“Corruption is a phenomenon the prevention, investigation and prosecution of which need to be approached on numerous levels, using specific knowledge and skills from a variety of fields (law, finance, economics, accounting, civil engineers, etc.” – United Nations Convention Against Corruption
The Republic of Haiti, though it is rarely acknowledged, provides a vital service to Guyana. Notwithstanding our worst socio-economic, or governance performance in whichever international indices the country is headlining, Haiti inevitably, and somewhat reliably, does worse. Guyana in turn gets to walk off with the undesired distinction of being ‘second worst’ in the Western Hemisphere. On the face of it, the results of the 2014 Global Perception Barometer did, at least numerically, continue this well-established trend, with the two countries corruption performances pegged at 124 and 161 respectively, i.e. the last and penultimate spots for an otherwise good performing Caribbean. However, numbers aside, Haiti’s rank belies notable efforts in recent years to combat corruption, which has resulted in significant improvements in their ranking.
Haiti has in recent years earned widespread praise because of its efforts to combat corruption. These efforts have included concrete reforms, such as the passing of a comprehensive anti-corruption law (2014), which imposes tougher sentences for the corrupt and, among other things, “criminalizes nepotism, the passing of insider information on public procurement procedures, and sexual harassment in the process of employment.”
The new law compliments the unprecedented political will shown by the government to provide a strong institutional foundation (laws, an anti-corruption unit and a draft bill in the works to protect whistleblowers and provide journalists with greater access to information) to adequately and effectively tackle corruption. Haiti’s Anti-Corruption Unit (ULCC), which forms part of the Ministry of Economy and Finance, is headed by the capable Director General, Antoine Atouriste who takes great pride in Haiti’s success. By 2013, Haiti had gained 12 places in two years in the Transparency International corruption perceptions index.
The ULCC has also been able to demonstrate its effectiveness with reported examples such as having targeted 36 public enterprises for compliance investigations, it uncovered a widespread HTG 100 million corruption scheme in the National Office for Old Age Insurance and jailed the agency‘s executive director. In 2013 alone, Atouriste set a record by indicting or jailing 94 persons (including government functionaries) for corrupt practices.
As it turns out, the regions poorest, disaster hit country with a history of political and social turmoil, has managed to outshine Guyana’s paltry record at meaningful and measurable anti-corruption efforts. Unlike Guyana, Haiti’s government does not seem to require the general public to show them the evidence of corruption but rather, it takes effective steps internally to hold public officials to account through strengthened and specialized institutions.
Guyana’s response to corruption more closely reflects the situation within the Americas. José Ugaz, Chair of Transparency International reflecting on the regional situation lamented that: “the Inter-American Convention against Corruption was signed 19 years ago and we are concerned about the slow progress in actual compliance and the dismal performance of countries in the region in the fight against corruption. For now there is only progress on paper, which has nothing to do with the real world.
Corruption scandals destabilise countries on a daily basis and make it harder to strengthen institutions which are urgently needed to better serve citizens, eradicate poverty and strengthen democracy; corruption reinforces the opacity, impunity, insecurity and looting of states for the benefit of a few.”
Ugaz’s point adequately captures the enormous challenge we face in Guyana, as corruption after all is a failure of public institutions and good governance. As such the problem is multi-faceted – on the one hand there is the sophisticated and complex nature of corruption compounded by poor transparency and a clear lack of political will.
In addition, corruption scandals often implicate, or imply the involvement of very senior and influential members of government.
At present, the checks and balances on public spending seem to emanate from weak government systems and from the largely ad hoc news reporting, and the occasional whistleblower (National Drainage and Irrigation Field Auditor’s report of 2012, the recent expose on health spending etc). Guyana’s approach has been to propose the establishment of key bodies such as the Integrity Commission and the Public Procurement Commission, neither of which currently function. We may be witnessing the tip of the iceberg based among other things on the results of the Latin American Public Opinion Poll (LAPOP) and the Corruption Perception Index, while the US Government, has cautioned that the discovery of oil and gas in Guyana could open the country to unprecedented levels of corruption for which it is little prepared.
As such, should the institutional framework in Guyana not be commensurate with the complexity of the corruption problem?
What is the right model of anti-corruption agencies that would best respond to Guyana’s governance context? Does Guyana need another fledgling commission, or a more comprehensive and robust model to tackle corruption that would serve us well in the years ahead?
The Haiti example is significant in responding to these questions because it highlights a global trend to use specialized institutions (laws, policies etc) and agencies (units, ministries) in strengthening anti-corruption efforts. Several international treatises now require the establishment of specialized bodies, for example the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (to which Guyana is a signatory) requires the existence of two types of anti-corruption institutions:
■ A body or bodies that prevent corruption;
■ A body, or bodies or persons specialized in combating corruption through law enforcement.
UNCAC also requires that these bodies have the necessary independence, in accordance with the fundamental principles of its legal system, to enable the body or bodies to carry out its or their functions effectively and free from any undue influence. It also requires that the necessary material resources and specialized staff, as well as the training that such staff may require to carry out their functions, should be provided.
Haiti created a strong body, the ULCC, that could investigate corruption independently, combined with a legal framework that facilitates the prosecution of the corrupt.
It also has a strong civil society body, namely the Heritage Foundation for Haiti (a local Transparency International chapter) that plays an important role in the country’s efforts to address corruption. A 2013 OECD study on “International Standards and Models of Anti-corruption Institutions,” carried out a comparative overview of different models of specialized institutions and categorized them by functions:
■ Multi-purpose agencies with law enforcement powers and preventive functions;
■ Law enforcement agencies, departments and/or units;
■ Preventive, policy development and co-ordination institutions
A common practice in the developing world has been to create anti-corruption institutions because existing multi-purpose agencies often are considered to be too weak to be effective. A common critique of the number of anti-corruption bodies (commissions, agencies, committees etc) started by governments is that they usually lack political will since they are often in response to citizen or donor demands rather than a genuine effort at reform. In addition their work is debilitated by the lack of trained personnel, resources and skills to be effective. There is also a lack of a comprehensive national plan or strategy for anti-corruption, which could guide these efforts.
Other countries have sought to increase the strength and powers of anti corruption institutions including through the creation of specialized ministries. Greece’s recently recruited Anti-Corruption Minister began his job targeting the “handful of families who think that the state exists to serve their interests” in order to recover millions of stolen euros.
The merits and impact of having such a Ministry will have to be measured over time but the question that should be asked here in Guyana, is whether our current model is working providing that our government is able to muster the political will needed to begin to comprehensively address corruption.