CORRUPTION AND CRIMINAL ACT IN NIGERIAN PUBLIC SECTOR

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.0 INTRODUCTION

Our focus in this chapter is to critically examine relevant literature that would assist in explaining the research problem and furthermore recognize the efforts of scholars who had previously contributed immensely to similar research. The chapter intends to deepen the understanding of the study and close the perceived gaps.

2.1 CONCEPTUAL REVIEW

CORRUPTION

Corruption is a social phenomenon that is difficult to define, and it does not have a universally accepted definition. The definition varies depending on the inclination of the scholar and perception of the concept. Andrig and Fjelstad cited in Mohammed (2013) are of the opinion that corruption is a “complex and multifaceted phenomenon with multiple causes and effects, as it takes on various forms and contexts”.

Similarly, Tanzi (1998) is of the view that while it is hard to define corruption, the crisis that is linked to corruption is not difficult to identify. The United Nations Global Programme Against Corruption (GPAC) defines political corruption as the “abuse of power for private gain.” In a similar vein, TI also put forward a lucid definition of the concept as “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain.” Waziri (2010) views corruption as a pervasion or a change from the generally accepted law or rules for personal benefit. Azelama (2002) defines corruption as any action or omission enacted by a member of an organization, which is against the rules, regulations, norms, and ethics of the organization, and the purpose is to meet the selfish end of the member at the detriment of the organization.

The World Bank (World Bank Independent Evaluation Group, 2006) defines corruption as “the abuse of office for private gains.” Public office is abused for private gain when an official accepts, solicits, or extorts a bribe. Agbu (2003) observes that public office can be abused for selfish gain even if bribery does not take place. This implies that political corruption could be defined in the form of patronage, election rigging, and voters register manipulation, favoritism in the award of contract, procurement scam, tribalism and nepotism in recruitment and promotion, unfair punishment/sanctions for public officials.

The utility of corruption both as a concept and as a phenomenon is in contest. That is, it is a contested concept that takes varied forms. What is universal is that at least two (2) elements will be involved and the intent is to satisfy pecuniary or selfish interests either directly or indirectly. Corruption is a global phenomenon, and has been with all kinds of societies; be it Advanced, Primitive, Modern or Traditional, as a global scourge. It is a universal phenomenon which presents itself in different colourations and dimensions and,wide spread in terms of coverage. The concept attracts different meanings from different people particularly the social scientists. Thence, its implications for different geo-political zones of the international community constitute a moot point. Corruption like most concepts in social sciences is classified into the group of concept described by Gallie as highly contestable concepts. Thus, the definition that may be attached can be dissected and restricted. Onigu Otite defined corruption as “the perversion of integrity or affairs through bribery, favour, or moral depravity... societal impurity” (cited in Okafor, 2009). Lipset and Lenz (2000) define corruption as an “effort to secure wealth or power through illegal means for private gain at public expense” (Fagbadebo, 2007).

Corruption, according to Nkom (1982) is the perversion of public affairs for private advantage. Nkom was also of the view that corruption includes bribery or the use of unauthorized rewards to influence people in position of authority either to act or refuse to act in ways beneficial to the private advantage of the giver and then that of the receiver. It includes the misappropriation of public funds and resources for private gains, nepotism etc. In a similar vein, Doig (1996) described corruption as, the use of official position, resources or facilities for personal advantage, or possible conflict of interest between public position and private benefit. This involves misconduct by public officials and usually covered by a variety of internal regulations (Public Service Rules and Extant Rules). From the above, it is common to find people referring to corruption as the perversion of public affairs for private advancement. Therefore, corruption in this sense includes bribery, kickback, misappropriation, misapplication or the use of ones position to gain an undue advantage. Thus, any transaction which violates the duty of a public office holder and aimed at acquiring or amassing resources illegally for personal advancement and self gratification is seen as an act of corruption. Put differently, any intentional deviant behaviour for personal fore deal is a corrupt act. Gibbons (1976) sees corruption in terms of politics and believes that political corruption has to do with the way public office forsakes public interest measured in terms of mass opinion in order to ensure that some form of political advantage are achieved at the expense of public interest. A more encompassing description of corruption was given by Akindele (1995) who opined that corruption is a socio-political, economic and moral malaise that is usually holistically permeates all the nerves of any society.

