THE ROLE OF THE CHURCHES IN COMBATTING CORRUPTION AMONG POLITICAL LEADERS
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Corruption: A Historical Overview in Nigeria
The word “corruption” has become a household word in the minds of an average Nigerian, because of its endless and constant spreading and its stability in any government in Nigeria, which to finding its solution has been difficult according to Amujiri (2015). Okoye (2012) referred to it as a phenomenon that has survived from one historical epoch to another in different forms. Amujiri continued that corruption has been described as “a living stone, which lives for ages”. Thovoethin, (2003) said that Nigeria’s post-independence history had been overshadowed by the depredations of a series of corrupt, abusive and unaccountable governments. He said that the basic contours of Nigeria’s political history is simply wholly and squarely the history of corruption and corrupt leadership; that Public office, be it political, bureaucratic or judicial, are nolonger held in trust. An occupant of any of these positions is expected to go into it with clean hands and goes out in a similar manner. But, this becomes impossible in the face of endemic corruption. Robinson, (1998) quipped that corruption has played a major role in undermining political and economic progress in Nigeria.He said that this has led to the resurgence of interest in analyzing the phenomenon and the diverse forms that corruption assumes in developing countries like Nigeria under different historical epochs. Okeke, (2003) said that corruption whether in the form of bribe, fraud, embezzlement, kickback, and so on has eaten deep into the fabrics of Nigerian society.
Going down the memory lane in relation to the pattern of governance of the Nigerian State since the attainment of independence in 1960, one can rightly say that corruption has been the bane of Nigerian public administration. More specifically, since the First Republic in 1966, political accountability based on performance-responsibility, evaluation has been very weak due to the endemic nature of corruption. According to Lawal, (2006: 645), the cry against corrupt practices in Nigeria became disturbing under the Gowon administration as a result of the alarming rate of different forms of corrupt scandals. Maduagwu, (1995) said that Gowon’s regime was unashamedly corrupt to the macro; that everyone knew it and did not hide it from public gaze. His pledge to enact an anti-corruption decree like other promises was never fulfilled. And when an attempt was made to expose these evils, he suppressed the attempts with the very weight of his high office. He said that the level of corrupt under the Gowon’s regime came under public scrutiny when Murtala Mohammed became the head of state. Joseph in Aziom, (2004) said that Muritala’s regime came to power as anti-corruption government, which set up Assets Investigation Panel to probe the Governors that served under Gowon. The panel indicted ten (10) of the twelve (12) governors and subsequently had their certificates confiscated. The anticorruption crusade of Muritala also spread to the entire public service. The purge of the public service led to the retirement/dismissal of over 10,000 public servants nationwide. However, Muritala succeeded in instilling some measures of discipline, and ensured accountability in government, but it is on record that his antecedence as a corrupt army commander during the civil war generated some doubts as to his sincerity and capability to sustain the crusade. The numerous multi-million naira federal capital projects contract and so on, gave additional strength to these doubts. He concluded that his untimely death hindered the confirmation or disaffirmation of these stands.
Ikpe, (2000) said that General Olusegun Obasanajo regime that took over from Muritala, still provided enabling environment for corruption. For example, in an effort at expanding state capability and development through such white elephant projects, activities and policies as Universal Primary Education Scheme (UPE), Festival of Black and African Arts (FESTAC 77), First Lagos International Trade Fair, Construction of Permanent Barracks for Soldiers and the new Federal Capital Territory at Anambra. All these were avenues for private accumulation of wealth; and this revives the conception of policies as “An unremitting and unconstrained struggle for possession and access to state offices with the chief aim of procuring direct material benefited only his cabinet members. He also said that during the second republic under the civilian administration of AlhajiShehu Shagari (1979-1985), one would have expected that the politicians of the 2nd Republic would distance themselves from corrupt practices but the reverse was the case. It was rather disappointing that the politicians of the Second Republic would not distance themselves from corrupt practices like their predecessors. Rather they engaged in different corrupt practices of different shapes. The era was marked by gross abuses of power by virtually all political officeholders. Lamenting the scourge of corruption in Shagari’s administration, Achebe (1983: 47) declared that “corruption in Nigeria has passed the alarming and entered the fatal stage; and Nigeria will die if we keep pretending that she is only slightly indisposed”. It is in the light of the above that Ulu, (2008:1) likened corruption as “a deadly virus, which attacks the vital structures of the society, thus putting its existence into serious peril”. Furthermore, Maduagwu (1995: 19)
continued that: Ministers, Governors, party officials, supporters of all the political parties, business associates, all rallied round to share the booty. Shagari’s regime raped public wealth. But parties were also evolved in the scramble for the national cake. The parties made sure that in the states where they were in charge public funds were diverted to the parties and private accounts as subsequently revealed by panels of enquires after the overthrow of the politicians. He moved further to the regime of Shagari and said that much to chagrin, the ethical revolutions commission was an abysmal failure for the simple reason that Shagari’s regime epitomized the very opposite of ethics in governance. According to Obianyo (2003: 58) “The profligacy of that regime (Shagari’s regime) was the antithesis of the ethical revolution it put in place”.He said that the military government led by Major General Buhari/Idiagbon that succeeded the Shagari’s administration was determined to wipe out corruption from Nigeria. Various Tribunals both at the Federal and State levels were set up to probe the political actors of the Second Republic. The Paul Omu led Tribunal found most of the politicians guilty and sentenced them to jail of various terms. He said that the Buhari’s anti-corruption crusade did not go far because of the overthrow of that regime by Babangida.
