Durban 10 October 1999
Your Excellencies,
Heads of State and Government,
Cabinet Ministers, Ambassadors,
High Commissioners,
distinguished delegates,
ladies and gentlemen
Allow me to start this session by once again welcoming you all to South Africa. I am pleased to see so many experts gathered here today to discuss what is increasingly becoming a threat to good governance and the development of democratic institutions in many countries of the world. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Transparency International and the International Anti-Corruption Council for organising this important Conference and also for organising it in South Africa at this critical stage of our democratic transition and transformation.
This Conference could not have taken place at a more opportune moment in our development in South Africa. It comes at a time when we have just finished two major national consultations on how to combat corruption. We are currently in the process of putting details on a comprehensive anti corruption strategy which will include all various stakeholders in the public sector, private sector and organs of civil society. I am also aware of similar initiatives taking place in various parts of the world. Consequently this Conference is testimony to the fact that the problem of corruption is not only a matter of domestic or regional concern but a global one. It transcends national boundaries and can only be effectively addressed if we make a global effort and adopt both national and global strategies.
Corruption has always been part of human experience. It is not a new phenomenon and will certainly not disappear tomorrow. Despite its pervasive nature, corruption can be contained and its pernicious effects on social and economic development significantly curtailed. The challenge which faces all of us as we go through the various themes of this Conference is to come up with viable strategies and options which can effectively combat the otherwise rising tide of corruption in many countries of the world.
In recent years we have seen a growing public recognition and discussion of the problem of corruption. This has manifested itself in a growing number of institutions and public discussions on its economic impact and ramifications. Equally significant has been the willingness of many public officials especially in emerging economies to discuss the challenges of corruption in their countries. In one of the recent surveys conducted by the World Bank of more than 150 high-ranking public officials and key members of civil society from more than 60 developing countries, the respondents ranked public sector corruption as the most severe impediment to development and growth in their countries. What this goes to emphasise is the fact that corruption is not only a moral issue but it is also an economic and developmental issue. Corruption does not only undermine the moral fabric of society but it also raises transaction costs and uncertainty in an economy, and leads to inefficient economic outcomes by impeding long term foreign and domestic investment.
Increasingly, there is incontrovertible evidence to suggest that corruption also distorts sectoral priorities and undermines government ability to raise revenue. Invariably, this affects governments' ability to provide essential public services and goods including the rule of law. In the case of the latter corruption severely undermines the legitimacy of the State and impedes the development of democratic institutions and a tradition of accountability.
There are many causes of corruption and it will probably serve very little purpose to spend a lot of time trying to decide which one of these causes is more critical than the other since the effect of corruption irrespective of form and cause is invariably the same. Suffice to note that these causes range from a breakdown of ethical social values of society to sheer greed on the part officials entrusted with public and corporate responsibility. The situation is often exacerbated by a lack of strong institutional controls, breakdown or absence of a democratic infrastructure and lack of enforcement measures as well as the requisite political will to take exemplary punitive action against corrupt officials and agencies.
The task facing this Conference is thus an enormous one. As we explore the various strategies to fight corruption, we must also address the various fundamental economic, political and institutional causes of corruption. Addressing corruption effectively requires taking into account these underlying causes.
First and foremost the major emphasis must be put on prevention measures. Such measures must not only be in the form of providing remedies and punishment which would provide adequate deterrence, but must also seek to remove or minimise the opportunities and loopholes that make corruption feasible and indeed profitable. Thus areas for discretion must be minimised, government regulations and procedures for accessing services and contracts must be simplified and more transparent and effective mechanisms that offer speedy and effective reviews of contentious decisions should be strengthened and where necessary reviewed. Similarly, efforts to improve enforcement of anti corruption legislation using the police, ethics office or special watchdog agencies are likely to bear little lasting results, unless they are accompanied by an equal emphasis on reforming economic policies, institutions and incentives.
It may not be possible to highlight all the possible anti corruption measures that each country may initiate. Much will depend on the nature, magnitude and complexity of corruption in each State or for that matter institution. What needs to be emphasised however, is that whatever strategy is opted for it must put emphasis on selecting the key measures to be implemented, in line with a country's implementation capabilities during the first and subsequent stages of an anti corruption campaign. For example, in cases of systematic corruption one may require boldness in implementation as incrementalism is unlikely to succeed. In all instances such interventions must be guided by the need to provide practical and as far as possible country specific solutions.