The concept of corruption, as observed by Akindele (1995), has ideological, moral, cultural and intellectual discourse. Another simple, uncomplicated and encompassing definition of corruption that is found to be useful is the one that sees the phenomenon as the acquisition of that personal benefits which one (as a member of society not public official alone) is not entitled to (Salawu, 2007). Corruption, seen from this perspective therefore represents a departure from what the society considers as correct procedures in exchange of goods and services on the part of everybody that makes up the society. The implication is that corruption is seen in various societies from the perspective of the prescribed social life of the people. The proposition is that, while some societies speak of corruption mainly in terms of illegal acquisition of material resources or benefits, others tend to broaden it by attaching social and moral values to it (Metiboba, 1996). The deduction from above is that what someone regards as a corrupt act is seen differently by another person. The 1999 and other previous constitutions established a code of conduct for public officers and made it a political objective for the state to abolish all corrupt practices associated with abuse of power. However, it does not define corruption or give a list of acts that will amount to corruption. It has also been observed that the statutory criminal laws, the criminal and penal codes, do not define corruption. The Independent Corrupt Practices (and other related offences) Commission (ICPC) Act 2000, and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act 2004 have now broadened the definition of corruption. The EFCC act empowers the commission to investigate, prevent and prosecute offenders who engage in: Money laundering, embezzlement, bribery, looting and any form of corrupt practices, illegal arms deal, smuggling, human trafficking, and child labour, illegal oil bunkering, illegal mining, tax evasion, foreign exchange malpractices including counterfeiting to currency, theft of intellectual property and piracy, open market abuse, dumping of toxic, wastes, and prohibited goods (EFCC Act, 2004).

TYPES OF CORRUPTION

According to Odekunle (1982:14), there are five (5) types of corruption in our society which are defined by the sphere or arena of special activities and integrated by the general principle of corruption.

• POLITICAL CORRUPTION

The two main areas in which political corruption is manifested are the activities connected with election and succession, and the manipulation of people and institution in order to retain power and office. Political positions and resources are scarce and the prizes of office are high. Hence, the competition for such resourcesposition involves every possible extralegal means-through corruption- in order to overcome obstacles and opposition. The 2007 election in Nigeria which was characterized by malpractice, irregularities and the subsequently nullification of the same election by various tribunals in the country show the manner in which Nigeria is corrupt politically.

• ECONOMIC CORRUPTION

Corruption in the economic and business world is commonplace. Businessmen have been known to bid for favours to any level provided the economic cost of such favours does not exceed the returns and the value made possible by such corrupt acts. In normal operation, businessmen and entrepreneurs dislike obstacles of profit-making and therefore use corrupt means to prevent the normal institutional regulation, hasten or shorten procedures.

• BUREAUCRATIC CORRUPTION

Bureaucratic corruption involves buying favours from bureaucrats who formulate and administer government economic and political policies. The areas chiefly involved are the acquisition of foreign exchange, import licenses, industrial establishment, avoidance of tax and the like. Oluwadere and Ayuda (1974) observes in this connection that “it is true that there are many situations in which people many bribe an official, thus tempting them away from the path of probity”. Ayuda argues that in some cases officials expected to be bribed for almost everything and the “worse still, they use their enormous powers of delay to force people to bribe them”. Such bribes and corrupt payments according to Leff (1964:8) are not legitimized by proper government process. Rather, they are appropriated by the bureaucrat, not by the state, and they involve subversion of government’s political and economic policies. The strength of any government and the success of its programmes depend largely on an effective implementation of its policies by bureaucrats. In this case, it becomes obvious that social development involves the efficiency of the bureaucracy and the probity of bureaucrats. Anything else is a non-rational and illogical that is Development, Bureaucracy, Efficiency and probity are central issues in the critique of corruption.

• JUDICIAL CORRUPTION

Allegations of corruption are rife against law enforcement agencies and the courts, both indigenous and modern. Judicial corruption plays on the relative position of buyers in the social structure and the use of wealth to secure police attention and bails, and even to pervert the administration of justice. In this regard, it has been alleged that some judges sell justice in our courts as marketable commodity. This must have prompted one of our legal luminaries, justices Chukwudifu Oputa to make the following declaration: Corruption is the greatest malady to affect any court system, for the court is our human attempt to attain justice through the law justice in our courts should never become a marketable commodity blatantly auctioned with the hammer going down to the highest bidder. Our judges should realize that it is not for fun that they are addressed as ‘Honorable justice’. They should also realize that justice is an attribute of God Himself, Ogiri (2004:14) in Anyebe (2007:58). In recognition of this fact Olufokunbi (1962) observed that “it would be alarming because unconsciously we still realize that corruption should not spread on a large scale into the administration of justice”. It would be tragic for the nation if such a corrective institution becomes polluted.