Babangida administration that terminated Buhari’s administration via the palace coup of on August 27, 1985 did not show any commitment to the anti-corruption drive (Lawal, 2006: 645). Babangida was widely accused of institutionalizing corruption as a tool of political control and as much as US$12.2 billion in oil revenues simply “disappeared” under his watch (International Crisis Group, 2007:12). General Babangida’s delay or refusal to hand over power gave rise to local resistance and foreign pressure, especially in the wake of the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election. He was constrained to step aside in 1993.
Interim Government was formed, with Chief Earnest Shonekan at the head. The arrangement lasted for three months, at the end of which, General Sani Abacha took over leadership of the Nigerian government. However, before he handed over leadership, Ernest Shonekan, who was the Chairman of the Economic Vision, 2010 under General Sani Abacha informed the nation that between 1960 and 1993, Nigeria had lost N8bllion (eight billion naira) to corruption.
Lawal said that judging from the theoretical framework at which Abacha launched out for war against corruption, one would, without equivocation; commend him for his good intensions. He set up the National Orientation Agency (NOA) and the War Against Indiscipline and Corruption (WAIC).Chuta (2004: 33) said:
Despite all that General Abacha set forth as his blueprint to dealing with corruption, his regime was noted to have incurred the worst palace of corruption in the history of Nigerian. The record of corruption which surrounded him, his family connection, and his supporters submerged whatever returns corruption may have accumulated in the wider society.Indeed, corruption had a free rein in Abacha’s government, and Abacha himself become an epitome of corruption in Nigeria. Godwin Agbroko in his work entitled “Corruption: Public Enemy No.1” presented a detailed account of the recovered ill-gotten funds and property belonging to Abacha himself, members of his family as well as those of his cronies thus: In Anambra seven choices property…along with a high raised building in Victoria Island, Lagos. The cash recovered from him included US$625, 263, 187.19, £75,306,886.93 and N100, 000,000, together with 30 percent shares of the West African Refinery in Sierra Leone, worth $420,000 US dollars. Between Abacha’s son, Mohammed and his brother, Abdulkabir, the government recovered up to N346 million. As for Abacha’s Security Adviser, IsmailaGwarzo, the Federal Government took possession of 13 properties located in Anambra, Kano and Zaria as well as cash worth almost N400 million and $2million (Agbroko cited in Chuta, 2004;33).
Remarkably, it was the mode of General Abacha’s exit from Nigeria’s political scene that made possible the uncovering of some details about the financial plunder during his tenure of office, for there is likely to be other politicians or public office holders in Nigeria who are worse than Abacha in terms of corruption.
Lawal and Tobi, (2006: 646) said that the Abdusalam’s administration cannot be absolved from the mass looting of the public treasury. Lawal cited an instance of Christopher panel set up to review contracts; incenses and appointments made under the Abdusalam administration came out with shocking revelation. The panel found beyond imaginable proportions that though Nigeria was already neck deep in corrupt practices, the Abdusalam administration made mockery of any sense of discipline and probity and a scale that practically made saints of his predecessors. The panels report revealed that 4072 contracts cost N635.62 billion as against the N88 billion budgeted for it 1998. The panel also revealed the depletion of the foreign reserve which as at the end of 1998 stood at $7.6 billion but shrank to a $3.8 billion by May 1999. He said that despite his short stay in office, General AbdusalamiAbubakar in sheer scope beat all his predecessors in office in the game of willful destruction of the nation’s economy (Thovoethin, 2003: 108). Corruption and moral ineptitude became national ideology in Nigeria especially during the military regimes. Nigeria became objects of ridicule and laughing stock by anyone and any state who want to maintain some essence of moral decorum (Obianyo, 2003: 58-59). Chuta, (2004: 33) stated that the level of corruption in Nigeria has qualified her to vie for a top position in the world’s corruption competition.
The inaugural speech marking the commencement of President Obasanjo’s administration on May 29, 1999 was replete with sentences, which showed a serious commitment to the promotion of the culture of public accountability and transparency in governance. The aspect of the speech on corruption read thus: Corruption, the greatest single bane of our society will be tackled head on at all levels. Corruption is incipient in all human societies and in most human activities. But it must not be condoned...No society can achieve anything near its full potentials if it allows corruption to become the full blown cancer it has become in Nigeria…There will be no sacred cows. Nobody, no matter who and where, will be allowed to get away with the breach of the law or the perpetration of corruption and evil (Obianyo, 2003:59).
The content of Obasanjo’s speech no doubt will convince any cynical observer of Nigerian politics of the president’s sincerity and commitment in steering the ship of Nigeria politics away from corruption and abuse of office by pubic officers. Obasanjo within few weeks of assumption of office introduced the anti-corruption bill to the national legislature, which was signed into law on Tuesday, 13th June 2000 after rigorous legislative processes. In this, Obianyo pointed out that Corruption was identified as number one enemy of development and progress. Combating corruption was easily the number one priority action for our administrative…Corruption is a cankerworm that has eaten into the fabrics of our society at every level. It has caused decay and dereliction within the infrastructure of government and the society in physical, social and human terms. Corruption has been responsible for the instability of successive governments since the First Republic. Every coup then has been in the name of stamping out the disease called corruption. Unfortunately, the cure often turned out to be worse than the disease.Nigeria’s external image took a serious bashing, as our beloved country began to feature on top of every corruption index.
He said that despite the sycophantic and hypocritical posture of Obasanjo on corruption, it became a popular belief that Obasanjo’s anti-corruption crusade is mere rhetoric as his government and people indicted for one form of corruption or the other populated cabinet. For instance, during the first year of his first tenure, the Senate President, ChubaOkadigbo was indicted to have received N22.95m as Sallah and Christmas welfare packages in excess of approved allocation for furnishing of the Senate President’s house (Obianyo, 2003: 62-63). The National Assembly that is expected to check corruption and establish accountability became an assembly that was polarized by greed. Yet, instead of the administration to apply the full weight of the law against them as is done to other criminals, they rather merely relieved them of their posts (Adams Oshimole commented in Vanguard, Aug 16, 2000, p17).
