President Donald Ramotar is supposed to have told his Cabinet at one of their early meetings that he was concerned about corruption. He is also on record as having railed against corruption at the Annual Police Officers’ Conference, at Eve Leary, at the beginning of March: “Corruption must be dealt with condignly… All forms of corruption in the Force must be rooted out with much vigour.” He might as well have added that all forms of corruption in the country must be confronted and rooted out with equal vigour. But that might be too wishful a thought, too early in the life of his administration and too ambitious in the context of the new political dispensation.
We are fairly sure, nonetheless, that the President recognises that ours is a culture in need of change. He may wish, for political reasons, to ignore the accusations, by the combined opposition, of corruption in government. But, whether as President or General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), he can hardly have failed to understand – or indeed, be alarmed by – Nadira Jagan-Brancier’s plea, at the March 28 remembrance service for her mother, for the PPP to recalibrate its moral compass according to the “high standards” set by her parents.
We would like to believe that President Ramotar sincerely wants to do something about the odour of corruption that has offended our sensibilities for far too long. But we are under no illusions – nor would he himself be – about the enormity of the task ahead.
How do we go about changing our culture of favours, mutual back rubbing and gifts in exchange for expediting paperwork in the bureaucratic nightmare that is our public service? How do we reject our culture of – not to put too fine a point on it – bribery and corruption?
Is it enough to argue that to change the culture, we have to change the law? Or does this present us with a bit of a cart and horse conundrum? How will changing the law change the culture, if the problem of corruption is deemed to be endemic? Equally, how do we change the culture if there is no enforceability, no legal framework for forcing change? Or indeed, no example to follow?
For any national anti-corruption strategy to work, the rule of law has to be paramount. Crucially, though, the political will must exist to ensure that the law is upheld, without fear or favour, at the same time that an adequately-resourced strategy is implemented to strengthen our faith in the normative values reposed in the legal system.
Such an undertaking would, however, have to be a long-term project. Experience around the world has shown that it can take at least a generation, perhaps 20-25 years at best, to effect change and that the process can be rather painful.
Ways therefore have to be found to ease the pain from the beginning and to overcome the challenge of public acceptance of or public apathy regarding corruption as a way of life. It is not enough to pass new laws and enforcement alone is not sufficient.
Given human nature, it is essential to remove temptation, to remove the opportunities for corruption in everyday life; prevention is critical. But no system or procedure is foolproof and education, particularly of the young, is equally important for effecting change at every level and for gaining public support.
Since people, ultimately, are the best defence against corruption, active public support for any anti-corruption strategy has to be sought. The people have to be convinced that it is a bad thing and should play no part in their daily lives. The people have to want to change. In this respect, civil society bodies such as the Transparency Institute of Guyana should be engaged by the government as equal partners.
A good government, almost by definition, has to practise good governance. That is, those charged with governing are good because they govern within a framework of respect for the rule of law and respect for the citizenry and their views. A good government, moreover, works to remove privilege, discrimination and, above all, arbitrariness. It governs according to set, clear and universally accepted principles, not by whim. To do otherwise is to sow the seeds of corruption and to invite failure.
President Ramotar needs to move against corruption to claim the moral high ground for his party and government. By so doing, he would not be yielding to opposition pressure so much as denying them ammunition to use against his administration. And he would be setting an example for the rest of the country to follow, to change the culture.