• MORAL CORRUPTION

The anonymity in contemporary societies, particularly in urban and cosmopolitan centres, has worsened, or some cases only created condition which favour moral depravity. The desire for employment, the wish to show wealth through the acquisition of women, the flamboyant demonstration of individual materialistic possessions in the midst of social poverty, the exploitation of man by man-the powerless poor by the powerful rich, etc, all belong to the types of moral corruption. The implication of criticism here is that the possession of wealth is right only when it is employed to serve the needs of society and its members. Lust, incest, avarice and covetousness, etc are abhorred in the society. In this regards Otite (1982) observed that ‘there is so much self-interest and greed in our society that the political rulers and top bureaucrats flout public moral code, and indeed our top elite are generally morally vulnerable”. This bring to mind the immoral act demonstrated in the Ministry of Health by the two ministers and top bureaucrats in the ministry regarding the unspent N00 million that was to be paid back to government account.

FORMS OF CORRUPTION IN NIGERIAN PUBLIC SECTOR

Although political corruption is perceived differently from one territory and geographical location to another, the following behaviors are regarded as forms of political corruption in Nigeria: acceptance of gratification; succumbing to inducement and undue influence; embezzlement; conflict of interests, for example, the award of contracts by pubic office holders to cronies, family members, and personally held companies; bribery; fraud; nepotism and tribalism in recruitment/appointment, promotion; kickback on contract; rigging of elections; misappropriation and conversion of public funds for personal gains; procurement scam; leaking tender information to friends and relations; diversion and misappropriation of funds through manipulation or falsification of financial records; payment for favorable judicial decisions, and so on (Azelama, 2002; Ijewereme, 2013; Waziri, 2010).

• ELECTORAL CORRUPTION

This refers to buying of votes with money, intimidation of agents of opposition parties at the Polling units, obstructing the freedom of election, and engaging in ballot snatching and stuffing (Idada & Uhunmwuangho, 2012). It involves manipulation of voters’ register, brigandage, and all manner of electoral violence leading to killing and maiming of people. It also involves multiple thumb printing on ballot papers, the announcement of votes in areas where votes were not cast, and winners of elections ending up as the losers.

• NEPOTISM

This is a highly biased method of distribution of state resources where a public officer prefers his or her relatives and family members or friends in awarding contracts, job recruitment, promotion, appointment to public positions, thereby ignoring the merit principle; this may lead to the downgrading of the quality of the public service (Amundsen, 1997; Commonwealth Association for Public Administration and Management, 2010). It also includes exemption of once relatives and friends from the application of certain punitive laws or regulations, and this may disrupt esprit de corps and trust. Nepotism provides room for “preferential treatment of one individual over another, without taking into accounts the relative merit of the respective individuals; this represents nothing but victimization of an individual or individuals” (Commonwealth Association for Public Administration and Management, 2010).

• FAVORITISM

This is a form of corruption where a public servant gives undue preference or favor to his or her friends, family, and anybody close and trusted in recruitment, promotion, and so on.

• PROCUREMENT SCAM

This refers to overinvoicing of government contracts or corruption related to purchases. That is, the purchase price of an item is inflated so that the difference between the inflated price and actual price is shared between the person who does the purchasing and the sellers or it is taken by the purchaser alone with the seller conniving. (Azelama, 2002, p. 92)

• GHOST–WORKERS PHENOMENON

This is a practice where the management of a public organization deliberately inflates the payroll by including fictitious names to get more subventions for salary. The excess is siphoned by the members of management in connivance with some members of governing councils or boards (Azelama, 2005).

• BUDGETING CORRUPTION

This is a form of corruption where management of a public organization in connivance with governing council or board minister/commissioner bribes some members of the legislature to approve inflated estimate for the institution during budgeting. In a situation where the budget is already approved, the management is expected to give tips or gratifications to the government functionaries whose duty it is to release money to the institutions (Azelama, 2005).

CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA POLICE

Indeed, police corruption is a universal problem. However, it is a particular challenge in Nigeria with an ever increasing misconduct that impacts on the development of police institution in the country. The corrupt practices of the Nigerian Police has been identified as one the most visible manifestation of corruption in the country (Ladapo, 2013) with the erstwhile Inspector General of Police noting that “corruption has come to characterise the behaviour of the average policeman” (Okiro, 2007). Accurate information about the prevalence of police corruption is hard to come by, since the corrupt activities tend to happen in secret and police organizations have little incentive to publish information about corruption (Kratcoski, 2012). Police officials and researchers alike have argued that in some countries, large-scale corruption involving the police not only exist but can even become institutionalized (Skolnick, 2002; Wang, 2013).

It is a common sight in the country for police officers to be seen collecting money from private and commercial motorists at checkpoints mounted across the country. However, beyond the checkpoints, officers of the police are in the habit of displaying their corrupt tendencies in criminal investigations and other sundry duties (Ladapo, 2013). So many crimes go un-investigated by the police where influential persons, including persons in government are fingered as suspects or where the suspects “sort the police investigators”, a slang for bribe payment (Ladapo, 2013). According to a recent Human Rights Watch report (2012), officers of the Nigerian Police often commit crimes against the very citizens that they are mandated to protect. On several occasions, Nigerians that are only making efforts to make ends meet are accosted on a daily basis by armed police officers who demands bribes, threatening those that refuse with arrest or physical harm. On a good number of occasions, the level of police brutality has been exposed through the killing and maiming of those that refuses to ‘settle’ police officers when they make such demands. Meanwhile, high-level police officers embezzle public funds meant to pay for police operations. The Human Rights Watch report (2012) concludes that in Nigeria, the police have become “a symbol of unfettered corruption, mismanagement, and abuse.”

Nigerian police officers are considered some of the most brazenly corrupt in the world (The Africa Report, 2014). Overtime, policing in the country has developed and changed, but corruption within its system has continued virtually unabated and largely unchanged in form and format. Rather, it has merely adjusted and adapted to developments in the Nigerian society. On a weekly or even daily basis, the Nigerian media is awash with reports of one act of corruption or other illegality perpetrated by the police somewhere in the country. Transparency International, a body universally recognised as an authority on corruption and adjudging the extent of corrupt practices in countries around the world, not only listed Nigeria as one of the foremost nations afflicted by this malaise, but also ascribed to the Nigerian law enforcement a contributory percentage of the activity that caused the rating.

Similarly, in a public opinion poll conducted by Centre for Law Enforcement Education (CLEEN), the police was identified as the most corrupt public institution in the country (The Africa Report, 2014). Police checkpoints for motor vehicles, where money is required to avoid harassment and delay, are common sights along major roads in the country. Oftentimes, they arrest, detain, torture, maim, and kill for bribes at their “extortion roadblocks” when their demands are not met by the drivers of taxis, minibuses, and motorcycles, as well as private motorists (Human Rights Watch, 2010). These checkpoints, ostensibly put in place to combat rampant and rising crime, have in practice become a lucrative criminal venture for the police.

As further reported by Human Right Watch (2012), people that are arbitrarily arrested for refusing to pay bribe are detained unlawfully until they or their family members negotiate payment for their release. Hence, for several Nigerians, the police are viewed more as predators than protectors. The extortion of money, frequent killing of innocent and unarmed citizens as well as cases of police brutality and threats is fast becoming a norm in our society.

It is common practice to observe Nigerian police soliciting or accepting bribe in exchange for not reporting organized kidnap, armed robbery, political corruption and other illegal activities (Okeshola, 2008). Opportunistic theft from arrestees, crime victims or even their corpses is not uncommon practice within the force. In some other instances, police officers may deliberately and methodically falsify evidence to evade conviction of criminals who have given bribe. Planting, modifying or adding to evidence on innocent poor citizens is another immoral act commonly practiced by the police (Okeshola, 2008)

It is a public knowledge that there is a perverse system of “returns” instituted by some senior police officers, in which rank-and-file officers are compelled to pay up the chain of command a share of the money they extort from the public, thereby institutionalizing and promoting extortion-related abuses. According to Human Rights Watch (2012), former and current police officers interviewed have admitted that they must pay money to be assigned to “lucrative postings.” While they are there, the officers are mandated to meet daily or weekly monetary targets for their sponsors or risk being “punished” with transfer to a posting with lower extortion potentials. In the account of a police corporal interviewed by Human Right Watch, “we do everything we can to make sure that we meet the returns demanded by our superiors, if we don’t have money at the end of the week, we will get money. We will pick someone and arrest them.” It is the belief of a good numbers of those interviewed that the “returns” are passed up to the senior ranks in the force, which makes it morally inappropriate for such senior officers to hold subordinates accountable for extortion and other abuses (Human Rights Watch, 2012).