The 2008 Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index lists Nigeria as the second most corrupt country in the world behind Bangladesh. Nigeria alone is reported to be responsible for over 30% of the incidents of corruption in Africa. The same report noted that corruption in Nigeria has accelerated since the civilian government of Obasanjo came to power. A staggering amount of $36 billion in public money was reported to have disappeared with a few traces (Fazekas and Fergusson in Bussiness in Africa, Dec.
2002/Jan. 2003: 6). Also in the 2008 Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index, Nigeria still ranked 152 out of 159 most corrupt countries in the world, while Nigeria is placed 94 out of 155 countries, in the World Bank’s 2006 Ease of Doing Business Index. Worst still, Nigeria is widely known around the world for a fraudulent activity known as the “419”. In a bid to further stem the trend of this social malaise (corruption), President Obasanjo constituted the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related Offences Commission (ICPC) in 2000 and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in 2003. Yet, corruption is still present and prevailing too at all tiers and branches of government. Ulu (2007: 108) argued that the anti-corruption policies have failed to yield the desired result of stamping out corruption in Nigeria because a criminal cannot prosecute himself.
It was on this note that Ifesinachi (2004: 1) expressly stated that “Africa’s wind of corruption wither anti-corruption policies”.On May 29, 2007 Yar‟Adua rode to power on the back of elections in which corruption, violence and fraud ensured victory for the ruling party - People’s Democratic Party (PDP). When he was sworn into office, Yar‟Adua made some encouraging gestures and stated that there must be a respect for the rule of law and transparency in government as well as zero tolerance to corruption as the watch words for his administration. In July, 2007, Yar‟Adua gave a nod to demands for increased transparency by publicly declaring the total value of his total private assert which was $5 million {BBC News Online, June 29, 2007.) The above gestures mark steps in the right direction. However, it is by his future actions that this administration will be judged, in fact, if President Yar‟Adua’s government is to succeed where its predecessor failed, deep and wide-reaching persistent reforms are needed to transform the trend of corruption, political violence and abuse that have become part of daily politics in Nigeria.
2.2 The Nexus between Church and Politics
Nigerian politics has since gone the religious lines. In the same way, it is no more hidden that Anambra politics now trails some religious denominational lines. Many events have since been pointing to this direction and ignoring it means folly while facing the facts may need more than an ordinary courage(Muozoba, 2010:1). Umechukwu (1995: 12) argued that religious politics refers to governmental use of religion to achieve economic and diplomatic benefits. He maintained that it can be an employment of religion as a way of winning political score against the government of the day, as it is the case of Northern State government of Nigeria. He saw the incursion of religion into politics and its attendant evil as the major issue that has always constituted an obstacle to Nigeria’s political integration with Religion. He says that the situation has deteriorated to the extent that many right-thinking citizens wonder whether religion has not jettisoned its primary role of ensuring peace between human beings and God, to giving way to chaos and anarchy. He believed that one sure manifestation of this problem is the incessant religious riots frequently unleashed on the nation.
He saw the threat posed by religious frictions to the political stability of Nigeria as intractable, and many attribute the conflicts to a sinister design by powerful forces to undermine or topple the government of the day. Umechukwu concluded that misapplication of religion that exists in Nigeria makes it imposseble to see the relivance of the Church in the nation building. Ekwunife (1992: 25) condemned this attitude when he averred, that once the selfish interest of these hidden elites is at stake, they sponsor the ever-willing fanatical religious group to rebel against constituted authorities and the laws of the nation.
He posited that religious rivalry in Nigeria has created an atmosphere of societal insecurity and has become an object of politics, which does nobody any good. He described it as quite unfortunate that is not uncommon to make political appointments enemies because of religious affinitive in Nigeria. Blanco (2003: 4) asserts that religion can act as both an agent to keep the status quo, as well as an agent of change and revolution. He retreated on how the Church’s supremacy through the Middle Age was a clear example of how religion can be an effective instrument to mentain law and order and to causing mayhem in the society. He illustrated from the contemporary events of the power of faith and how it can be a strong means to social changes. The black civil rights movement in the UnitedStates of America, Poland’s solidarity movement, the 1979 Nicaraguan revolution, south Africa’s anti-apartheid movement and so on.
Mayer (1996: 9) stated that, the religious order has a prominent claim over the believer and the social order of every day life, thus, extending its influence over the political domain when collective decisions concerning that social order are being made. Hence, the way the individual relates to the state and acts in the public arena are also determined by the religious order. He says that Politics is made relative to, and is validated by religion. Moyser argued that some of citizens, most visible political actions like voting or protesting may reflect the underlying beliefs values and options.
He cited another example of how religion also influences the decisionmaking process in the public sphere through law making regarding issues of education, family, sexuality or capital punishment – example, polygamy, homosexuality, inheritance, etc.that focusing on the context of developing countries and their colonial experiences, it seems that people in Nigeria tend to be more religious than being political as a result of different historical processes. He mentained that Religion is almost a political system or theocracies dominate in geographical areas such as sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia prior to European colonization. Madu (1997: 43) said that “religion is at the core of the personality, exerting a tremendours influence on the lives of individuals, whether intellectuals or the illiterate masses.” This is because of certain claims religion makes on the adherents. Religion, for instance claims to be a connecting link between man and God, who is a transcendental invisible being. This claim or assumption is made manifest when man finds himself performing some unintelligible functions in cults or worship, believing that what he is doing has some relevance in his life.
