Ethiopia Needs CSOs to Fight Corruption: Suggested Roles
During his maiden speech, the new Prime Minister of Ethiopia Dr. Abiy Ahmed has pledged to crack down on corruption. The government has also set up committees to improve the justice system and reform the laws that hamper the active participation of the civil society organizations. If the reforms are carried out effectively, it would be a crucial milestone in fighting injustice and corruption in the country. Though the role of the government in tackling corruption is crucial, it requires the participation of different actors such as the Civil Society Organizations to effectively address the problem. Byrne et al noted that if a government works in isolation, without the involvement of the public, in fighting corruption, it “become vulnerable to unpredictable political will” (2010, 2). An eradicating of corruption is possible if the government and non-government actors work together as equal actors and partners. Hence, CSOs should involve in developing a comprehensive, participatory, sustainable and well-run anti-corruption strategy in Ethiopia.
Civil society actors play a crucial role in strengthening transparency, accountability, and ultimately good governance, especially in countries like Ethiopia that emerge from dictatorship and maladministration. Since CSOs are independent actors that represent the interest of the public, by definition, they have more leverage than the government in fighting corruption. In other words, civil society actors are effective actors in identifying and exposing corrupted officials, corruption-prone institutions, and the prevalent forms of corruption. Hence, holding the belief that Ethiopia desperately needs CSOs to win its fight against corruption, this essay aims to suggest the possible roles for CSOs in the country to effectively address the problem of corruption. The essay also highlights corruption in the country, its impact and the reform attempts in the past.
Overview of Corruption
Corruption has infiltrated every sector and institution and has become a norm in the country. The problem of corruption in the country is caused and exacerbated by a range of complex factors including; low wages, unemployment, lack of awareness about the threat of corruption, weak budgetary and financial control, low political will on the side of government and lack of confidence in the system and unity among the public in fighting corruption. According to the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index, Ethiopia ranked 107th from 175 countries in 2017, making the country among the most corrupted countries (Trading Economics, 2018). The same report also indicates that the average index between 2002 and 2017 stood at 109.65. Areas where corruption is rampant include; police, land administration and government housing, public services such as telephone and electric services, tax and customs administrations, public procurement, and licensing and issuance of permits (GAN Integrity, 2017; Tesfaye, 2007). Parastatal and the ruling party (EPRDF) affiliated endowed corporate conglomerates such as EFFORT and TIRET are organizations where corruption is rife. In addition, figures also indicate that the illicit financial outflows from Ethiopia are higher. According to the Global Financial Integrity report (2011), a Washington based research, and advocacy organization, Ethiopia has lost a total of USD 11.7 billion to illicit financial outflows between 2000 and 2009.
Impact
Corruption has been one of the reasons that hinder democratic governance and socio-economic transformation. According to Tesfaye (2007), corruption has been the primary cause that undermined the legitimacy of the former two regimes, the Imperial and Derg regimes, of Ethiopia. He asserts that corruption reduced productivity, hindered development, worsened poverty, marginalized the poor, and created social unrest which eventually led to the fall of both regimes. Admittedly, corruption has also been the root cause of the recent political and economic crisis and the ensuing violent antigovernmental protest across the various regions of Ethiopia. The violence culminated in the transfer of power from the former PM Haile Mariam Desalegn’s to the incumbent PM Dr. Abiy Ahmed.
Reform efforts
Under the EPRDF regime, government has been attempting to undertake reforms aimed at combating corruptions since the start of the millennium. As part of the large civil service reform, the regime established a federal Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) in 2001, which was later renamed as the Federal Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission (FEACC) in 2005 with the Proclamation №433/2005. The FEACC was established with objectives: awareness creation through promoting ethics and anti-corruption education; prevention of corruption offenses and other improprieties; and detection, investigation, and prosecution of corruption offenses. The regional governments have also established their own ethics and anti-corruption commissions. The country has adopted its own central and regional anti-corruption laws and ratified international conventions such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). However, on top of its limited success stories, the government led anti-corruption efforts in Ethiopia were “superficial” and remain to have “marginal results” (Asayehegn, 2017). Besides the lack of civil societies’ participation in the process, two other factors contribute to the failure of government-led anti-corruption effort:
- ACC’s lack of skilled manpower and resource constraint: the poor implementation of the anti-corruption proclamation of 2005 is due to the lack of skills and resources in different areas including corruption prevention, investigation and prosecution.
- Ineffective judicial system: the judicial system is one of the sectors that are prone to corruption. Courts lack transparency and trials are not open to the public or the media. Assignment of judges is based on party affiliation and ethnic quota system, hence decision-making favors party and/or ethnic associates.
Suggested Roles for CSOs
The roles to be played by different civil society actors such as individuals, higher education and research institutions, journalists, business associates, NGOs, lawyer associations, and the press at the local, regional and national levels should include:
Watchdog: as an independent entity, civil society actors are effective in identifying and exposing corrupted officials, corruption-prone institutions, and the prevalent forms of corruption. For instance, the press can focus on watchdog journalism to ferret out and expose incidents that involve corruption. Ethiopian CSOs should involve in watchdogging national and regional governments’ performance.
