protection is genuinely considered a crucial mechanism in the fight against corruption, why have no interim measures been implemented to address the plight of former and current whistleblowers? The prolonged delay by the State in amending whistleblower laws not only perpetuates a climate of fear but also undermines the very integrity of its anti-corruption efforts.

In conclusion, while there are efforts in addressing corruption, the effectiveness of these anti-corruption measures hinges on more than just policy formulation. The persistent challenge lies in implementation and consequences for those implicated in wrongdoing. 

The vision of a thriving Africa, where fields are green, communities flourish, state institutions operate with independence, integrity and efficiency, law enforcement vigorously combats corruption and does not participate in it, and whistleblowers are truly protected, feels like a distant dream. Quite frankly, without serious commitment, we won’t make a dent in corruption.

Cape Argus