By Amin Kef Sesay
Allegations of corruption in the auctioning of unclaimed goods at the Port, booking by reluctant commercial drivers at points where they are supposed to be checked by traffic police and wardens, continued exploitation by schools and teachers in various forms in spite of the FQE, poor service delivery by certain MDAs, allegations of demanding of commission from contractors by Finance Ministry officials before contract payment is approved and made; these and many allegations of lack of transparency and accountability dog President Bio’s New Direction Government.
Accountability and transparency are major pillars in the architecture of governance if the goal of poverty reduction through effective and efficient service delivery by MDAs and economic growth and diversification are to be achieved by the Government and its people in the shortest possible time.
Paul Wolfowitz, former President of the World Bank, in a 2006 speech in Jakarta noted that
in developing a community or country good governance is the foundation of all other State activities which essentially boils down to a strong mix of transparent and accountable institutions; ethical work conduct, skills and competence and above all willingness by State actors particularly those entrusted with finances, resources and service delivery responsibilities to do the right thing. Some MDAs, the people observe, are still stuck in the old way of doing things – no bribe, no hand shake, no service.
For the New Direction Government to succeed where previous administrations failed in delivering on their promises to the people, transparency and governance should run through the country’s entire political, economic and social structures.
Any weakening in public accountability and transparency; respect for and strengthening of the rule of law and anti-corruption measures; democratization, decentralization and local government reform; increased civil society participation in development, respect for human rights and protection of the environment amount to failure by whatever political party is in power.
Transparency refers to openness in Government policies and decisions which requires making available required information to the populace in order to minimize the scope for misuse of resources and enhance public capacity to hold Government and its officials to account.
Crucially, budget transparency is paramount because it is through it that management of national resources is implemented. Therefore, absence of transparency in budgeting processes can engender corruption, inefficiency and inequity, and compromise the provision of public services and the development effort. Particular focus is advised on public procurement. The use of open tender processes, publication of relevant information regarding award of contracts, easily accessible complaints procedures when foul play is suspected, are among the crucial considerations for ensuring good governance in public financial management.
Similar approaches should be adopted in the management of revenues accruing from natural resources such as oil and other mineral wealth, forestry and fisheries resources. The contracts signed with foreign partners for the exploitation of these resources, the revenues accruing there from and the uses to which they are put should be readily accessible to the populace. Absence of transparency in these matters create breeding houses for conclusion of arrangements which may not be of general national benefit, encourage misappropriation and exploitation of national resources in the interest of an elite minority, with a potential in the long run of threatening national cohesiveness and precipitating instability.
The case for transparency and good budgetary management assumes further significance in the evolving advocacy for channeling aid through the domestic budget. The provision of aid in the form of general budgetary support confers greater independence in the use of resources on recipient countries, stronger national ownership of development policies and programmes, and lower costs than those associated with multiple aid delivery modalities. For this intention to be achieved on a wide basis and the proffered benefits realised, donor governments and institutions must have confidence in mechanisms in place in recipient countries for the management of the budget.
Worries about corruption and mismanagement are antithetical to this objective; hence the need for strengthened budgetary procedures, improved governance and transparency. There is a strong perception in the donor community that international assistance is required to help strengthen the public financial management systems and processes in aid receiving countries, including oversight by parliament, audit boards and civil society. Apart from the technical dimensions of the intervention, it is considered pertinent that, as may be relevant, the recipient countries should subscribe and adhere to, internationally sanctioned arrangements, such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), to ensure appropriate disclosure of revenue accruals and maximization of inflows from national resources. Accountability is the natural concomitant of transparency.
Indeed, the purpose of transparency is essentially the facilitation of accountability. In general, accountability refers to the obligation of those in authority to account to those on whose behalf they exercise such authority, for the discharge of the responsibilities entrusted to them. We can distinguish between financial, political and administrative elements of accountability. The exercise of accountability requires a system of laws, regulations and codes of conduct.
In addition, mechanisms should be established for monitoring compliance and deviations, and institution of corrective measures. Financial accountability, which tends to be the main focus in this context, pays special attention to budgetary processes. It is deemed a necessary condition for good governance; prudent management of public resources; reduced corruption; better delivery of services; and a support to efforts at poverty alleviation. Strengthening financial accountability requires reforms almost across the board, touching on the parliamentary, judicial and administrative structures and modalities of government, and could thus entail a far-reaching revamping of governance systems.