Awareness Creation: Successful campaigns against corruption depend on the awareness of the public on the cause, depth, and dire consequences of corruption. Therefore, different civil society actors could use public events like street campaigns, posters, and media reports to raise awareness or educate the public in general and public servants in particular about the damaging nature of corruption. CSOs can create awareness by having their own information center and use it to disseminate useful information to the wider public on matters related to corruption.
Monitoring and Evaluation: this involves monitoring and evaluation of the performance and the progress of local and federal governments’ anti-corruption commissions. It also involves monitoring and evaluation of government actions and decisions to prevent potential abuse of power and strengthen transparency and accountability. CSOs can track the plans, budget, and performance of institutions and projects to ensure whether they operate in corruption free environment. CSOs should be encouraged to participate to monitor and evaluate sectors or institutions that align with their respective areas of expertise. Such CSO based monitoring and evaluation enhances the accountability of officials and increases the quality of public service delivery (Gumede, 2017).
Education and Training: awareness creation and monitoring and evaluation should be complemented by education and training. Article 7.1 (d) of the UNCAC underlines the need for education and training programs to enable officials “to meet the requirements for the correct, honorable and proper performance of public functions and…enhance their awareness of the risks of corruption inherent in the performance of their functions” (UNODC, 2004). Such training and education can enhance ethical attitudes and understanding of the evils of corruption. Therefore, CSOs can work with the ministry of education for the integration of anti-corruption topics in the existing subjects including civic and ethics, human right, democracy, and good governance courses. CSOs can also engage in training officials and citizens about detecting corruption, whistle-blowing, whom to contact and the procedures to follow in reporting corruption cases. Since the youth in Ethiopia constitute a sizable portion of the population, engaging them in anti-corruption training and awareness creation should not be underestimated. CSOs should take the initiatives such as integrity camps, summer schools, and setting up various integrity clubs in different areas high schools, preparatory schools, technical and vocational schools, colleges and universities to train or educate the youth and officials about their rights, the legislation, and institutions in fighting corruption, and impact them to have a changed attitude and zero-tolerance towards corruption.
Advocacy: CSOs can advocate for stronger access to information law which will enhance citizens’ right to have access to large amount of information which will, in turn, help them to identify and expose the cases of corruption. Along with advocacy for access to information, CSOs should advocate stronger whistleblowers protection law. CSOs can also advocate for their participation in the budgeting and monitoring process of the public and private sectors. CSOs should also advocate for the application of stronger public grievance redressal mechanisms and legal frameworks in the country which will help to facilitate a quality public service delivery, redress grievances timely, and hold accountable to the responsible body for repeated failure.
Responsible role model: CSOs should first be the change they want to see in the country. They should be role models in implementing the principles of transparency and accountability. By entrenching integrity and good governance internally, CSOs can set norms and lead by example.
Building Networks: building coalition among the trio i.e. government, CSO and the private sector, in local, regional and international level helps to “increase government accountability and transparency; to curb corruption in private sector actions; and to involve civil society organizations more strongly into anti-corruption initiatives” (IACC, 1997). Horizontal collaboration among CSOs such as community groups, religious groups, media, development organization, education institutes and the partnership of the trio is an effective and sustainable means to diagnose problems, exchange experiences and create synergy from the special experiences and different perspectives of each group in the fight against corruption. Therefore, CSOs in the country can build strong networking and partnership with various stakeholders both at local, regional and international levels to stem the tides of corruption and create a transparent system effectively and sustainably.
Lobbying and proposing alternative: CSOs should not only expose corruption cases, but they should also participate in proposing new or alternative anti-corruption policies, legislation, and strategies based on evidence and sound diagnosis of the problem. Such policies must give due attention to the implementation and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, which are often neglected (UNDP, 2014).
— — — —
Asayehegn, D. 2017, April 17. Ethiopia Needs A Multi-Party Democracy to End The Crushing Impact Of Corruption. The Conversation.
Byrne, E., Arnold, A, & Nagano, F. 2010. Building Public Support for Anti-Corruption Efforts Why Anti-Corruption Agencies Need to Communicate and How. IBRD/WB CommGAP. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTGOVACC/Resources/CorruptionWhitePaperpub31110screen.pdf
GAN Integrity. 2017, August. Ethiopia Corruption Report. Can be retrieved from https://www.business-anti-corruption.com/country-profiles/ethiopia/
Global Financial Integrity. 2011. Illicit Financial Outflows. http://www.gfintegrity.org/press-release/illicit-financial-outflows-ethiopia-nearly-doubled-2009-us3-26-bln-says-new-gfi-report/
Gumede, W. 2017, September 12. Citizen, civil society and media-based monitoring and evaluation. Monitoring, People and Leaders, Policy Brief 19.
Tesfaye, S.M. 2007. Anti-Corruption Efforts in Ethiopia. Global Forum V Fighting Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity. https://www.nacf.org.za/global_forum5/CVs/111.2%20e%20Shamebo.pdf
Trading Economics. 2018. Ethiopia corruption rank. available at https://tradingeconomics.com/ethiopia/corruption-rank
UNDP. 2014. Anti-corruption Strategies. Available at
UNODC.2004. UN Convention Against Corruption. Available at https://www.unodc.org/documents/brussels/UN_Convention_Against_Corruption.pdf