Smith (1991: 2) saw the „intrusion‟ of western ideas and western power as the marriage between religion and politics with the introduction of the complex processes of secularization of religion as it opposes between Christianity and
Islam. He said that Islam and politics cannot be separated; Islam is politics and Politics is Islam. Blanco (2003: 12) on the other hand said that the Christian Priest said; “there is a demarcation line between religion and politics. He claimed that both positions are fundamental to their religious doctrine. He said that the priests always referred to the Bible on account where Jesus proclaims that His kingdom is not of this world. In explaining this difference between Islam and Christianity,
Kukah and Falola (1996: 3) said that it is easy to understand Islam’s political nature because it was founded on politics and her political structure becomes part of the structural and architectural design of Islamic religion. He affirmed his assertion that it might be safer to assume that the Muslim view of society is a major cause of the problem of instability in Nigeria, as the effect which the other factors exert on the society are merely the result of the socio-political structure which itself is influenced by this Muslim concept of, and the Muslims‟ attitude to, the Nigerian pluralistic society.
2.3 The Nature of Corruption
There are different ways through which corruption is viewed. Notwithstanding, it has a common ground of opinion which conceives that corruption is the perpetration of a vice against the public well-being. Lipset and Lipset (2000: 16) saw corruption as an effort to secure wealth or power through illegal means for private gain at public expense. Tanzi (1998: 7) in his own view saw Corruption as intentional non-compliance with ethical and moral behaviour which aimed at agalitarian society and also a determination to destroy the set moral institutions.
Tanzi also believes that corruption occurs in every human endeavour and often difficult to observe because corruption do not typically take place in broad daylight. Ackerman (1998: 34) viewed corruption from the payments that are made to obtain a benefit for avoiding a lost of interest on the part of the payer. Such payment affects the behaviour of both payers and recipients. She went further to observe that different societies drew the line between legal gifts and illegal pay offs at different points.That in thinking about where to draw the line, one must ask what was the rationale behind the payments to such agents to underming public goals. She mentained that this is the critical element in determining what constitutes corruption. She however said that depending on how a society is organized or disorganized will go a long way in explaining whether corruption succeeds and the degree of its pervasiveness. She said that the important point is that each society must define legally what constitutes a corrupt practice or behaviour and devise ways of sanctioning it. Although she said that it is not very easy since the dynamics of corruption keeps changing not only from one society to the other but also from one historical epoch to another.
She gave an instance; the way corruption is perceived in Nigeria in the 1960s may be completely different from the way it is perceived presently. Walecki (n.d: 2) saw corruptipn as behaviour on the part of a candidate or a party that involves improper or unlawful conduct of financial operations for the gain of a political party, interest group, or of an individual candidate. Akanbi, (2001: 13) identified a long list of practices that constitute corruption. These include: the use of pecuniary advantage, gratification, influence peddling, insincerity in advice with a view to gaining advantage, less than a full day’s work for a full day’s pay, tardiness and laziness, failure to report cases of inducement to the commission. Ayikeke (2006: 39) said that corruption in Nigeria has made election results to have very little or nothing to do with the performance in office of politicians. But effective democratic processes, parliamentary systems, political stability, and freedom of the press are all affected with corruption. With regard to the electoral processes, costly political campaigns, with expenses exceeding normal sources of political funding, and the absence of adequate controls to prevent bribery or „campaign donations‟ provide room for corrupt practices (Dreher, and Steve, 2009: 68). Macrae (1982: 1) was of the view that corruption is primarily a problem of institutional weakness and inefficient public bureaucratic system. In his view, he saw corruption as a form of behaviour that results from the structural deformity of an under-developed political economy that is incapable of delineating between public trust and individual interest. He saw corruption narrowly as a negative form of behavioural pattern where an officer who is entrusted with public office abuses that office through personal misconduct or moral lapses that borders on greed, avarice or selfish desire. Macrae is more concerned with the official aspect of corruption. He fails to realize that so many corrupt practices can be unofficial and therefore does not entail somebody who occupies a public office.
Scot (2007: 3) said that even official corruption requires an element of covertness to work on a continuous basis. To him, the interesting point about corruption anywhere in the world is that it requires mutual understanding to work and prosper in it. It is not an ad-hoc and incidental affair like gift taking, which seldom happens by chance. Rather, it is an internally organized and wellcoordinated arrangement between principals and agents or patrons and clients.
Ake’s explanation of corruption is derived from his analysis of character. According to him, the postcolonial state of character molding in Africa was weak and crisis-ridden of non-autonomised. Consequently, politics becomes a kind of crude and relentless fight to gain access to state power and the spoils that it offers (Ake, 1981: 30). In his view, he saw corruption as originating from the inherent weakness of the state to mediate competing social forces. On the contrary, the state itself becomes an arena for political and ethnic conflict, rather than an impersonal institution capable of standing above and managing the incessant power struggle.
Furthermore, he concluded that the attendant politicization of development, crass consumerism vis-à-vis low productive base and the struggle for scarce resources make the state a negative unity of crooks in which collective enterprise and development is all but impossible. Consequently, he said all that matters is the calculus of force, greed and self-interest. Alatas (2008: 24) briefly viewed corruption as a situation where two people can act to increase their own pay-off at the expense of a third person. He said it does not mean that an individual cannot perpetrate the act.But the point here is that, most often, it takes at least two people to perfect an act probably conceived by an individual. Gray and Kaufmann (2008: 17) viewed acts of corruption to include bribery and extortions, fraud and embezzlement. To them, it manifests in governmental activities through the appropriation of public assets for private use and embezzlement of public funds by politicians and high-level officials.
