Argument:
Although corruption is widespread in Africa, it is not worse of than any other
country. What makes it unique is the devastating consequences. This reflects
the forms of Clientelism in Africa. The author argues that Corruption is the
consequence of crisis and not the cause of crisis.
1. International
Anti-corruption agencies exaggerate the extent to which corruption is a cause
of crisis in Africa rather than a symptom, of a much deeper problem. They
underestimate both the depth of its roots in the very fabric of the post-colonial
state and its resilience in the face of reform measures imposed from abroad
2. Instead
of elevating corruption into a universal explanation of Africa’s ills, it is
more useful for us to see corruption as a product of other structural forces such
as dependence of accumulation on state power and nature of Clientelism as a
means of political mobilization.
3. Corruption
is thus an expression of intense factional competition. The more intensive this
competition becomes the more endemic corruption is likely to become too. The
nature of this malaise was built into the fabric of the post-colonial state at
its very inception
4. The
roots of African Clientelism were bequeathed by the nature of colonial development
and the post-colonial settlement which succeeded it. The withdrawal of European
colonialism for the most part left in its wake formally democratic states more
or less modelled on the metropolitan constitutions of the former colonial
powers. Yet the reality was somewhat different.
5. By
failing too free rural ‘subjects’ from the yoke of ‘tribal’ authorities,
nationalism ensured their continued domination by traditional authorities and
ethnic leaders rather than giving them the opportunity to take their place in
the post-colonial order as individual ‘citizens. This fundamentally
‘contaminated’ the process of democratization
6. It has
been a feature of societies in which peasant populations or migrant or
otherwise excluded communities have been mobilized or organized politically.
Yet the democratic credentials of Clientelism are ambiguous and contradictory.
If it provides marginalized people with a political voice, that voice belongs
to the relatively privileged strata and propertied classes who typically speak
for the group. If it permits access to the state office and resources that
would otherwise be denied, that access is hardly democratic
7. It
will be necessary for anti-corruption strategies to tackle the deeper problems
of which corruption is just one symptom. There is a need to de-couple Clientelism
from the corrupt appropriation of public resources, to ensure that factions do
not have direct access to state resources by virtue of their capacity to mobilize
voters and politicize identity.
Own sentence: With globalization, the international anti-corruption
organizations have developed certain universal rules on corruption such as,
what is corrupt and what is not. The problem with this is that, it is being
imposed on countries in Africa, where liberal democracies have not been
established. This may not only deter the efforts but also intensify the
prevalent forms of corruption[i]. Therefore, the international
anti-corruption efforts should take into account the post-colonial history and
the prevailing social structure of the state before promoting anti- corruption
measures.
[i] Szeftel, Morris. Clientelism,
Corruption and Catastrophe,2000. Review of African Political Economy No.
85:427-441
No comments:
Post a Comment