Apart from corrupt practices being perpetrated against the public, officers of the Nigerian police also indulge in corrupt practices against the Force. Periodically, staggering amounts of money meant to cover expenses for police operations are embezzled by those expected to arrest such financial misappropriation. In spite of the huge sums annually budgeted and allocated to the police, the frequent reality is that embezzlement and mismanagement has left the police with limited investigatory capacity and government forensic laboratories at a near standstill. The lack of needed resources appears to lead many police officers to adopt torture as their primary tool for collecting information from criminal suspects. Therefore, it is not surprising for police officers to complain of lack of basic needs for their operations such as fuel for their patrol vehicles, as well as their basic supplies for investigation which include writing materials.

CAUSES OF CORRUPTION

The general framework for analyzing the causes of corruption can be discerned from three (3) levels; International, National and Individual levels (Khan, a).

• International Level-the competitiveness of the International markets, according to Khan (b), gives multinational companies an incentive to offer bribes to gain an advantage over other competitors in the system. The Siemens scandal, the National Identity Card saga and Halliburton case are some of the corruption cases involving international companies in Nigeria.
• National Level- the development strategy of the government may increase opportunities and incentives for corruption. Three types of relationships exist at this level; that is, the relationship between the government (elected and appointed officials) and the civil service; between government and the judiciary and, between government and the civil society/private organisation or individuals. What comes to mind here is, connivance and privileges. This could be when awarding contracts or giving concessions for economic reasons or granting of rights (such as privatisation of government owned businesses).
• Individual Level - This deals with business regulation, management of foreign aids, outright diversion of public resources, collection of mobilization fees without execution of the project or abandonment of projects when the amount for the project has been paid or poor execution of the project, a culture of affluent and get rich syndrome, unbridled competition between and among different classes of individual and the tendency to acquire more so as to gain advantage and retain one's position or aspire for a higher position. This explains why politicians spend a lot of money during elections period.

Many reasons could be adduced for the endemic nature of corruption in Nigeria. Some of the factors responsible for corruption in Nigeria are;

• Weak institution of government, a culture of affluent and get rich syndrome which has become part and parcel of public officials coupled with the extended family pressure, village and ethnic loyalties and, unbridled competition between and among the ethnic groups and a dysfunctional legal system.
• Lukewarm attitude of the enforcers of the law (police, judges etc) forced some officials to be corrupt because they believe they could go unpunished and get away with their unwholesome acts. Those in this group are called the sacred cows, the untouchable, the cabals etcetera. It goes with varied appellations.
• Some cultural and institutional factors could lead to corruption. For example, nepotism and strength of family values/ties are linked to the feeling of obligation. Nye (1967) was of the view that corruption is atimes caused by motivational behaviour which is a response to social pressures but which violate the set goals and objectives of a social system. In Nigeria for instance, individual rights are often subordinated to groups‟ interests and allegiance to ethnic interests is considered more important than public accountability or national interest.

Consequently, individuals who became successful in the public sector are expected to share benefits with selected few (their accomplices and associates).

• Sometimes, poor reward system, low remuneration for public servants and greed account for corruption related behaviour or actions. The reward system in Nigeria is, perhaps, the poorest in the world. Some states in the federation owed workers between two-six month salaries as at June, 2015. Yet, these members of the society are expected to be honest, productive and train their children in a most honourable manner without getting their salaries. Corrupt acts become the alternative means to achieve their objectives and make ends meet because they cannot depend solely on their meager salaries for a decent living (Obuah, 2010)

Some people, individuals or firms engage in Corruption usually occasioned by bureaucratic bottlenecks. For example, businesses are likely to pay ransom or spend money in order to facilitate faster processing of their applications or documents. Individuals frisked at police check points in Nigeria are likely to pay bribe in order to avoid wasting their precious time. Similarly, individuals who apply for passports or driver‟s license in Nigeria are likely to pay bribe to speed up the issuing process (ibid). Sometimes, the process takes several months. The money paid serves as a means of avoiding the cost of delay. This act is usually called PR.

There there exists a principal-agent rent seeking relationship between bureaucrats and their superiors, especially where such relationship can provoke contests for positions that entitle them to appropriate transfers. In addition, the absence of transparent financial institutions in an economy can serve as an impetus corruption related behaviour or transactions or activities. In the 1980s, the discredited Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) served as the conduit pipe for many Nigerian officials to launder money derived from corrupt transactions into overseas banks (ibid).