Kaufmann’s assumption that only politicians in government are corrupt is narrow. Most often, bureaucrats provide the templates for perfecting corruption. Most corrupt practices are only exposed by bureaucrats when they are excluded from sharing in the proceeds. Hence they said that corruption in government cannot be a unilateral action. They therefore, mentioned in some places where corruption manifests itself- all facets of governmental activities via contracts, the allocation of benefits, collection of public revenues, and judicial pronouncements. That Officials involved in performing these duties partake at one stage or the other, in the abuse of the processes. This type of official misconduct as well as the rationale thereof has been vividly articulated by Klaveren (cited in Ikejiani, 1995:
139) said that
Corrupt civil servants regard his public office as a business, the income of which he will seek to maximize. The office then becomes a maximizing unit. The size of his income depends upon the market situation and his talents for finding the points of maximal gain on public’s demand curve.
Besides regarding his office as business, a corrupt power holder could engage in activities that reflect his self-interest as he uses his public office as a springboard. This point was well captured by Fredrick (Quoted in Ikejiani, 1995:129) when he contended that the pattern of corruption exists whenever a power holder is charged with certain responsibilities do a thing which is against his office functions. He said that this may be through monetary or other performance not legally provided as part of his duties and thereby create damage to the public and its interests.
Corruption, as it has been revealed, does some damage to public because the action of the public office holder or the power holder is against the public interest, which the office holder is supposed to protect by his oath of office.
Njoku (2001: 1) has identified different forms of corruption .He enumerated them to include: economic, bureaucratic, political and judicial corruption. He said that under economic corruption businessmen, multi-national companies and other corporate bodies circumvent established and conventional procedures in order to make huge profits. Those public officers who should normally and officially supervise them collude with them on agreed non-official terms.
Okoosi (1993:2) in his own view saw this type of corruption as an odeal and an abuse of public trust using official positions and responsibilities for self-serving objectives. He said that this does not usually result only in momentary gains but also employing wrong persons because of brotherhood and relation clique. For example, when the head of an organization employs or appoints someone based on personal relationship rather than merit. He said that a corrupt civil servant regards the public office as a business income. The office then becomes a household company. According to Okoosi, when public office is converted into an avenue for the maximization of income and/or property, market centred corruption has occurred. According to him, examples of this type of corruption include: the creation of „ghost‟ workers, kick-backs and commissions on government projects and purchases, illegal oil sales and auctioning of public property, ranging form cars to seized goods.
Robinson (1998: 6) classified corruption according to the number of people involved in the act. He therefore, categorized corruption into three: systematic, individual, institutional for example the police force in a systematic society could still be collecting bribe in the open. These are confined to instances of malfeasance on the part of individual politicians or public officials and are episodic rather than systematic. One can cite an instance of police toll gates in every two kilometers of our roads. He said that in some cases, there are some corruptions that pervade particular institution or sectors of activity, for example, bureaucratic corruption. This is what Robinson categorized as institutional corruption. In the third case, corruption pervades the entire society and in the process becomes routinised and accepted as a means of conducting, everyday transaction. This is what Robison calls systematic or entrenched corruption, which affects institutions and influences individual behaviour at all levels of a political and socio-economic system.
From a conservative angle Chidoka (2001: 6) categorizes corruption into two main types according to the degree of the menace. The two types of corruption according to him include petty and grand corruption. Petty corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for personal gain or for the benefit of a group to which one owes allegiance. Grand corruption, according to Chidoka involves high public officials who make decisions involving large economic rents. Gray and Kaufmann (2008: 17) identified seven factors that engender corruption. These are the value of wages and salaries, presence of strong opportunities and awareness of how to perpetrate corruption, weak measures against accountability, population manipulation, misdirection of natural resources, lack of political will and indecisive pressure. He maintained that the factors that enhance corruption vary from one culture to the other and from one political system to the other.
Nigeria presents a veritable case for understanding the connection between corruption and political malaise. Ribadu (2007: 32) gave a graphic summary of the situation of corruption when he termed the period between 1979 and 1998 “the darkest period” in Nigeria’s history of corrupt regimes. The civilian administration of 1979 – 1983 was bedeviled with profligacy, wanton waste, political thuggery and coercion. Disrespect for the rule of law and bare-faced free for all looting of public funds through white elephant projects. Ribadu continues that corrupt public servants and others in the private sector bestrode the nation, masquerading as captains of business and power brokers with tainted and stolen wealth and demanded the rest of us to kowtow before them. He said that the period of military regime was pathetic. Under them, corruption became the sole guiding principle for running affairs of state. The period witnessed a total reversal and destruction of every good thing in the country. Adesenyoju (2006:16) noted that Systemic corruption and low levels of transparency and accountability have been major sources of development failure. Illegal activities such as the Advanced Fee Fraud (known as 419) and money laundering have torn the fabric of Nigerian society.
He maintained that unconventional and fraudulent trade, misappropriation of funds, kickbacks, under and over invoicing, bribery, false declarations, abuse of office, and collection of illegal tolls, among other malfeasant practices, are the issues that ranked Nigeria one of most corrupt countries of the world. That it has also denied her its pride of place in the international community. He also said that corruption is far more dangerous than drug trafficking or other crimes because when it goes unpunished, the public losses confidence in the legal system and those who enforce the law.
