The need for a capable state in Nigeria

The buzz word in Nigeria these days is the “war against corruption.” This is understandable. Most Nigerians blame corruption for all or most of their country’s ills. And the widespread belief that the Jonathan administration facilitated corruption contributed largely to his defeat at the polls in 2015. As Buhari himself lamented shortly after taking over power, Nigeria was “materially and morally vandalised” by ravenous politicians. So he was only responding to the express wishes of the people by promising to wage a relentless war against corruption insisting that “if Nigeria does not kill corruption, then corruption will kill Nigeria”. Thus far, he has made the right noises and appears to be really determined to bring those, or rather, some of those who have pillaged the country’s resources to justice.

But we have been here before. Former president Obasanjo also solemnly swore to fight the “hydra-headed monster of corruption” on his inauguration on May 29, 1999. He proceeded to set up two whole anti-corruption commissions and the entire country was seized by the frenzy of the “war against corruption” throughout his tenure between 1999 and 2007. We were all witnesses to how the ‘war’ panned out and eventually fizzled out and how corruption, instead of being defeated, actually grew and even became more brazen and more cancerous than it had ever been.

In his first coming as military Head of State, Buhari also attempted to eliminate corruption from Nigeria with military zeal and ruthlessness. But after he was shoved aside by his army chief, he watched from behind bars as all his efforts or plans were rolled back and the new government continued with ‘business as usual’ as the Nigerian cliché goes.

That should have taught him a very important lesson – that reforms should not be anchored on individuals but on institutions. History has proven that strong institutions are the best guarantee of progress and sustainable growth and development in any society. Institutions are impersonal and not subject to the whims, caprices, flimsy and erratic nature of human behaviour. Reforms based on personalities, personal rule or individuals fizzle out eventually. What is more, human nature is erratic and does not guarantee consistency. History has shown that it is not always possible to get excellent people to run institutions over time. Weak and sometimes, morally bankrupt individuals get into positions of authority. The key difference however is that in societies where institutions are strong and well entrenched, these institutions withstand or survive such persons without considerable damage. However, where institutions are weak or non-existent, all previous progress is destroyed and the society or organisation had to start afresh after such weak or bankrupt individuals depart.

Besides, the very cause of corruption is the absence of a capable state or non-functioning of institutions. In most climes therefore, corruption serves to grease the wheels of inefficient government bureaucratic machines leading to efficient outcomes. Logic therefore suggests that to eliminate corruption, the emphasis must be on the creation of a capable state – a state that, in the words of Ricardo Hausmann, “can protect the country and its people, keep the peace, enforce rules and contracts, provide infrastructure and social services, regulate economic activity, credibly enter into inter-temporal obligations, and tax society to pay for it all”.

But historically, wars on corruption in Nigeria are set to undermine institutions. Anti-corruption institutions are created and made to work at the discretion or following the ‘body language’ of the president sidelining or undermining established state institutions in the process. They could and do disobey court judgements and orders.

Sadly, the current war on corruption of president Buhari is following this set pattern. There are cases of the Department of State Security (DSS) or the State Security Service (SSS) storming people’s houses in commando styles to effect arrests without valid court warrants and refusing to release suspects even when they have been granted bail by the courts.

In another development, the President has been riding roughshod over institutions and undermining their independence. At the sidelines of a meeting with the French President in Paris, Buhari was quoted as saying, “I don’t think it is healthy for us to get the naira devalued.” When quizzed on the shortage of foreign exchange that the decision would cause, he argued that “the central bank is providing ample foreign exchange to essential services [and] industries”.

Expectedly, after the pronouncement, the CBN lost its independence to determine the country’s monetary policy and has relied instead on reading the ‘body language’ of the president and taking actions that will conform with that ‘body language’ now verbalised in France.

The CBN was then forced to roll out various kinds of policies – including placing some items on import prohibition list, an action the Economist derided as archaic in a July articled titled “toothpick alert” – to protect the beleaguered Naira. Though pegged officially at N199 to a dollar, the black market rate – a truer reflection of the value – is now over N280 to a dollar. For the former Minister of Education and former Vice President of the World Bank, Oby Ezekwesili, the administration cannot claim to “be busy fighting corruption while the CBN is pursuing an Exchange Rate Management policy that is hugely rewarding corruption”.

It may be easier to create agencies to fight corruption. It may be easier to launch a media campaign against perceived corrupt officials or even make scapegoats of some, but such actions never get the country anywhere. They are just mere tokenisms that fizzle out with time. Example from other climes such as Uganda shows that a country can have the best anti-corruption legislation in the world and still see all its corruption indices worsen. What helps a society to effectively tackle and prevent corruption is the creation of a capable state and that begins with respect for and strengthening of state institutions.

Christopher Akor

This article was first published in the Nigerian Edition of The Economist’s “The World in 2016”