Osakwe (2004:178) has identified causes of corruption in Nigeria as follows: They are excessive materialism, bureaucratic bottleneck, poor leadership and nonexistence of social services.

• Excessive Materialism

One of the reasons for corruption in the Nigerian society is the avaricious ways in which we live. No person seems to be satisfied with what he or she has. Greed and insatiable quest for material wealth highly dominate the life of the Nigerian. Nigerians according to Okolo (1994:32) “define social success and importance practically in terms of money and material value alone”. He further noted that: A correct reading of the Nigeria character particularly from the period of the historical accident of the “oil boom” is an undeclared but clearly defined craze to amass as much money and wealth as possible with means fair or foul, for it very much matters to him the size of his bank book, his number of housing estates, the number of transport cars, how many of his relatives, children’s or otherwise are in high economic positions;, how much he spends on funerals; weddings, social parties etc All these are phases of and dynamics of acquisitive instincts as deeply rooted in the Nigerian psyche, which predispose her to corruption. Excessive materialism therefore can certainly be regarded as an important root-cause of corruption in Nigeria

• Bureaucratic Bottleneck

Bureaucratic bottleneck is a source that encourages corruption in Nigeria Corruption according to Ndubisi is used to “cutred-tapism in a rigid bureaucratic system”. There is a slow-pace of bureaucratic action in Nigeria hence making institutions of government inadequate to fulfill the demand placed upon them. There is wide inefficiency in our governmental system. What is most painful is the evidence of non-commitment in achieving the goals and objectives of governmental organizations by people who work in them. There is too much delay in prosecuting and delivering public services. Thus, if you go to some government parastatals like Nigeria Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) and Nigerian Postal Services (NIPOST) for instance, unless you are known by the workers, you can stay there all day. Even when you are served, the workers will demand some gratification. Public officials in Nigeria ask for and receive bribes and kickbacks from fellow citizens and foreigners to accelerate the pace of action by sidetracking laid down civil service rules and regulations. The observation of this fact led Emezi (1998:6) to comment thus: Corruption seems to provide an alternative means of allocation or access to decision making. This is so because where bureaucracy is both elaborate and inefficient, the provision of strong personal incentives to bureaucrats may be the most effective means to speed action. On this premise, corruption is legitimized by the faulty operation of western-style institutions and norms.

• Poor Leadership

Poor leadership is another source that encourages corruption in Nigeria. There is poor conceptualization of leadership in Nigeria. Leadership in Nigeria according to Obasi (2000:141) has largely been hypocritical”. Right from 1960 when Nigeria gained independence, the political elites be it civilian or military pursue selfish interest at the expense of the public; they have demonstrated that the struggle and scramble for power among them are for sharing the spoils of political office. Since then, every political office has been subjected to abuse. They loot public treasury with impunity. As the public observes the brazen pervasion of normative values by their leaders and their agents, they do not find any justification or motivation to cherish such values. Hence the tendency for the masses to imitate their leaders. This explains why the messenger who receives unjust wages will declare your file missing until you bribe him; it also explains why policemen extort money from the public without having any sense of guilt. Achebe (1983:10) minced no words in his categorical assertion that: Nigerians are what they are only because their leaders are not what they should be”.

SUGGESTED MEASURES OF CONTROL OF POLICE CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA

• Police leadership’s resolution to check corruption

At the organisational level, controlling corruption requires strong as well as the bottom and all points in between in the hierarchy. If the top brass are able to stamp their feet against corruption and their intentions are sincere and resolute, the change will trickle down the ladder of the force. Thereon, officers that are caught exhibiting corrupt practices should be severely punished. Once the principle of severity and certainty of punishment is applied to police corruption by the administrators, the rank and file will be deterred from such practices.

• Value reorientation of Police officers

Considering that corruption within the police has become systemic, hence, new recruits are socialised into it, it is the suggestion of this paper that a value reorientation need to be introduced into the system. This must be done with sincerity of purpose and intensity. In training, institutions of the force, ethical behaviour and decision should be rewarded, promoted and applauded because failing to make officers aware of the consequences of corruption will only serve to encourage it. This process must be allowed to have a stronghold and be intensified at police training schools, academy and staff colleges, and be totally consolidated in the larger society where perceptible and honest priorities must exist.

