While it has been a vital necessity for the socio-economic development of its beneficiaries (usually developing countries), foreign aid money has acted as a source of corruption. If not handled properly, foreign aid will most certainly breed corruption, which can be difficult to control.  There is no clear cut evidence to avow that certain countries are immune to corruption. However, several countries are far more corrupt than others.

A global watchdog on corruption and transparency, Transparency International, has, since 2010, conducted the Corruption Perceptions Index surveys in over 183 countries. Shockingly, on a scale of zero (extremely corrupt) to ten (quite clean), most of the 183 countries scored below five. Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Singapore and Sweden have always been at the top of the list with a score above nine, while Afghanistan, Iraq, Myanmar and North Korea reside at the bottom with a score below two.⁽²⁾ On the African continent, 6 of the 10 most corrupt countries on the globe are located in the Sub-Saharan region, several of which score below four.⁽³⁾ Indeed the African continent has been dubbed the continent with some of the most corrupt countries in the world.

Looking at the scores from the various countries, it is clear that many of the highly corrupt countries are ‘developing’, while those that are quite clean are, in fact, developed, and yet corruption is blamed for the lack of significant development in most developing countries.⁽⁴⁾ It is also responsible for the increased and substantially stagnant levels of poverty among populations in those countries. Some of the populaces have lashed out violently, causing ferocious conflicts that have led to the toppling of governments and their leaders, colossal loss of lives, the violation of human rights and massive displacement of people. For instance, the Egyptian, Libyan and Tunisian revolutions are vivid examples where populations outraged to protest their utmost frustration for political corruption, forcing the leaders out of office and subsequently ending their tyrannical regimes.

Uganda is a developing country located in the Sub-Saharan part of Africa. It is not immune to corruption. In fact, according to Transparency International, Uganda is the 130th most corrupt country on the globe.⁽⁵⁾ Characterised by massive levels of corruption incidences, most of the cases involve the grand theft of foreign aid meant for developing the country and improving the livelihoods of the people. These frequent grand thefts were condemned by the donor countries, which, in response, suspended all foreign aid to Uganda until 2015. The countries that have so far suspended aid include Britain, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Norway and Sweden.

This international move protesting to the colossal corruption levels came after the widespread reports of fraud in the Prime Minister’s Office where billions of Ugandan Shillings, meant for the reconstruction of the post-war northern Uganda region and the development of the north-eastern region of Karamoja, were allegedly stolen. Uganda has a history of corruption involving the embezzlement of donor-given financial aid, for which it was discontinued; for instance the 2005 Global Fund theft. In 2012, several donor countries expressed their discomfort and withheld aid to Uganda. It is clear that the foreign aid contributors refuse to be associated with a country where foreign aid meant for structural and humanitarian development is embezzled for personal use by its handlers and in some cases their subordinates.

Whilst incorporating examples and some of the corruption scandals from Uganda, part 1 of this paper defines corruption in its generality and offers an overview of its different scales, methods and causes. It also presents an overview of corruption in Uganda, including a historical context of corruption.It considers the efforts policy makers have made to halt the problem or bring it to an expediently minimum level. However, due to the lack of total implementation of these policies, corruption continued to rise at a massive and more sophisticated level. Part 2 of this paper further examines Uganda, discusses the commonest forms of corruption and the manner in which they occur.

Corruption: The definition, scales, methods and causes

While the World Bank bluntly defines corruption as “the abuse of public office for private gain,”⁽⁶⁾ the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) defines it in development co-operation terms, stating that corruption is a circumstance where companies, institutions, organisations and even individuals profit incongruously from their assumed positions of operation, eventually leading to significant damage or loss of finances and resources. From the latter definition, it is clear that even those who benefit from that which has been embezzled or constantly accept bribes are, in fact, corrupt. Therefore, corruption is undoubtedly a two-way street. Corruption usually involves the grand theft of public funds, most of which is diverted for personal use instead of catering for certain basic services such as clean water, good health and schools.  And, in the long run, chronic poverty becomes inevitable.⁽⁷⁾ While the well-off can find solutions to the ill-offered services – private schools and hospitals and water filtration – the poor people, who cannot afford such remedies, are left without any alternatives, except to suffer the consequences such as illiteracy, diseases, and death.

