The Cultural Feeders of Corruption - Fr Alberto Maquia SJ

Fr Alberto Pedro Maquia SJ

Introduction The word corruption, according to Joseph Samuel Nye (1967, p. 419) is defined as “the behavior that deviates people from the formal tasks of a public office for private interests, (...) gains or status by violating laws for such interests ”. Tevfik Nas, Albert Price and Charles Weber (1986) consider corruption as any illegitimate use of public power or authority for benefit. This is a standard definition that is widely accepted today (Svensson, 2005; Méon and Weill, 2010). Corruption as the use of public goods for private interest can take a wide range of forms, such as fraud in tenders, embezzlement of funds and purchase of votes (Klitgaard, 1998). Ignorance of the common good, lack of personal responsibility, nepotism, tribalism and greed feed corruption.

Corruption as a cultural problem Corruption is not only an institutional or eminently political problem. It is also a cultural one in which one chooses to be corrupt. Culture is the set of artistic, social, linguistic and behavioral manifestations of a people or civilization. It is observed that culture is linked to commonplace behaviour, which happens frequently and stops causing amazement. However, we should not confuse the commonplace with the acceptable, if it breaches ethical conduct. According to Lenon (2018) small acts of corruption are common all over the world, and in many African countries, they are often “praised”. These acts are a commonplace part of people’s daily lives. But we know that as rational beings people are endowed with the choice not to be corrupt. The question that arises is: What needs to be done by countries facing this cultural problem in order to have honest and credible members of the executive and the legislative who are worth electing since both the voters and those who assume to political offices share the same culture? A given society’s culture that has loopholes for corruption directly affects the political system.

Corruption and Human Choice Corruption is rooted in life flowing from human nature or as an isolated act. J Patrick Dobel (1976) points out that the unanimous agreement among theorists

about the source of systematic corruption lies in certain patterns of inequality and lack of social cohesion. This leads to decline of trust, loyalty and consideration among citizens within a state. Dobel clarifies that in the strict sense most corrupt acts require an individual’s moral choice and depend on the level of human avarice and malice. However, state corruption results from the consequences of individuals interacting within systematic and permanent inequalities of wealth, power and status. Such inequalities are always unjust and corrupt. However, the mere end of inequality does not ensure the elimination of corruption since it is part of the human condition. But generally, state and individual corruption go hand in hand. That is why the solution to this problem lies both in the moral education of the people and in their participation in the political process accompanied by greater economic fairness. Often corruption originates from financially successful individuals and their allies who operate in a porous environment. Corruption as a form of group behavior is more difficult to detect than an individual act. This is often the case in developing countries where bureaucracy reinforces the sovereignty of politicians rather than the supremacy of good administration. In fact, political corruption is largely responsible for administrative corruption, which is the use of official positions for private gain (Hope, 1987). Corruption vs Good Administration According to Calil Simão (2011) political corruption corresponds to “the use of public power for private benefit, promotion or prestige, or for the benefit of a group or class, in a way that constitutes a violation of the law or of standards of high moral conduct ”. Administrative corruption is an illegal act committed by a public official in the exercise of civil service or arising from it. This is contrary to the basic principles of public administration. Simão also says that “the act of improbity qualified as administrative (act of administrative improbity), is impregnated with dishonesty and disloyalty”. Simão (2011). According to Kempe Ronald Hope (1987) the proliferation of corruption is due to the following: a) absence of a work ethic in the public service, lack of commitment and responsibility, associated with disrespect for rules and regulations; b) poverty and inequality, forcing individuals to tolerate or even become involved in corrupt actions; c) inefficient leadership and discipline on the part of politicians, due to the weak notion of what the national interest is; d) expansion of the role of the State and bureaucracy, with an increase in the employee’s discretion, which gives room to abuse of power; e) cultural attitudes and patterns of behavior that favour traditional orientations over modern ones; f) the existence of a weak public opinion, which does not act as a counter-force. These causes result in the creation of dysfunctional systems ranging from unnecessarily raising the costs of government expenditure to exporting corrupt behavior to other institutions, which puts pressure on and influences other officials. Administrative corruption undermines public service professionalism and frustrates honest employees, affecting their performance and reducing their productivity. Caiden and Caiden (1977) highlight institutional or systemic deviations as the most important. When an organization becomes corrupt, or corruption becomes an acceptable means of transacting official business, systemic corruption dominates the organization’s way of operating, destroying public credibility and organizational effectiveness. Violation of the laws becomes the rule of conduct, and there is a growing discrepancy between the written rule and the actual conduct of employees, where violators are protected, and non-violators are penalized. Systemic corruption blocks all efforts to reform and modernize bureaucracy, leading to the loss of moral authority. It expands opportunities for organized crime, encourages violence, undermines political decisions, produces inefficient use of resources, bringing advantages to the unscrupulous while disadvantaging society. It therefore needs to be fought. Therefore, the relational structure on which corruption is based

