by Nontando Guwa

Corruption is rife in the new South Africa. This is the verdict of the Public Service Commission Report, 2007.

Part of the reason why it might appear, to some observers, that the problem is worse than it was during apartheid, is that in the context of our democracy there is a greater awareness of the need for accountability and transparency.

There is also greater access to information in line with our Constitutional provisions.

The recent report by the Public Service Commission brings out key challenges facing the public service and highlights the high number of corruption cases that have been reported. According to the report, the Eastern Cape ranks among the highest regarding the reported number of corruption cases.

The report further highlights a need to strengthen human resource management and development to ensure that there is a skilled, professional, motivated, and productive workforce that drives government programmes. It also talks about the need for provincial government to consolidate its systems, planning processes, financial management, monitoring and evaluation, and to leverage these to ensure sustained and effective service delivery.

Corruption is often viewed as a disease or sickness of a society, and the public sector is invariably the key culprit. Public officials are expected to demonstrate traits of public honesty, integrity and accountability.

Unfortunately, because many of our newly appointed public officials have not received proper training for the positions they hold, the exposure to corrupt influences is very high.

It starts with a flawed recruitment process where political patronage and sheer nepotism take precedence over meritocracy. It is therefore not suprising that there is a serious problem of corruption in the public sector, particularly in the Eastern Cape.

The establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Hotline (NACH) in September 2004 has been viewed by many as a promotion of visible anti-corruption action on the part of government. From its inception in September 2004 until December 2005, 140 cases of corruption were reported through the Hotline in the Eastern Cape – the second highest rate in a country of nine provinces.

On financial misconduct, the Eastern Cape stands at 52 reported cases in the financial year 2004/5.

The province recorded the highest number of corruption cases reported among all the nine provinces.

Of more concern is the level of non-compliance by senior officials (senior managers) with the requirement to disclose their financial interests. As of 1 February 2006, the Eastern Cape still had 257 outstanding forms for financial disclosure.

The Code of Conduct for the public service clearly states that an employee should not use his/her official position to obtain private gifts or benefits for her/himself during the performance of his/her official duties nor should s/he accept any gifts or benefits when offered as these may be construed as bribes. However, this important requirement aimed at promoting transparency and accountability is often ignored.

Sadly, corruption is so bad that public confidence in government is being rapidly eroded. The high numbers of reported cases in the Eastern Cape might be indicative of provincial government’s commitment to fight corruption and should be commended. Be that as it may, the province still faces the challenge of public officials and political office bearers who are prepared to sacrifice development and public trust rather than exposing their colleagues.

It is commendable that the premier set a Government’s Anti-Corruption Programme as a co-ordination of various agencies responsible for crime intelligence and law enforcement. It is through this collaborated effort that many of the corruption cases in the Eastern Cape have been brought to light.

An important characteristic in the fight against corruption is the promotion of accountability. Accountability implies that public servants should be held answerable to government and the public for achievement of service delivery objectives and the proper utilisation of resources. Of most importance also in the fight against corruption is the involvement of the public or citizens. The legal framework in the country clearly stipulates processes by which the public can monitor the use of resources by public servants in line with agreed development goals.

Looking at the interdependence of provincial and local government in service delivery and in view of the fact that the report links corruption to capacity challenges, one can clearly see the impact corruption has on the performance of local government.

Local government is generally facing a number of serious capacity challenges. It is estimated that “60% of municipalities perform 50% or less of their constitutionally mandated functions”. Although these concerns are specific to local government, one cannot talk of effective and efficient national and provincial departments outside the context of the performance of local government.

Given the high level of interdependence between the national, provincial and local spheres of government, it is inevitable that capacity pressures experienced at one level will spill over into the other levels as well.

The three spheres largely use resources from the same pool and overall gains in efficiency and effectiveness ultimately depend on how all the spheres perform.

The Local Government Transformer Oct/Nov 2007