Corruption manifests at three different levels. These include:

1. Petty corruption where small favours are exchanged between small groups of people. This level of corruption is rampant in developing countries where civil servants are poorly paid. These people will exchange small gifts just to obtain some small favours.
2. Grand corruption, which occurs at the highest levels of government. This form of corruption necessitates considerable insurrection of the economic, legal and political systems. This is the sort of corruption that precipitated the significant cutting of foreign aid in Uganda. It is characterised with despotic governments and those without strong anti-corruption agencies.
3. Also known as endemic corruption, systematic corruption occurs due to the failing of the system. This failure can be encouraged by a lack of transparency, monopolistic leaderships or an endless society of impunity.⁽⁸⁾ Corruption can occur in the different economic sectors, both public and private, and even in non-governmental organisations (NGOs) as these are not immune to it. Corruption in the public sector occurring in the legislative (political), executive (police) and the judiciary systems is considerably dangerous as it affects public service delivery.    

There are various methods of corruption, some of which include: extortion, favouritism and nepotism, fraud, embezzlement, the offering and acceptance of bribes, conflict of interest and illegal monetary contributions to political parties.⁽⁹⁾ But, among these, bribery is the most common one, and is extremely prevalent in most corrupt societies. It is simply the inappropriate use of gifts and favours in exchange for that which is most desired. Bribes are used to obtain favoured treatment, cover up a crime, and can also influence the allocation and delivery of government services, the final verdict of a court proceeding, taxes to be paid and acquisition of licences by a company or individual. The kind of gifts and favours offered can range from obtaining a job offer, money, political benefits and even sexual favours. Bribery is sometimes part of systematic corruption, and most of those involved are without a doubt, sooner or later, vulnerable to blackmail and extortion – by the use of threats or even death of oneself or a loved one. Embezzlement, another method of corruption, is usually perpetrated by someone who has complete access and control of finances and resources; for instance, the misallocation of funds into companies that are non-existent, paying salaries to “ghost” employees (and “ghost” soldiers and pensioners in the case of Uganda) or taking possession of foreign aid money. Another form of corruption is favouritism and nepotism, which involves not the perpetrator of corruption but, a relative, friend or any other person they are related or acquainted to.

The causes of corruption are not only deeply embedded in a country's social history, but also its policies, officious traditions as well as the political development.⁽¹⁰⁾ However, the inclination is that corruption will most certainly prosper in countries where political competition and economic growth are very low, those which have a weak civil society and lack very strong mechanisms to fight it.⁽¹¹⁾ In such environments, corruption becomes difficult to control.⁽¹²⁾ This is perhaps because corruption is rampant in the major systems that govern a country: the economical, judicial and political systems. On the contrary, countries quite clean from corruption have fairly exclusive transparent governments, wide ranges of economic opportunities, absolute respect for civil liberties as well as a well structured political competition.⁽¹³⁾ Most of these countries with the preceding aspects are developed, for instance, Denmark and Sweden.

Another school of thought suggests that corruption will most certainly flourish in societies where the morals, values and norms of the persons in leadership positions are uncouth, and their public service work is barely supervised or even audited.⁽¹⁴⁾ Looking at the preceding statement, corruption would be controllable only if institutions are supervised and the ‘ins and outs’ finances are audited. However, using this action alone cannot fight corruption as audits can be altered. This is indeed an affirmation that corruption thrives because of the combination of two variables: accountability and discretion.⁽¹⁵⁾ Corruption will increase in a country where there is very low accountability and colossal discretionary power. This is why there is a widespread notion that corruption will be addressed by establishing policies and that institutions give public offices and those in power less discretionary power and, at the same time, make them more accountable to the populace. This remedy has been successful in some countries. However, it should not be forgotten that even if corruption severely affects the common man, it is without doubt a fundamental governing tool for dictatorial governments.⁽¹⁶⁾ This is because corruption is used by such regimes to control its supporters and do away with its rivals. Since corruption is pervasive in dictatorial governments, the phenomenon is that even when the perpetrators are top government officials, those in power will, with utmost discretion, decide whom to protect and who can be prosecuted; a decision which turns out to be an example to many who wish to go against, or seem to be drifting away from, the prevailing rule.⁽¹⁷⁾

Uganda as a case study (1986-2012)