is essentially asymmetric due to the unequal positions of the actors, which allows for abuses of power. Corrupt practices tend to benefit those who have sources of relationships that allow them to obtain benefits through nepotism. Because of the secrecy surrounding such practices, contamination is widespread. Corruption expands through the perversion of the system itself.

Towards Eradicating Corruption For the possible eradication of corruption Bayle (1970) suggests that a policy be adopted to contain the grossest forms of corruption while waiting for changes in circumstances to remove the functional utility of such practices. This is an essentially passive strategy influenced by the belief that corruption will not have harmful consequences that hinder progress.

Corruption can be eradicated by exhorting and reviving solid morals. Hence the need for the acceptance of the common good as the end of the particular persons that exist in the community, as the end of everything and the end of any of its parts (Gandra, 2000). In other words, the good of the community is the good of the individuals who make it up. The individual desires the good of the community insofar as he represents his own good. Thus, the good of others is not strange to the good itself. Ignorance of the common good as the primary particular good is a neglect of the dignity of the human person, since human dignity is not a particular good, but a common good inherent in all men. This means that human dignity is a proper good of each and every person that makes part of society. That is why totalitarian political forms involve the denial of the common good by undermining the dignity of the human person.

The understanding of the common good as the basic requirements for decent human life requires personal responsibility. This implies the maturation of the individual who is capable of recognizing one’s own mistakes in order to deal with one’s immaturity so as to create opportunities for personal and professional growth. The lack of a sense of the common good as a principle for upholding the dignity of the human person and personal responsibility in public affairs generates nepotism as well as clientelism, which comes into play. The other sequel to corruption that is most prevalent mainly in African societies is tribalism. It involves the exclusion or marginalisation of those who do not belong to one’s tribe or ethnic group. It is the instrumentalization or manipulation of ethnic identities in order to derive certain benefits (Coulon, 1997). Tribalism is evidently a phenomenon that seriously affects African societies. Through the tendency to over-value and give priority to one’s family, tribe, neighborhood, or village, tribalism blindly leads the continent to disaster. This attitude causes a person to devalue or ignore the good effort or contribution made by someone who does not belong to one’s group of preference. If Africa is to firmly establish itself on the path of development, the psychological work of cleaning the African mind of nepotism, tribalism and corruption must be enhanced. To this end, family and school based education needs to play an effective role in the promotion of morals against corruption. If education does not play its proper role as a driving force for social change, development will continue to be a postponed dream for Africa.

Conclusion In conclusion, we can categorically affirm that corruption is an evil that affects the whole of society. It affects the provision of public services as well as the social and economic development of many countries in the world, particularly in Africa. It erodes the dignity of citizens, deteriorates social life and compromises the lives of the present and future generations. The fight against corruption requires a cultural and behavioral revolution for all citizens, because societal change depends on the development of individuals that compose it. So working against corruption in isolation is ineffective. One of the main weapons in the battle against corruption is education. Only with the formation of conscientious citizens committed to ethics, morals, citizenship and honesty, can we build societies free from corruption.