• Prompt and adequate payment of salaries and other financial incentives of officers

Payments of salaries and other remunerations of the police should be made prompt and consistent while other welfare packages should be made attractive to ensure high level of job satisfaction and contentment within the officers. Government should ensure that police are able to live a worthy life that guarantees the meeting of basic needs if they choose to be honest and bribe-free. It will be difficult to enforce anti-graft when salaries are delayed and inadequate.

• Transparency in posting and promotion of officers

It is public knowledge that officers engage in massive bribery to influence their posting and promotions. Consequently, officers that have paid their way through their posting will make every effort towards recouping their money as soon as possible and corruption becomes a tool for getting better return on “investment.” In addition, transfers or redeployment of staff are often used as a retribution tool against officers as a pressure tactic and to coerce officers that are reluctant to engage in corrupt practices. However, if there could be a design where postings are automatically generated by software after a given time interval for each officer, corruption in the police can be effectively combated. In the same manner, objective criteria for promotion could be developed and published so that individual judgement plays a very minor role in promotions. This will reduce the need for bribes or engage in other misconduct in order to get promotion.

• Automation of Crime and complain reporting

The present system where the recording of crime and complains of the public is left at the discretion of officer is grossly inadequate. This has contributed to the growing rate of ‘dark figures’ of crime as well as increased corrupt practices among the officers. Since the registration of complaint is the first step towards receiving justice, citizens are compelled to pay bribe in order to get their complaints registered. The use of technology to automate the reporting and handling of cases can play a pivotal role in arresting corruption associated with crime reporting by the public. Filling of cases could be done through internet and if required, detailed information can be given later on. Case status could be made available online to bring in more transparency and make the police force more accountable. This would ease the trend of complainants being asked to buy report sheets and other writing materials when they try to register their complaints.

• Operations and performance monitoring

Though, there are internal and external monitoring agencies being put in place to monitor and check the excesses of the police, independent and civil society groups should also be co-opted into the system by the government. Objective performance and efficiency indicators can be chosen and tracked to monitor the performance of the Police force. The monitoring of the performance of the police by governmental and non-governmental agencies can substantially increase the accountability of the force. This will lead to having clear improvement goals for the force on objective and measurable parameters. In particular, government should give more recognition to the activities of the likes of Human Rights Watch and other nongovernment agencies that are equally stakeholders in ensuring proper service delivery of the police.

2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

• Corruption Theory

This theory posits that the State is the stronger part in the state-society relationship. That is, the corrupted (the state or some state agents) benefits the most from corruption and the corrupter is more or less a passive actor. Significantly, the ruling elite is the strongest force in society; this elite or class uses the state apparatus as its instrument to extract based on the operation of authoritarian polities in general, and on the experience of the new-patrimonial states in particular. Put differently, the theory posits that the state is not only the strongest force in society, but also many centers of powers.

The theory also emphasizes the well-known expression that all power tends to corrupt; and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is, the more political power is concentrated exclusively in the hands of few individuals, the greater the temptation for power abuse, selfish wealth-seeking and primitive accumulation. Again, the theory posits that the ruling elite uses and misuses the power of the state primarily to safeguard their own corporate interests, at the detriment of the majority. They use violence, force and persuasion to command respect. They may use sophisticated institutional arrangements like for instance presidentialism, dominant-multi-single-party system (like the Nigerian ruling party), and the cooption of rivals in order to restrict participation and power sharing (Government of National Unity in Nigeria).

They may use press censorship and electoral frauds, established unjust laws and disrespect the laws they have made themselves, and use human rights violations like political surveillance and intimidation, imprisonment and torture, in economic terms, corruption, in particular political corruption, is only one of the many modes of economic accumulation and private appropriation applied by authoritarian rulers. The theory is also characterized by new-patrimonialism. That is, a kind of political system where there is pervasive- and patron-client structures, the non-distinction between public and private pursue and strong political weaknesses exist. In a truly patrimonial system there is no distinction between public and private, and the modern idea of corruption will make no sense because the ruler’s personal income is the same as the government’s revenue, and there is no nepotism because there are no criteria for appointment to office other than the ruler’s favour.