Prior to 1986, Uganda was immersed in an era of corruption and desperately needed a solution to stop its continued progress. President Yoweri Museveni, who won the ballot on the anti-corruption ticket and better standards of living for all Ugandans, was sworn into power in January 1986. Ugandans were convinced that he would rectify all of Uganda’s problems, including addressing the corruption issue. Certainly, in his inauguration speech, Museveni pointed out that Africa and Uganda, in particular, was having problems because of the regimes and its leaders who refuse to leave office. He also added that this factor had encouraged corruption, patronage and brought about impunity.⁽¹⁸⁾ It was then that Museveni prioritised the fight against corruption and made a promise to all Ugandans to eradicate it. Predictably, no African country, not even Uganda (despite the proclamation from its leader), has been able to fight corruption. Many of the leaders who come to power on anti-corruption tickets have often been blinded by their overwhelming desire to remain in office.⁽¹⁹⁾

Following 1986, several institutions, whose specific goal was to improve governance in Uganda, were established. At the highest level, there was the establishment of the Inspector General of Government (IGG – now called Inspectorate of Government (IG)) and the Human Rights Commission (UNHCR), and at the local level was the Resistance Committees and Councils (RCs). Subsequently, Uganda showed signs of readiness to undertake reform. It was from this aspect that certain donor countries became eager to fund the above anti-corruption efforts and, in doing so, played an important role in having them fully established and maintained.⁽²⁰⁾ However, despite all these attempts, the vice of corruption flourished until today, moreover at a massive and intolerable scale. The various corruption scandals that have occurred since then involving the theft of colossal sums of public money by different personalities, some of whom close to those in power,⁽²¹⁾ range from the Global Alliance for Vaccine and Immunisation (GAVI) and Global Fund embezzlements, to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) swindle, the Junk helicopter scandal, ghost soldiers, National Identity cards, National Social Security Fund (NSSF) and Pension scandal, Uganda Primary Education (UPE) scandal and most recently, the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) scandal to mention but a few. All these grand thefts involve top government officials, many of whom still occupy public offices.

Part 2 further discusses the forms of corruption which are prevalent in this African country.

Written by Catherine Akurut ⁽¹⁾

NOTES:

(1) Contact Catherine Akurut through Consultancy African Intelligence’s Conflict and Terrorism Unit ( conflict.terrorism@consultancyafrica.com). This CAI discussion paper was developed with the assistance of Denine Walters and was edited by Nicky Berg.
(2) ‘Corruption perceptions index 2010’, Transparency International, http://www.transparency.org.
(3) ‘Rethinking corruption in Africa’, New Vision, 11 October 2012, http://www.newvision.co.ug.
(4) Treisman, D., ‘The causes of corruption’, 1997, http://www.isr.umich.edu.
(5) Namulondo, S., ‘Uganda ranks 130th most corrupt worldwide’, The Independent, 5 December 2012, http://www.independent.co.ug.
(6) ‘Helping countries combat corruption: The role of the World Bank’, The World Bank Group, http://www1.worldbank.org.
(7) ‘Poverty and corruption in Africa: community voices break the cycle’, Centre for Transparency and Accountability, 2012, https://docs.google.com.
(8)  ‘Corruption’,Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org.
(9) Ibid.
(10) ‘Helping countries combat corruption: The role of the World Bank’, The World Bank Group, http://www1.worldbank.org.
(11) ‘Causes of and conditions of corruption’, Monograph No. 65, September 2001, http://www.iss.co.za.
(12) ‘Helping countries combat corruption: The role of the World Bank’, The World Bank Group, http://www1.worldbank.org.
(13) ‘Causes of and conditions of corruption’, Monograph No. 65, September 2001, http://www.iss.co.za.
(14) Ibid.
(15) Pei, M., ‘Corruption: Government by corruption’, Forbes, 22 January 2009, http://www.forbes.com.
(16) Ibid.
(17) Ibid.
(18) Biryetega, S.R., ‘Uganda’, Global Integrity, http://back.globalintegrity.org. 
(19) ‘Rethinking corruption in Africa’, New Vision, 11 October 2012, http://www.newvision.co.ug.
(20) Flanary, R. and Watt, D., 1999. The state of corruption: A case study of Uganda. The World Quarterly, 20(3), pp. 515-536
(21) ‘Overview of corruption in Uganda’, U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, http://www.u4.no.