Many countries have instituted or are in the process of developing national integrity strategies. The formulation of anti corruption measures is critical to any government's attempt to fight corruption. We need to move away from declarations and policy statements, and pay greater focus on the underlying causes of corruption and on mutually supportive mechanisms between the government, private sector and organs of civil society. A successful national strategy must therefore, be comprehensive and must address corruption in its substantive, structural and moral dimensions.
Secondly most of the anti corruption measures are bound to fail unless independent enforcement mechanisms are implemented to increase the likelihood of detection being detected and punished. Enforcement is a critical component of any anti corruption strategy. Investigations and prosecutions, and adjudicators must be given sufficient latitude which would enable them to carry out their functions in a transparent and independent manner. Their powers should also include lifting immunities that high level public officials may enjoy by virtue of their office as well as ability to enter into arrange-
ments for international mutual legal assistance with other countries. The latter should include the possibility of punishing corrupt individuals outside a country's territory and where possible seizure and confiscation of assets obtained through corruption.
Equally important is the fight against corruption is the need for institution building and public awareness. The public has had a legitimate interest in how public funds are being used and it is often affected by corrupt administration through either poor or highly cost services. It is thus important that the public be educated not only about their rights and complaint procedures against public officials, but also should be empowered so that they can expose corrupt officials without fear of reprisals and victimisation. To this end it is the role of the press and media generally that may need to be strengthened. This must include not only greater access to information in the public and corporate domain, but also adequate measures to protect whistle-blowers.
It is also necessary to examine critically public and corporate institutions to ensure that they are adequately resourced that they are able to function in a manner which would inspire public confidence and a sense of accountability. Indeed, we should be looking at whether informal financial management systems in our institutions are adequate and effective. Similarly, the search for institutional renewal must also interrogate the relevance procedures and ethos of existing institutions and their capacity to monitor and respond effectively to corruption.
There is often a tendency to look at corruption, and hence measures to combat corruption as the primary responsibility of government and public institutions. However, recent evidence increasingly points to prevalence of corruption in the private sector as well. Often public officials are lured by fat bribes given by private firms in order to obtain public contracts or related favours. This would certainly suggest that a comprehensive anti corruption strategy must focus on both the public sector as well as the private sector. I hope this Conference can work out mechanisms and come up with suggestions on how the private sector and organs of civil society can play a more active and meaningful role in the fight against corruption. It may be useful for example, to encourage the private sector to develop appropriate ethical codes in their business dealings to take decisive action against their members who transgress such a code.
In our fight against corruption we should not lose sight of the fact that corruption as the primary responsibility of government and public institutions. However, recent evidence increasingly points to prevalence of corruption in the private sector as well. Often public officials are lured by fat bribes given by private firms in order to obtain public contracts or related favours. This would certainly suggest that a comprehensive anti corruption strategy must focus on both the public sector as well as the private sector. I hope this Conference can work out mechanisms and come up with suggestions on how the private sector and organs of civil society can play a more active and meaningful role in the fight against corruption. It may be useful for example, to encourage the private sector to develop appropriate ethical codes in their business dealings to take decisive action against their members who transgress such a code.
In our fight against corruption we should not lose sight of the fact that corruption is assuming an international dimension. There is increasing evidence linking corruption to transnational organised crime especially in the form of money laundering, drug trafficking and related crimes. This would imply that equal emphasis needs to be placed on international cooperation especially in the area of enforcement and mutual legal assistance. It is against this background that we welcome the recent initiatives of the OECD countries in ratifying the OECD Convention against Bribery of Foreign Officials which came into force in February this year. By providing for punitive measures against corruption by public officials as well as bribery, the Convention will go along way in addressing both the demand and supply side of corruption. I am hopeful that this example will be emulated by other regional groups and that both bilateral and multilateral mutual assistance agreements will contain measures to facilitate greater cooperation and assistance between various law enforcement agencies.
Lastly allow me to conclude by emphasising one important aspect about corruption. The problem may not be the absence of clear national strategies. It may not even be the paucity of resources to implement such plans. The distributing feature of most anti corruption campaigns has been the lack of political will. For these strategies to succeed there must be a clear commitment of the political leadership to combat corruption and to take decisive action against corrupt officials. This would also imply that the leaders must be prepared to submit themselves to scrutiny.
This must be supported by comprehensive anti corruption strategies implemented by independent agencies adequately resourced and with impeccable integrity. At the same time areas of government activity susceptible to corruption must be identified and relevant procedures reviewed as a matter of priority. These are the major challenges not only for this session but for the other subsequent session in the coming four days.