Namibia, development hamstringed by corruption

FRITZ H DAUSAB, POLITICAL ANALYST AND SOCIAL ACTIVIST WRITES:The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) remains the most influential measurement of the pervasiveness of corruption in countries. The causes of corruption lie in part in political and cultural reasons, while ineffective law enforcement may further promote it. Namibia in its recent corruption index rankings dropped one place from 57 to 58, where the CPI is perceived as how corrupt the government/state or public sector is (Trading Economics, 2022).

President Geingob came out with slogans as his administration’s commitment on corruption and government services, 100% of which are empty gestures. Namibia since 1990 was ruled on a system of appeasement and patronage. Hence, state-society relations are characteristically transactional, hinged on preserving a regime of unrestrained illicit accumulation of public resources by prevailing social forces (Allison, T. 2021. Corruption in Fragile States: What the Corruption Perceptions Index does not Reveal).

These could be seen under former presidents Nujoma and Pohamba where large scale of our white fisheries was given to Spain, while billions of Namibian dollars were lost in mass housing saga where politically connected cronies became overnight millionaires without building houses.

The patronage system of ruling party has made the Executive Branch of government unaccountable to Namibians. We can see this in past and present budget debates in parliament, where elected officials cannot hold the Executive to account, hence my statement to Landless People’s Movement members of Parliament that no budget allocation ever has been changed through discussions in parliament. How this situation impacts anti-corruption enforcement is much noted by LPM’s Swartbooi when he be cried the little to nothing spent on our anti-corruption watchdog or ACC (Anti-Corruption Commission Bill discussions, 2022, Namibian Parliament).

All government/president who came after Nujoma had to make tough choices, where an administration is confronted with a ’share or fight’ dilemma: perpetuate the regime of corruption and maintain stability or combat corruption at the risk of upsetting the equilibrium. Whatever the choice, the outcomes are consequential. Allowing the pillaging undermines development, and fighting corruption becomes counterproductive to the administration’s longevity and sustenance of stability (Allison, T. 2021. Corruption in Fragile States: What the Corruption Perceptions Index does not Reveal). Hence the Namibian House where only the poor are eating peace and stability, while not having jobs, or houses or food in a resource rich Namibia.

When an administration must make the difficult choice between provoking the wrath of potentially destabilizing pro-corruption forces and pressing on with the war on corruption. The undeniable fact is that an administration that came to power on the believability of the strength of its commitment to fight corruption now presides over disturbing levels of corruption. Just think about it. . . Fishrot. . . SME Bank. . .

Opposition leaders such as the Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP) leader and member of parliament Mike Kavekotora said he has no doubt in his assessment that the drop from bad to worse is a true reflection of the state of corruption in the country. “I am on record, and have warned the government, that corruption is about to be institutionalized in our country. The denial stage for President Hage Geingob and his administration should be over if he is to rescue this country” (New Era, 28 January 2022).

Political commentator and director of the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) Graham Hopwood cited a failure to deal with longstanding and current cases such as the collapse of the Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) Bank, the August 26 Holdings scandal, and the Areva/Uramin case, among others, as factors that are relevant and likely to have contributed to the drop in Namibia’s perceived increased corruption ranking (New Era, 28 January 2022).

Yet the global corruption index is perceived not viable by our own Noa, the same gentleman sitting in that important chair of being the anti-corruption watchdog, yet according to majority of Namibians – a very sleepy watchdog. Who puts the fault of ruling party corruption at the feet of World Bank and IMF, who Noa claims does not recognize the work done by ACC?

In conclusion, the Namibian public sector is rampant with corruption. Starting with inept Executive branch of government; a patronage system where the politically connected thrive and honest but hardworking Namibians makes up the unemployment statistics; where tenders are given by a one tribe dominated procurement board to cronies, friends, and families; it is so worse that applying for jobs with appropriate skills and education is laughed at and given to connected individuals. Let’s not even talk about ECN and just forget about free and fair elections; nor about resettlement farms allotment; or the allocation of fishing quotas. . . oops! I even forgot the diamond sightseeing quotas being held by the offspring of high-level ruling party cadres.

In short, people are tired of the status quo. Where they want to hold their elected officials to account for developing their country, towns, and regions economically and socially. Yet, the administration or public officials in councils are just as corrupt as national counterparts, where they would rather appoint YES & lazy people and keep out the hard workers.

As a corrupt prone Namibia, we should think about the examples we set for our unemployed & non-empowered youth and women. Local councils, not run by ruling party should reflect on corruption and fight tirelessly for the poor and downtrodden communities where they serve. The high debts of NamWater came through not empowering the original people in Hardap and ||Kharas. Without work there is no way to pay high debts of lazy and inept administrations. How can local councils only rely on rates and taxes to develop without proper development plans?