The Corrupt And The Corruptible: It’s All In The Family

IN 2006 the Anti-Corruption Commission was inaugurated with all the fanfare that accompanies such events. This was nearly two and a half years after the Anti-Corruption Act was passed by Parliament. Which meant the institution was left to collect dust between the covers of government gazettes for some years.

In the meantime, the corrupt deal makers were busy sharpening their knives, taking advantage of the institutional vacuum, and ready to cut and share the cake. Because right in the mid-90s corruption was already rearing its ugly head. In the wake of recent phenomenal corruption cases, some might have already forgotten about the scandals that surrounded the Katutura Single Quarters renovation project (itself a failed experiment at urban renewal because the Single Quarters is nothing but a den for alcohol, crime and sex).This speaks volumes not only about the ruling party’s sluggishness but also about our parliamentarians. There is always that lack of urgency when it comes to important national issues that need to be addressed by MPs. One gets the impression that this country has been independent for the last 100 years and all that needs to be achieved, has been achieved already (a sociological and economic impossibility). And the politicians, both ruling and opposition, are on long vacations somewhere in the Caribbean and longing for retirement. In any case, the ACC made its debut in 2006. It came at a time when the country has just inaugurated a new president – Hifikupunye Pohamba – who promised zero tolerance on corruption. He also promised the nation that all previous commissions of inquiries that his ‘Co-President’, Sam Nujoma, kept under wraps, would be made public during his term. These raised high expectations of change in that most distinctive characteristic of Namibia’s political culture, corruption. It was expected that past corruption cases would be thoroughly investigated and resolved and the first steps taken through sensitisation programmes to prevent future corruption.This was not to be. Almost five years in the Pohamba presidency, the ‘Nujoma commissions of inquiry’ remain state secrets. And some of the known high-profile cases involving millions of dollars at ODC/NDC, SSC/Avid and Defence, for example, as well as others at our embassies and other institutions, are now almost cold. The only case that was ‘successfully’ resolved was the Namibia Liquid Fuels which was hastily given a clean bill of health by the ACC. Now, if the current trail of a massive case, involving millions in public money, linking Windhoek to Beijing is anything to go by, then it’s clear the ACC is not making any dent in corruption prevention. Corruption is on the increase because there are simply too many sacred cows – the politically connected and the untouchables. Little wonder therefore that although the ACC has been in existence for about four years few, if any, major corruption scandals have been publicly unearthed and thereafter prosecuted at the behest of the commission. As long as the real big players in the corruption underworld remain scot-free, the so-called anti-corruption crusade will always remain a façade – a political smokescreen to hoodwink people into believing that government is determined to fight corruption. Of late, small fish have been paraded in courts while the real big fish and the Mafioso of Namibia’s corruption underworld, remain untouched. I just hope the present case will set the stage for a genuine fight against this national disease. This time the justice system and the Prosecutor-General must bring their part.So what went wrong? Why is it that people who have been implicated in these cases are still at large and some still in government employ? Why is the Swapo government hardly worried about the missing millions? How can a country lose N$100 million and no single person is held responsible for that and the public is quiet and happy? And the President doesn’t demand answers either.I have previously questioned the composition of the ACC, arguing that instead of having a lone director and a deputy, it should be restructured to have commissioners drawn from different disciplinary backgrounds and a balanced ethnic makeup. This is important because a closer look at most of the high profile cases shows that it is mainly one ethnic group involved in these. This is giving an impression, perhaps wrongly, that the Ovambos are mainly the ones involved. I think the problem has to do with the shifting balance in the policy and decision-making processes in the country since independence. Looking at the staffing structures, at the managerial level, of the major public institutions – parastatals, the police, army, embassies etc – are mainly staffed by one ethnic group. Therefore, it is natural that most Government concessions, licences, quotas, tenders, public procurement contracts and lease agreements would logically go to one group. If other ethnic groups where in a similar position they would probably do the same. The Omaheke tribal allegations, for example. But there might be some other cultural and sociological factors to explain this.Sometime back Martin Mwinga wrote a celebratory article praising the Ovambo’s entrepreneurial spirit and thus their economic success. According to Mwinga, the Ovambos are imbued with entrepreneurial spirit and culture of risk taking. They are said to love money and to accumulate wealth for themselves and their communities. They are also said to have understood the relationship between money and political power and they have therefore capitalised on the political opportunities created in the country since Independence to build wealth for themselves and their families. And in their quest to achieve wealth they have manoeuvered many minefields and treacherous routes and have exploited every opportunity available in the country. The flip side of these positive characteristics could also turn out to be negative. We are talking of love of money and all the material things and modern gadgets that go with it. Look at all the fancy cars bought with this ill-gotten wealth. Now given all these characteristics of the dominant group one shouldn’t be surprised at the direction the country has taken. Namibia has virtually been turned into one big business entity controlled by a small clique of politically well-connected Namibians and their friends. They treat it as an economic milk cow, and all aspects of social and political life become secondary. This is perhaps stating the obvious, because after all, this is the spirit of capitalism which is at the core of the Ovambo group’s economic and social organisation, if we accept Mwinga’s hypothesis. All these values are counter to a mindset of shared values, responsibilities and compassion.The reason why it is impossible to fight corruption here is because one is dealing with a centralised web of individuals connected to the ruling party and its businesses, to families, to tribe, to briefcase companies and to individuals who don’t know whether they want to be professional politicians, civil servants or business people – who then end up using their political positions for private gains. And to complete the picture Government introduced an open door policy with the Chinese. Mind you, we don’t bring in Chinese doctors, engineers, agriculturalists, lecturers, IT technicians but business people. This is where the underhand deals are made. All those involved in these schemes know each other – some are, of course, proxies and conduits for the big guys – so no one is prepared to say anything about the other because one doesn’t know what the other person would say in turn. It’s more or less like the ‘prisoner’s dilemma’ in game theory. So there must be many fingers in the present Windhoek/Beijing-gate pie just as there was in the Windhoek/Gaborone one, all involving millions in public money.Although the Director and the Deputy were not well-known campaigners against corruption, they are nevertheless qualified lawyers and people with integrity. Thus enormous hopes were placed in them by the public. Yet, as they started turning over the stones, it was evident that they were being impeded not just by inertia and the culture of ingrained acceptance of wrongdoing. I think they are being obstructed by the very people at the heart and at the top of the government which appointed them. Let’s face it. If Cabinet can stoop as low as to rescind an administrative decision by the TransNamib board that dismissed Titus Haimbili legally and within its mandate, what will stop it from telling the ACC not to pursue a certain case if it might implicate some of those higher up in the political hierarchy?President Pohamba should be asking himself what he has done on the corruption front before he goes on the campaign trail for another term. The only thing that he and his ‘Co-President’ have done was to organise ‘the walk against corruption’. What a smart way to placate the people. Both Pohamba and Nujoma will be remembered as having presided over a corrupt system and did virtually nothing. In the meantime, long live Namibia’s fly-by-night millionaires.