TANZANIA: Tackling the problem of corruption: Suggested alternative

The resulting stiff court sentences, including imprisonment, fines and
confiscation of ill-gotten wealth, will hopefully help mollify
underlying anger and desperation in our country, and deter recurrence
of similar criminal activities in the future.

It remains to be seen whether our judicial system can meet this
widespread expectation. Our courts are severely limited in terms of the
number of qualified personnel. Heavy workloads, poor working conditions
and salaries have conspired to undermine the effectiveness of our
judicial system. It would seem that over the years a large number of
our best lawyers have left (or avoided) government ministries for
green pastures in the private sector, politics, or overseas.

In addition to these problems—or, perhaps, because of them—our judicial
system itself appears to have been tainted by corruption, the very
monster it is supposed to help us slay. There is a real danger that
corrupt individuals, with tons of stolen money to spare for shrewd
defense lawyers, from inside and outside the country, could overwhelm
or even paralyze our judicial system.

Equally worrisome, is the fact that corrupt individuals that will be
acquitted in the courts could demand and get immense compensation from
the very victims of corruption, the citizens of Tanzania.In order to
mitigate the potential shortcomings of excessive reliance on the
courts, some of our citizens are starting to call for complementary
court-like initiatives resembling Truth and Reconciliation
Commissions , such as that of South Africa, or those of other
countries (currently numbering about 17). For the most part, such
commissions have been aimed at resolving potentially divisive national
political problems.

The problem of corruption in Tanzania is, without doubt, politically
divisive. The prevalence of grand corruption provides fertile ground
for partisan—and, sometimes, unconstructive—politics, and seriously
undermines the people's trust and confidence in their Government. The
perception that high-ranking officials of the Government and Bank of
Tanzania are mismanaging public funds undermines the peoples' trust in
their Government. It is difficult to achieve national cohesion in a
situation where most Tanzanians are trapped in poverty, hunger and
disease and a handful of people are wallowing in billions of ill-gotten
wealth.

How then, could we use a truth and reconciliation commission to
supplement the ongoing efforts in the courts?As responsible citizens,
we should seek to know the truth about all stolen and misused public
resources. We should know how much was involved, who did it, as well as
why and how it happened. Unless we have clear answers to these
questions, we cannot prevent a recurrence of similar problems in the
future.

To restore national cohesion, we need reconciliation between
Tanzanians at large, or the public, and those who have stolen or
diverted public resources. Such reconciliation may require that we
provide opportunity for these people to return voluntarily all the
ill-gotten wealth and demand public apology. Those who do not want take
this route should be prosecuted and face the full wrath of the law.

Some of the resources acquired through the EPA account, and other
opaque dealings were probably used to support activities of political
parties. Here, too, we need to know the truth, and we should demand
public apology. Personal wealth acquired through political channels
should likewise be returned: voluntarily, with public apology and
amnesty from prosecution. Otherwise, the law should take its course.

Whether we use the courts or court-like conciliatory avenues, we have
to limit our struggle to cases and charges that truly constitute
corruption. We should, to the extent possible, resist the temptation of
lumping in the group of corrupt people, individuals that we think
implemented bad policies.

Acid tests of good and bad policies (and excise thereof) are difficult
to apply in the social fields where senior officials have to use
judgment in accepting advice and weighing policy options. Problems in
this area can be addressed best by improving our system of checks and
balance, by effecting much-needed reforms within the different arms of
our government, by fostering a culture of strict accountability for
administrative underperformance and inaction, and through democratic
change of government.

In order to use the courts and conciliatory mechanisms effectively, we
should use available public organs, such as the PCCB, and other means
to establish a comprehensive (but rationally limited) list of people
that are alleged to have stolen, misappropriated, or diverted public
resources for personal enrichment and other errant ends.

We would also need a list of lower-ranking officials and other
individuals presumed to have facilitated the alleged corrupt
activities. Accountable public explanation and apology from (or
exoneration of) these people are necessary, in order to root out the
cancer of corruption in our country.

The management of a substantially increased number of court-like
proceedings can be greatly facilitated through a commission established
by Act of Parliament, and empowered to exact public apologies and grant
amnesties from prosecution. Such a commission would need to be composed
of outstanding public leaders with acclaimed high ethical standards.
They could include distinguished law enforcement officials, religious
leaders, and lawyers and people of other professions in the private
sector and civil society.

The Commission should be required to conduct its proceedings publicly
and to issue a public report at the end of its work, not exceeding,
say, two years from now. The primary task of the Commission would be to
foster maximum voluntary return of illegally acquired personal wealth.
It would also be empowered to accept honest apologies, and grant
conditional amnesty from prosecution.

Without an effective and credible judiciary, our struggle against
corruption will flounder, and value-added of the Reconciliation
Committee will be minimal. Accordingly, the ability of our courts to
prosecute, judge and manage a substantially increased volume of
corruption cases should be immediately strengthened.

This can be done by securing the services of additional (say 200-300)
top notch prosecutors, from within and outside the country. Additional
judges of international reputation would be needed. The Government
would also need to bolster the administrative budgets of the courts.

Finally, we must accelerate the legislative and other ongoing
initiatives to develop efficient, transparent and fair financing
systems for political and electoral activities in our country. With the
national elections around the corner, we have to act quickly.

In summary, we should avoid half-hearted, unfocused and prolonged
anti-corruption efforts resulting in few court convictions and
acquittals that may well be very costly to the very victims of
corruption. The people are understandably angry about the alleged
scams: EPA, Richmond, Twin Towers, defective government contracts,
purchase of expensive government radar and plane, Merimeta, irregular
sale (or privatization) of government assets, and many more.

There is crying need for the Government to increase substantially the
manpower and financial budgets for the courts dealing with alleged
cases of grand corruption. Supplementary efforts, through a
legally-founded Truth and Reconciliation Commission, will also be
needed to promote voluntary return of illegally acquired wealth,
apologies from (or exoneration of) all suspected persons, and orderly
management of amnesty from prosecution.