In the word of Max Weber (1964 ) the classical or traditional patrimonialism is one in which the right to rule is ascribed to a person rather than an office, and exercised more through the informal clientelist and nepotist practices than strong formal routes of authority, Finally, this theory is also characterized by clientelism. This is the sophisticated hierarchic network of patrons-client relationships through which the patrons grant services, positions, and public supports to his clients, in exchanges for political and material support. Patrons at different levels to build support through the extraction and distribution of wealth and prestige, constructing a pyramid of social differentiation, use these clientelist networks of reciprocities. States and local governments for instance, relate as clients to national political office holders, contractors, traders and other Administrators and others taking the roles of patronizing middlemen. These low class clients then offer electoral support, social prestige, ethno-religious support, labour and material and fiscal benefits to their patron, in return for his protection, leadership and a sense of belonging. From the level of the middlemen, the clientelist system extends all the way up to the president of the republic.

• Social Learning Theory and the Growth of Police Corruption in Nigeria

Similar to other norms and values, attitudes toward corruption are bound by context and learned by observing others. It is the position of this paper to try to locate the conditions that facilitate the growth of police corruption in Nigeria around the postulation of social learning theory. Akers (1998, 2000) developed social learning theory as an extension of Sutherland’s differential association theory to explain acts that violate social norms. Akers (2000) stated that there are four variables that function to instigate and strengthen attitudes toward social behaviour; differential association, definitions, reinforcement, and modelling. The balance of these influences determines whether one will be prone to engage in conforming or deviant behaviour. The central variable in social learning theory is differential association, or the influence of those with whom one associates frequently. Akers (1998) argues that individuals develop favourable or unfavourable definitions to deviance in interactions with their peers. These definitions are then reinforced, positively or negatively, by the rewards or punishments. This theory applies to the police as it recognizes the subculture as the primary peer group in which officers learn definitions. Alpert and Dunham (1997) opined that one of the most profound pressures that operate in police agencies is peer influence. In this vein, most researchers and police officers acknowledge the existence of a police subculture (Conser 1980). Therefore, the development of deviant subculture and in particular, corrupt practices by the officers is facilitated by the departments they work in when they are engaged. This is done through the transmitting of the beliefs, values, definitions, and “manners of expression” that depart from acceptable behaviour. Consequent upon the argument of the theory, as the subculture is already formed, a new officer that is engaged enters the peer group and he or she is exposed to models of behaviour that will influence his or her own attitudes and behaviour. Due to the fact that police officers are exposed to their co-workers much more than other people, it is likely that the officer will learn to accept and internalize the definitions shared by other officers. As observed privately by a senior police officer, “it is near impossible for a recruit not to align with a system of corruption that he is confronted with within the police if he wants a prolonged career in the force”. According to this officer, the corrupt subculture is so grounded within the Nigerian police force that constables regard bribery as a fundamental right. This happens because the subculture shared value system allows such officers the opportunity to rationalize, excuse, and justify deviance (Kappeler, Sluder, & Alpert, 1998). Alpert and Dunham (1997) maintain that since social isolation is a feature of the police subculture, officers are likely to withdraw into the subculture for support and approval. The result is that the police officer is ‘‘subjected to intense peer influence and control,’’ and this can involve the acceptance of deviance (Kappeler, Sluder, & Alpert 2001).

2.3 EMPIRICAL STUDIES

Aborisade &. Fayemi (2015) Documented evidences of endemic police corruption and its devastating effects on the rule of law in Nigeria abounds The main objective of the paper is to discuss the extent, causes and remedies to police corruption. We also examined if social learning theory can account for police deviance in the country. The basis of the discussion is from secondary sources like police commission reports, books, magazines, newspaper, and other sources. The authors conclude that general submission and acceptance of police corruption as an endemic problem that has defied solutions would not make the menace to abate. Therefore, it is suggested that a value reorientation need to be introduced into the system.

Umar (2018) examined police corruption and administration of criminal justice system in Nigeria. The duo established that the position which the Nigeria Police occupied is beyond mere protection of lives and property of the citizens. They are indeed considered as one of the major stakeholders in our criminal justice system. Under the law, they are conferred with powers relating to the administration of criminal justice system such as power to arrest, investigate, arraign and other ancillary issues thereto. However, these seem to be abused due to the influence of social evils such as corruption, favouritism, dishonesty, fraud, tribalism, ethnicity and even vigilantism. These social problems are not peculiar to the Nigeria Police alone. They are universal tendencies that existed in Nigeria but what causes worry is the degree to which this phenomena are being perpetrated in an organization considered ordinarily as a friend to citizens and due to this the citizens begin to lose hope and have no confidence in the system any more.