Entitlement culture feeds political corruption in Nigeria

Each time a political corruption scandal breaks out in Nigeria, the latest being the so-called “Dasukigate”, the tendency is to focus on the actual scandal and ignore its underlying structural causes. And, so often, as the public outrage provoked by the scandal inevitably fizzles out, it’s back to business as usual. But the key to tackling any problem effectively is to understand its root cause.

And the key to “understanding the causes of things”, to quote the famous motto of the London School of Economics, is to ask critical questions.

So, in understanding political corruption in Nigeria, let’s start with these basic questions: why do Nigeria’s political elite have the tendency to treat this country as their personal fiefdom? Why do they often treat public resources as their private assets? Well, in my view, the primary reason is the ferocious sense of entitlement of Nigeria’s political or ruling elite.

There are, of course, secondary reasons, such as the absence of effective counter-powers to restrict political corruption and ensure the responsiveness of politicians. But my focus here is the primary driver of political corruption in Nigeria, i.e, the entitlement culture that feeds it.

Let’s face it, political corruption poses serious dangers to Nigeria’s development. This is because, unlike bureaucratic corruption, which occurs at the implementation end of policies, political corruption takes place at the top level of the state and involves the manipulation of public institutions. As Inge Amundsen puts it in an interesting paper, “political corruption is when laws and regulations are systematically abused by the rulers, side-stepped, ignored, or even tailored to fit their interests”.

As we have seen with the “Dasukigate”, there were, allegedly, the manipulation of the central bank, the side-stepping of procurement laws and the subversion of the electoral process.

Such abuse of political power can surely damage the institutions of government and the political system. But at the heart of the political corruption is the entitlement culture of Nigeria’s ruling elite.

According to Vocabulary.com, “If someone has a sense of entitlement, that means the person believes he deserves certain privileges – and he’s arrogant about it”. Now, few politicians in the world have a more ferocious sense of entitlement to privileges than Nigerian politicians. When President Buhari said in his budget speech that he wanted to speak directly to “the men and women who placed us here”, he used the right phrase. But how many Nigerian politicians really see themselves as servants of the people?

Take, for instance, the legislators. Visit the National Assembly and you will be affronted by the pomposity of our legislators. Most senators walk about with a retinue of hangers-on and carry a lot of air around them. Then, consider the arrogant display of power by most of the governors and other political office holders.

When politicians have such a sense of superiority and believe they are entitled to privileges, they will see nothing wrong about using public resources to sustain their assumed status and prestige. And, of course, when they also operate in a neo-patrimonial system, as we have in Nigeria, where politics is largely about distributing public resources to relatives, friends and political allies, and when it is about acquiring wealth and prestige through the system of prebendal accumulation, then you have the making of the kind of political corruption alleged in the “Dasukigate”.

Without going into the details of the “Dasukigate”, we are told that $2.2 billion of public money, set aside to buy arms to fight the Boko Haram insurgency, was allegedly transferred by the former National Security Advisor, Sambo Dasuki, from the central bank to private accounts and distributed to various individuals and organisations to serve personal and party political purposes.

But let’s not forget that the security vote, for which the money was set aside, is itself a product of the entitlement culture. Security votes are in the personal gift of a president or governor to be used as they wish, including by distributing money to various groups and interests, all in the name of security. It is the biggest source of redistributive corruption, and most Nigerians seem to accept this as a reality, some even justify it. During this year’s presidential election, a prominent Islamic scholar in the North opposed Buhari’s candidature on the ground that he would be too strict with the use of public money. He argued that “Islam allows the use of Zakkat and public wealth as an instrument to pacify and lure influential people for the sake of peace and stability”, adding that, “In modern governance today, it translates into the security vote”.

Surely, if the security vote can be used in such an opaque and unaccountable way, it is little surprise that it’s a great source of political corruption in this country.

Now, while redistributive corruption is bad enough, using the security vote to undermine the democratic process is certainly beyond the pale.

According to the “Dasukigate” allegations, leaders of the People’s Democratic Party in the six geo-political zones were each given N600 million for so-called “contact and mobilisation”, while billions of naira were allegedly given to several individuals, organisations (perhaps, including the ubiquitous Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria, TAN) and some media owners to mobilise support for the re-election of the then President Goodluck Jonathan. If true, this is political corruption of the most deleterious kind. In many countries, several individuals would go to jail for attempting to corrupt and subvert the political and electoral system.

That then brings me to the most institutionalised culture of entitlement in this country. Call it the gravy train of former presidents. President Buhari has just budgeted N2.3 billion for all the former presidents and vice-presidents. Not even the US, where we probably copied the entitlement system from, has a more generous system of benefits to former presidents than Nigeria. Compare the US Former Presidents Act with Nigeria’s Remuneration of Former Presidents and Heads of State (and other Ancillary Matters)
Act of 1999, and you will see how more lavishly we treat our former presidents than the Americans do theirs. Each of our former presidents is entitled to, among others, 3 vehicles (and drivers) replaceable every four years (!), residential accommodation (in addition to office accommodation), 30 days annual vacation plus, of course, the N350,000 monthly stipend. The states, of course, have similar largesse for former governors, all in the name of entitlement!

But, for me, none of this beats the fact that Nigeria’s presidents enjoy constitutional immunity in power and de facto immunity when they leave office. A former Nigerian president is untouchable, treated as an “institution”, which is why, despite the public outrage over the so-called “Dasukigate”, few are talking about the role of former President Jonathan, even though the $2.2 billion would not have been misappropriated, as alleged, without his authorisation. Nigeria is probably the only country where former presidents cannot be personally held accountable for their actions in office. But this simply entrenches political corruption because a president knows that he can preside over massive corruption and executive abuse and get away with it, apart from being voted out of power, of course!

Surely, if we want to stop political corruption in Nigeria, we need to reform the political system. And a good starting point is to tackle the entitlement culture and neo-patrimonial system that feed political corruption in Nigeria. The phrase “servants of the people” must be more than a platitude. There must be strong accountability between the governing elite and the governed!

Warmest wishes to all my readers for the festive season!