2.4 Corruption and Rigging of Election in Anambra
The history of elections in Anambra is the history of rigging of election with impunity, brutality, thuggery, intimidation, maiming, stabbing, killing, snatching of ballot boxes or ballot boxes openly stuffed up with ballot papers, electoral officials reported of massive turnout of voters in areas where no voting took place at all or election results fabricated. A journey into the past in relation to Anambra’s political history will justify and validate the above propositions and claims (Muozuba 2010:3). He cited an instance from Human Right Watch interview with Anambra Political godfather Chris Uba (Human Right Watch, Feb.2007) at his Enugu residence in February 2007 has this to say:
I have been in politics from 1999, but it is now my time to produce a Governor for the State. Since 2003 I have been handling PDP party and we have been doing well and did not have any problem in the party. When he (Ngige) became Governor he started playing funny. That is where we disagree. Yet we signed an agreement before he became Governor.
From the interview, he also maintained that Ngige promised him that he would produce (appoint) six to seven state commissioners. Ngige himself would appoint the remaining. He said that the promise was that he will produce more of the commissioners while the Governor will produce lesser. He also said in the interview that he spent a lot of money to put him there but I never asked him to pay the money back. He kept on re-echoing that Ngige was trying to be smart and tried to run the government on his own. That the problem is Ngige being a politician who did not invest one naira, not even one kobo, wanted to run away with everything and not even share one appointment. He claimed that Ngige heaped blackmail upon him, which he did not tell him to give #3 billion because he knows that he does not have it. He said he was supposed to bring the commissioner for Finance, and the man who speaerheaded the campaign was supposed to be commissioner for Works. He said that he reminded him that he did not sign the agreement under duress. According to Muozuba, (2010:7) the NgigeUba saga came to an end in March 2006 when a Federal Court of Appeal ruled that Ngige’s 2003 election victory was fraudulent and threrfore null and void. The result was Ngige’s replacement with his 2003 electoral opponent from one of the opposition parties – All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA), Peter Obi (BoladeOminjo in Vanguard, March 18, 2006). It is a fact that godfatherism has turned Anambra into an epileptic State in terms governance and even made the state ungovernable! This was much more demonstrated by the unconstitutional process of impeachment against Governor Peter Obi, just seven months after he assumed office on November 2, 2006; and his deputy Stella Etiaba was sworn in. After Obi was re-instated in February 2007, his tenure was further disrupted by 2007general election, as Andy Uba was sworn-in as the governor of Anambra on May 29, 2007. All these show of political instability and crisis were as a result of the manipulations of the restive godfather in the state.
However, Andy Uba’s celebration as the new governor was short-lived. Months prior to the elections Governor Peter Obi had filed a law-suit arguing that he had been robbed of his term of office because of the years-long delay in declaring him the winner of the 2003 election. A day after Uba was sworn in as Governor, Nigeria’s Supreme Court ruled in favour of Obi in that case, granting Obi the right to serve for four years in office. Uba’s election was null and void, and gubernatorkal elections will not be held in Anambra until 2010 (See Editorial 2007, The Guardian, June 27, 2007).
Ayua (2001:21) argues that political corruption should be considered as dangerous as it transforms power into a means not of governing for the common good but of enriching those in power and/or spreading all manner of rewards among loyal supporters. The challenges facing corruption analysts begin with how to define it. Most people know corruption when they see it. The problem is that different people see it differently. The mostly commonly specified definition is the abuse of public office for private gain (Klitguard, 1991:211). The assertions made by the various scholars in their attempts to find out the elements of the definition is subject to debate and that a contention over what those terms mean is often the most important in political dimension of the corruption problem. Ribadu (2007: 30) gave a graphic summary of the situation. He termed the period between 1979 and 1998 “the darkest period” in Nigeria’s history of corrupt regimes. The civilian administration of 1979-1983 was bedeviled with profligacy, “wanton waste, political thuggery and coercion… disrespect of the rule of law… bare faced, free for all, looting of public funds through while elephant projects”. He further posited that corrupt public servants and others in the private sector bestrode the nation, masquerading as captains of business and power brokers with fainted and stolen wealth and damaged the rest of us to kowtow before them. The period of military regime was pathetic. Under them, corruption became the sole guiding principle for running affairs of state. The period witnessed a total reversal and destruction of every good thing in the country. It also reduced the “giant of Africa” to a comatose midget. They frittered away the oil bonanza on extravagant investment projects
(Ayittey, 2006:31). These culprits are presently „powerbrokers‟ in Nigeria and „godfather politics‟ seeking democratic avenues to perpetuate their rule (Skiar and others, 2006:31).
In his assertion, (Akin, 2007: 32) said that it is clear that military regimes were more than the civilian regimes as far as corruption was concerned. Hence political leaders assumed the activities in a dangerous dimension as contestant as they see their sucessors victorious in corruption. Instead, corruption continues to grow and the abuse of public office for private gain, coupled with nepotism and bribery killed good governance (Lawal, 2006: 2). Boer identifies two major issues that are affecting Church in Nigeria. “The first is corruption, which has penetrated every of society…” (Boer, 2003: 30). Eze realistically argues, however that “the survey of corruption in countries is not based on hard empirical experience and perception of those who are most directly confronted with the realities of corruption” (Eze, 2004: 1).
A critical survey of the state of things in the Churches in Anambra shows that the Church has witnessed a phenomenal growth with an attendant increase in the rate of corruption. In a countrywide survey, Emenyonu (2007: 19) explained that the Church in Nigeria has witnessed a phenomenal growth over the past 100 years while the Christian population of Nigeria was just about 176,000 in the year 1900, by 2000 the population of Christians in Nigeria had risen to about 51 million. He said that it is projected to grow to 86 million by the year 2025”. The Church in Anambra is not excluded from this growth. The number of Churches has also grown astronomically. In the big cities, it is becoming rare to find a neighbourhood where a Church is found within ten minutes walking distance. Numerous writers have commented on the growing influence of the body of Christ in Nigeria in particular and in Africa in general. Awoniyi, (2007: 11) said that with the numerical strength of Christians in Nigeria and practical living examples, corruption should not continue to thrive in the society.
