Since 1994 Corruption has become a hotly debate issue in Malawi and everybody including civil servants themselves can relate to stories of greed and inefficiency of public servants. The fight against corruption in Malawi in its present term is a phenomenon of the late 1990s and is linked to the country’s transition to democracy. In 1995, Parliament passed the corrupt Practices Act and in 1998, the donor-funded Anti-Corruption Bureau became operational. This policy is the direct product of the promotion of ‘’good governance ‘’ by the World Bank, IMF and the International Donor Community and indeed these efforts to fight corruption seemed to be necessary. Corruption has been described as the abuse of entrusted power for private benefits. This emphasize that corruption involves the delegation of power and a conflict between the private and the public interest. The concept of delegation, independently from the political regime, is quite clear within the public administration. In the year 2020, Malawi Corruption Index showed a decrease from 31 in 2019 to 30 points in the year 2020 which shows there is a lot to be done in order to curb corrupt cultures. It is eminent to say, forms of corruption vary; they include but are not confined to bribery, extortion, nepotism, parochialism, patronage, influence peddling, graft, embezzlement, kickbacks, involvement in organised crime, etc. Democracies may experience corruption when they lack transparency in political and campaign financing, have outdated laws on freedom of information, provide insufficient protection to whistleblowers or have unreliable media. The Corruption Perceptions Index 2019, reveals that the continued failure of most countries to significantly control corruption is contributing to a crisis in democracy around the world.
How corruption derails democracy
One of the common forms of corruption is ‘state capture’ which comes into existence in any system of governance when the state institutions, legislatures and even governing parties are owned by a political faction, small elites, a small number of companies or businessmen and women. These entities systemically channel national public resources for their own self-enrichment. They manipulate policies, laws and rules to their own advantage. Democratic institutions, laws and policies are manipulated in such a way that although corruption is taking place, it appears on the surface that outcomes were reached through ‘normal’ rules, procedures and processes. Hence, this kind of corruption undermines the power of ordinary citizens to influence decision and policy-making as decisions and policies have been bought by small elites. When corruption takes its roots into the democratic system, corrupt leaders may seek to prevent democratic checks and balances so that they can continue to remain in power unpunished. They often bypass formal institutions which are meant to enable transparency in government spending and other decisions, while oversight agencies and the judiciary may be politicised or left weak. In order to stay in power, corrupt leaders may seek to weaken democratic checks on their power, for example by constraining political competitions through electoral fraud, luring or threatening voters as well as purging the civil service and weakening regulatory agencies. The election procedure is tampered with; real sentiments of the public are curbed. Corruption breaks the link between collective decision making and people’s power to influence decisions normally through votes and participation, which is the very characteristic that defines democracy. The increased corruption leads to declining trust in a system and the state. In a country with high corruption levels, the general public has no confidence in their politicians and civil servants. The public becomes cynical to the speech and deeds of all the political leaders and public officials, whether or not they are corrupt. With suspicion and even fears, the population cannot invest itself in voting, being involved in the civil society or participating in public debates. As a result, the culture of democracy begins to crumble.It is worth noting that political corruption leads to the repression of political opponents and the general police brutality upon the public and other political groups; justice is denied, and freedom is curtailed. It can even lead to the rise of dictatorship and such attacks against the courts and judiciary enable corruption and impunity and damage a fundamental pillar of democratic governance. When judicial bodies, watchdog institutions as well as neutralising bodies are captured, the rule of law turns into ‘rule by law’. As a result, the fabric of democracy is unwoven gradually in a long run, such undermines the delivery of public services, slows economic growth and stunts development. Corruption also lowers compliance with construction, environmental, or other regulations, reduces the quality of government services and infrastructure, and increases budgetary pressures on government. For a country to be a democracy, a minimum of public services is necessary. Without a good education, health and a measure of security, people’s participation in political debates is minimal. Suffice to say corruption is a loci for instability, violence and extremism. It erodes the credibility and legitimacy of, trust in and support for democratic constitutions, institutions and laws, it leads to citizens looking towards alternative governance systems to regulate their lives, whether religious and traditional fundamentalism or populism. Those marginalised because of corruption seek answers in violence, religious, ethnic and political extremism.
Proposed remedies to control corruption and to promote healthy democracy
Corruption is the biggest threat to the democratic system and culture. Therefore, necessary precautions and actions should be taken before the corrupt culture becomes normalised and institutionalised in our country. To begin with, credibility is one of the successfull measures to deal with corruption, the offenders both on the demand and supply side of a corrupt deal must be convinced that the government is serious about fighting corruption. One suggestion towards this end is to “fry some big fish”, that is to publicly try and punish some well-known corrupt people in the country. Some highly publicized trials and convictions of important officials and businessmen on charges of corruption have taken place in Malawi. However, since allegations of corruption are often used to discredit political opponents, the suggestion is further made that the fish that is fried should preferably be from your own pond. Secondly, publicity campaign to create greater awareness on the adverse effects of corruption and a clear and unequivocal official pronouncement on the desirability to bring it under control would be helpful. Ordinary citizens have a lot of first hand experience with corruption, they are a good source of information and their help and cooperation should be solicited for the successful launch of an anti-corruption drive. Once people are convinced that a sincere and genuine effort to combat corruption is underway, they will respond and extend their full cooperation in resolving the problem. Having a responsible press to gather, analyse, organize, present and disseminate information is considered vital to create greater public awareness and to provide the momentum for undertaking reforms to overcome corruption. Secretiveness has been a key factor that has enabled public officials and politicians to get away with corruption. A responsible and an investigative press has played an important role in many countries, both developed and developing, in exposing misconduct as well as in serving as a watchdog to limit corruption and preventing it from getting out of hand. The anti-corruption bodies should be created in a political atmosphere where leaders are honest, civil servants are insulated from political interference. Otherwise, the oversight bodies will be rendered useless or worse, misused for political gain.
A useful conclusion that has emerged from the current discussion and ongoing debate on the corruption issue is that corruption is a symptom of deep-seated and fundamental economic, political and institutional weaknesses and shortcomings in a country. To be effective, measures against corruption must therefore address these underlying causes and not the symptoms. Emphasis must thus be placed on preventing corruption by tackling the root causes that give rise to it through undertaking economic, political and institutional reforms. Anti-corruption enforcement measures such as oversight bodies, a strengthened police force and more efficient law courts will not be effective in the absence of a serious effort to address the fundamental causes. Of course, corruption will not disappear because of reforms. But reforms will bring it under control and minimize its adverse consequences so that the country can proceed with its efforts to become a modern, developed nation with a good chance of attaining that goal.
