(A sign promoting the fight against corruption in Zambia - author's photograph)
From examinations of malpractice in South Africa’s police service, via investigations into grand larceny perpetrated by the recently toppled Gadhafi and Mubarak regimes in North Africa, to debates about new anti-graft bodies in Kenya and Zimbabwe, a cursory glance at media stories from the past seven days illustrate that corruption is rarely far from Africa’s headlines. Nor is it often absent from lists of investors’ most common complaints about, or reasons to delay, committing funds to the continent. With the business opportunity in the region proving increasingly difficult to ignore, and legislation governing Western companies’ ethical conduct tightening, developing holistic and effective corporate strategies to avoid entanglement in illegal activity has arguably never been more important.
Shifting sands, but still quicksand
Africa’s changing demographic and governance profile – generally younger and more democratic – is gradually changing its transparency outlook. Observing events in Tunisia and Egypt from close quarters and fearful of similar mass protests mobilized within their own increasingly connected societies and maturing civil society institutions, fewer governments south of the Sahara feel they can be seen to be tolerant of corrupt activity. However, as powerfully illustrated in a compelling recent book about the root causes and impacts of corruption in Kenya, the incentives that drive malfeasance including inter-ethnic competition and poor bureaucratic pay remain strong across most of the continent. The recent experiences of Nigeria, Senegal and Kenya amongst other countries highlight that all too often political movements that surf an anti-corruption and good governance wave to power all too often themselves succumb to temptation once entrenched in government.
Recognizing that transforming a vicious circle – where citizens, bureaucrats and businessmen all feel it is in their immediate personal interest to prolong corrupt practices – into a virtuous one is far from an overnight project, Western governments are increasingly seeking to rupture that co-dependency through extra-territorial legislation in their home countries. Until recently, the US Foreign and Corrupt Practices Act has been the trailblazer in this regard, ensnaring a who’s who of major corporations in its investigations – many of them with a footprint in Africa. A newer kid on the block, the UK Bribery Act, was only enacted on 1 July this year – it has raised eyebrows by outlawing smaller so-called ‘facilitation payments’ or small bribes made by UK entities – the grinding, every day variant of the corruption blight – as well as the large payments intended to skew business outcomes that usually attract the main focus of investigators.
(Percentage of users who report paying a bribe to at least one of nine service providers in the past year; source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer, 2010)
Short term pain, long term gain
The howls of protest that greeted the UK legislation – that it’s impossible to do business in places like Africa without paying bribes, that zealous enforcement of its provisions will render UK businesses uncompetitive against less scrupulous competitors – underline the sort of short-term thinking that continues to define the intractability of the problem in the region. In fact, growing numbers of corporations are finding out that taking a zero-tolerance approach even in the most murky and problematic jurisdictions does eventually pay dividends. A short-term opportunity cost – of tenders lost or delays to processes previously greased by bribes – is rapidly replaced by a reduction in demands and enhanced status as an employer and partner of choice. The contribution to overall societal transformation may be more modest, but the benefits in terms of litigation and compromising commercial entanglements avoided are generally a more than sufficient ROI.