The Church in Nigeria has not just grown numerically; the level of participation in the life and activities of the Church is commensurately quite high too. From experience most Anambra people can attest to this from the millions that attend places of worship for normal Sunday services, mid-week services, all night prayer meetings, retreats, and special conference programmes. External empirical validation of the level of involvement of Christians is provided by the World Survey of Values, Global ranking of the levels of church Attendance. The survey indicates that Nigerian Christians with about 89% rate attendance are the number one in the whole world (Emenyonu, 2007: 17)
With this unprecedented increase in numerical strength among the churches in Anambra, one may ask “why unrighteousness reigns”? The answers is very simple, greed, self-seeking and grab mentality, excessive quest for wealth and materialism, and other forms of corrupt practices among Church leaders and their members in Nigeria. Emenyonu continued that the number of Christians in Nigeria has been growing at a phenomenal rate; we also have empirical evidence that the people are actually going to Church and not just answering Christians without active involvement.
But Emenyonu (2007: 17) lamented that
The bad news is that while the numerical increase in the number of Christians in Nigeria is self evident, and church attendance is an all time high, it is however, unfortunate that there is no significant commensurate impact on the level of virtue and integrity in the Nigeria society. Nigeria has consistently ranked as one of the most perceived corrupt countries on earth. This has given rise to a befuddling paradox, namely; how can a people that profess so much faith and religiosity be regarded as the face of the earth.
From the above, one can see that Nigeria ranks as the country with the highest level of Church attendance on one hand and also the country perceived as the most corrupt country. The juxtaposition of apparent spirituality should jettison grotesque infamy (i.e. absurd and normally wrong behaviour, bad reputation and being a source of shame which has become a blighting hall-mark of the rise of Christianity in Nigeria. Agidimolaja (2008: 2) stated that
my problem all along has been with our so called Christians and Christian Pastors. My problem is the various interpretations of our Bible texts. My problem is our various denominations and strange religious practices. My problem is lies and fraud in the house of God. Is it not supposed to a Holy Temple? Are we not supposed to be Holy people?
He further added that nowadays, spirituality had vanished from the pulpit. Health and wealth propagation (prosperity preachers) have taken over. Anywhere you go, it is money. Ministers of religions no longer care about life after death. Life here on eath is of paramount importance to them. He said that they are the type Paul describes as “…their god is the belly, and thy glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things” (Philippians 3:19, RSV). The welfare of the flock is no longer their top priority. “God’s blessing upon them is on top of the list of their daily routine. They build mighty mansions for themselves and sit upon people’s money. All kinds of method have been used to pick people’s pockets and after words nick-named the robbery as “God’s blessing”. In fact, the evils in the Church and corruption perpetrated by the church leaders are enormous.
As disappointing as the picture exposed above, Agidimolaja retorted, “Why then should I be a member of any Church? I need not be among these wogs. I better be alone. My church is my heart and that is where my God lives.” This confirms what Ozodo cited in (Minchakpu, 2009: 2) Chairman of the Nigerian Evangelical Mission Association said earlier that: “A significant segment of the Christian church in this country is gradually but steadily departing from the basic goals of Christianity… the entire church is in danger of losing its basic direction”. He lamented that Christianity has been commercialized in the country with the love of wealth that has been introduced into the Church. No wonder the scriptures posited that “For the love of money is the root of all evils; it is through this craving hat some have wandered away from the faith and pierced their hearts with many pangs” (I Timothy 6:10 RSV). This love of money has brewed a “mercantilic Church‟.
Okafor, cited in (Minchakpu, 2009: 8) the then Secretary-General of Scripture Union in Nigeria and a Pastor of the Chapel of Redemption at the University of Nigeria, Enugu campus said that some ministers are most concerned about their own financial desires. Quite often there is an unnecessary spirit of competition and rivalry in the preaching of the gospel. They seek to be popular and cannot seriously call people to repent from sin, lest such people turn away.
In fact, he maintains that some preachers of the gospel are ignorant of the scripture and they also lack theological training that contributes to the lack of knowledge of the word of God.One must suggest that the reason why the Church has not been able to wage war against corruption in Anambra is that the gospel bearers have carried corruption alongside with the gospel. Then the sinners wondered how hypocrites could change their lives for good.
2.5 Efforts at Fighting Corruption in Nigeria.
Since independence, every Nigerian government has sought to fight corruption by devicing various means to curb corruption menace. During the first republic, Azikwe declared corruption as the nation’s enemy. During the Gowon era, The Corrupt Practice Decree No. 38 of 1975 was promulgated to deal with corrupt practices. Also reference has been to the anti-corruption crusade of the Murtala/Obasanjo regime and how it purged the public service by sacking about
10,000 civil servants in a bid to curb corrupt practices. It also set up the Public Complaint’s Commission. In the second republic of Shehu Shagari (1979-1983) was concerned about the high incidence of indiscipline and corruption inaugurated an Ethical Revolution Committee in November 1982. When Buhari became the Head of State (1984-1985), he warned that his administration “will not tolerate kick back, inflation of contracts, forgeries, fraud and abuse of office (Iredia, 2005: 6). In fact, the Buhari regime was determined to inject sanity into the Nigerian polity via its “War Against Indiscipline (WAI) campaign.TheBabangida administration (1985-1993) resuscitated the Code of Conduct Bureau established by the 1979 Constitution and proceeded to the code of conduct Tribunal in 1989 to handle corruption. He also instituted the KayodeEsho Commission of Inquiry to investigate corruption in the public and private sectors, i.e, the National Committee on Corruption and other Economic Crimes. The Babangida regime also came up with Corrupt Practices and Economic Draft of 1990. This decree expanded the definition of corruption to encompass the private sector. It also avoided unnecessary technicalities and provided stiffer penalties. However, that government did not really take issue of corruption seriously. It could actually be argued that corruption in Nigeria became institutionalized during this period (Agbu, 2003: 3).
