Political Perspective

WE understand that most diplomacy is done at the bilateral level. But that does not mean that we should not properly interrogate some of the arrangements we’ve entered into with other states, because it is quite likely that some of the ‘deals’ entered into in these ways are able to be exploited by the corrupt who have access to the detail of these contracts.

Often these deals involve purchases of one kind or another from another country, and these bring with it the risks of commissions, bribes, kickbacks or what are known as ‘facilitation fees’, since there is not unanimity on whether such are illegal or not.FOR example, the US does not outlaw facilitation fees. I am unsure of what the situation is vis-a-vis Namibia, but some countries take a dim view, while others openly pay ‘commission’ on big purchases. We need to determine where we stand in this regard and make it very clear to our civil service, private business sector and everyone else if such things are not allowed, and if they are, under what circumstances.Clearly, more often than not, such could be listed under corrupt practices. If we, for example, take the Transparency International definition of corruption as being ‘the abuse of entrusted power for private gain’ then clearly we would not permit any government officials to take kickbacks of any kind. Generally, corruption involves bribery, nepotism, abuse or misuse of power and favouritism.There are many governments and companies, which are confronted with an ethical dilemma with regard the demand for a facilitation payment to do business. This often occurs in countries where minor government employees, whose duties are essentially administrative or clerical in nature, I’ve read, demand small ‘facilitating’ payments to perform or expedite the routine functions that they are in any event required to perform. Examples might include requests for ‘processing fees’ not required by law with regard to visa, customs and other routine approvals. But then there are the ‘bigger’ fees to do with much bigger deals, and we have some examples in the here and how.We’ve also grappled with these issues in the past. Shortly after independence, our purchase of a Falcon jet came with a hefty commission. Quite who took it and how much was never really clarified, although fingers were pointed at some top Government officials at the time.I would probably be inclined to take a categorical approach against commissions and facilitation fees, but there are others who see nothing wrong. Point is, why should people, who generally haven’t done a stitch of work, get multi-millions simply for being a ‘go-between’? It is ethically clear to me that this is not on, particularly when taxpayer money is at stake.We also need to take a deeper look at some of our bilateral agreements. We must have signed many of them since independence, but what do they all mean, and do our people understand what’s at stake with these. Our bilateral agreements with China, for example, obviously have to do with giving a certain number of Chinese companies/workers, contracts and employment here, in return for generous donations towards the building of our new State House etc etc.Particularly our media need to dig deeper too when these agreements are signed. You may read (this from a Liberian newspaper):’Liberia and Namibia have reached an agreement aimed at strengthening bilateral relations between the two countries. The framework Agreement on Economic, Technical, Scientific, Cultural and Tourism Cooperation seeks mutual benefits in the fields of agriculture, fisheries, gender equality and child welfare. The Agreement also covers areas of cooperation in vocational training, industry, mining and energy, education, culture and tourism, among others..’ The agreement continues: ‘An Executive Mansion dispatch from Windhoek says modalities of the Agreement will involve the exchange of data and technical information, experts, specialists and consultants. A Joint Commission is to be established to ensure the implementation of the Agreement. ‘ But what does this diplomatic jargon really mean to us in terms of what we’re giving Liberia or what they’re giving us.Likewise, recently following the visit by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, a bilateral agreement was reached, and the signing of key accords, namely The Agreement on the Reciprocal Investment Promotion and Protection between Namibia and Russia and the Memorandum of Intention between the State Committee for Fisheries of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources of Namibia on Co-operation in the Field of Fisheries. It is said that the ‘development of natural resources, infrastructure, energy, fisheries, military-technical co-operation and co-operation in the fields of tourism, education and public health services were identified as priority areas of bilateral co-operation’ and that ‘an agreement was also reached on the expansion of Russian investments to develop and introduce new large-scale projects in the Namibian economy, in particular, mining, oil exploration and energy’.But what does it all really mean? In short, deals will be done involving, quite probably, prior access to what they involve and there are those preying on exactly such situations seeking to enrich themselves. It probably goes something like this: Government official A tells family/friend/relative B that a certain piece of land is going to attract attention soon because project C is planned there. B purchases shelf company and buys the land and, voila, it will soon be worth mega millions and a certain cabal has scored bigtime!So what we need to do, if Government is not prepared to share more with us, is to seriously sharpen up and be vigilant, and the Anti-Corruption Commission needs to research these ‘deals’ vigorously in future.