The Abacha administration (1994-1998) at its inception declared war against corruption through the “War Against Indiscipline and Corruption (WAIC).
Also, the Sani Abacha regime came up with the anti-corruption decree of “Indiscpline, Corrupt Practices and Economic Crime (Prohibition) Decree of 1994 which was largely a replica of Babangida’s 1990 draft decree on “Corrupt Practices and Economic Crimes. Abacha in his fight against corruption jailed many people while his own loot was later seen to be more than that of all those he jailed put together. “Ironically, revelations made after the death of Abacha and the amount recovered so far from family and cronies aptly showed that the Abacha administration was against corruption was a matter of rhetoric” (Lawal, 2006: 647). Abacha set up the Failed Bank Tribunal and promulgated the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Decree No. 13 of 1995 to sensitize the nation. Even the interium National Government which lasted for three months had something to say about corruption. In the 1993 budget speech the nation was told that “we can no longer ignore the issue of corruption which is now widely believed to be endemic in our country” (Shonekan, 1993: 5). It was only AbdusalamiAbubakar who was too preoccupied with the transition to civil rule during his short tenure, which did not design his own strategy against corruption (Iredia, 2005: 7).
The civilian administration of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo appeared to have had an agenda in fighting corruption in Nigeria when he came into office on May 29, 1999. His inaugral speech was replete with sentences which showed a serious commitment to fight agaist corruption and ensconce public accountability and transparency in governance. As he was out to match words with actions, he introduced the anti-corruption bill, which was signed into law on Tuesday, 13th June 2000. He identified corruption as a number one enemy of development and progress, and combating it was his number one priority action for administration.
The result was that Obasanjo set up the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) on June 12th 2001 and mandated Honourable Justice Mustapha Akanbi as the Chairman to investigate and prosecute cases of corrupt practices. Similarly, the Government also constituted in September, 2004, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) headed by NuhuRibadu, an Assistant Commissioner of Police to give an added impetus to fight against corruption.
The tempo of the anti-corruption crusade has since been high with many top government officials as the victims. Among them, were the public officers holding sensitive positions such as President of the Senate (Wabara, A), Inspector General of Police, many State Governors etc. however, a critical question comes to mind “Can the Federal Government established an Act of empowering itself to review the finances, policies and activities of State governments and punish erring state official?” (Natufe, 2007: 9). MallamNuhuRibadu (2008: 23), the then Executive Chairman of the EFCC on Thursday 27th December, 2007 in an Interview revealed that: “Fighting corruption is an extremely difficult task, but it is a task that must be accomplished. It is a panacea for good governance … A couple of personnel of EFCC have lost their lives, but the battle must be fought and won by us”. He further explained that corruption is the reason why Nigerians are not maximizing the dividends of democracy. According to him, corruption is responsible for military take-over of governance. People take over government because it pays, it is a big reward. They see government as a place to go into, control public funds and do whatever they like with the fund. Though ICPC and EFCC never functioned without a log in the wheel of their operations.The chairman of the ICPC lamented that ministers and State Governors are major hinderances to the successful prosecution of the was against corruption. According to Akanbi (2004:1) this is “not unexpected in a country where majority of people go to accept office because of what they can take out of the oofice”. Similarly, a group described as the Northern delegates blast Obasanjo thus:
In spite of Mr. President anti-corruption pronouncements and actions, no significant success has been recorded. Rather it (corruption) has escalated beyond imagination involving officers in high levels of government. Neither the method nor the approaches used to stop corruption have worked so far. (Owete and Alli, 2005: 7). Regrettably, some officers of the EFCC are more corrupt than the people they are hunting to track down for financial corrupt practices. This is evident when eleven (II) top officers of the EFCC were sacked on 24th August 2008 (See Daily Sun, Monday August 25, 2008:1). Uju (2002:110) said that corruption is a household word in Nigeria that does not need definition. She opined that Corruption has eaten deep into all the fibrics of the nation. It has become the lubricant or the oil with which every facet of the system is serviced. It no longer carries the negative connotation it ought to under normal circumstances. Ulu said that anti-corruption policies of Obasonjo failed to yield positive results.
As Obasanjo’s administration gave way, national mantle of leadership fell on AlhajiUmaru Musa Yar‟Adua as the President of Nigeria on May 29, 2007. At inauguration, the President rolled out his seven-point agenda with emphasis on zero tolerance of corruption, respect to the rule of law and the notion of transparency as what will form the pillar of his administration. Yar’Adua inherited the ICPC and the EFCC. Within his first one year in office, none of the political big shorts or what his predecessor called ‘sacred cows” accosted, tried and found guilty of financial corruption by the EFCC. Rather, he maintained the approach of Romanization of crime. Only the poor bears the full weight of the law – a negation of his No. 1 agenda of the respect for the rule of law and due process, as well as a caricature of his posture for zero tolerance of corruption.
From the literature so far reviewed, it is a demonstrated fact that though many scholars of sound intellectual pedigree have exerted enormous intellectual energy in their conceptions and explications on the issue of political corruption in Nigeria. However, the question that borders on the nexus between the Church and political corruption in Nigeria, especially as it concerns the place of the Church in the fight against corruption has not been satisfactorily answered in the existing literature. And this apparently spells out an existing gap (lacuna) in literature. As a matter of fact, it is the preoccupation of this research to fill this gap in literature with absolute adherence to the appropriate methodological approach adopted in this academic inquiry.