School of Oformatism presents "How to Fight Corruption in a Corrupt State" written by Andrew Oforma Eze

google.com, pub-2371127776110309, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

School of Oformatism presents

"How to Fight Corruption in a Corrupt State" written by  Andrew Oforma Eze

Have defined this anti-development (corruption) in previous articles  there is no need to keep on defining it again and again because it is not entertaining and it is anti-human. I have also discovered that the more Nigerians incessantly call the word “corruption” the more it increases and waxes stronger. Corruption has multiplier effects. Therefore instead of attributing all societal misfortune to this asocial act it will be more beneficiary if we devote our research prowess on how to ameliorate it to the barest minimum if not total eradication because it is an asocial act which need not to live with social beings.

Hence, many scholars across disciplines have unveiled different approaches on how to fight corruption in Nigeria and beyond. Some political scholars, social analysts and commentators have advocated different approaches like capital punishment which include: death sentence, banishment, life imprisonment, public execution, etc., to a convicted corrupt person. Whereas some have advocated for more moderate approaches like light imprisonment, reformatory, community service, moral orientation, socialization, etc., to the convicted corrupt person.

One thing that is undeniable is that corruption which is a socio-political problem can also be tackled with socio-political therapy. Praying and fasting may not ameliorate it because it is not spiritual problem. Therefore, spiritual, political economic, and cultural problems, should be tackled with their therapies. We can categorize these scholars who propounded different approaches to fight corruption into three schools of thought namely: Radical School of Thought, Social School of Thought and Socialization School of Thought.

Radical school of thought is of the opinion that there is no other way to fight corruption in any society apart from inflicting undeletable mark or scar on the convicted corrupt person or to make the person pay dearly including paying the supreme  price for his/her act. This perspective advocates for capital punishment like death sentence, public execution, banishment, life imprisonment with hard labour and other corporal punishments etc. The radical proponents believe that such brutal acts against convicted corrupt persons will definitely deter or make other people to stay away from corrupt practices. That is the main reason some of them prefer public execution to secret execution and life imprisonment. They contend that public execution will pass a clear message to other corrupt persons or to those that may be intending to do so what their fate will be if they are convicted. This radical school of thought even backed their argument with empirical examples from some of developed countries that have zero tolerance to corrupt practices like the Peoples Republic of China, Republic of Israel, Singapore etc.

On the other hand, the Social School of Thought contends that corruption is home grown and societal rooted. That what causes corruption revolves around the political system of a state. In other words, corruption is caused by some anti-social phenomena, the lack social insecurity within a state. The apostles of social perspective believe that the only way to fight corruption if not totally elimination of it in any state is to address the root cause which is the lack of social security. They contend that man engages in corrupt practices not by choice or that it gives him joy but by necessity. Man involves in corrupt act not as an option but as an alternative in order to meet end means. They vehemently argue that the only way to reduce corruption in any state, be it developed, developing and underdeveloped is through the provision of “Security of Social Security Network” for the citizens.

And it is the primary role of government to protect and guarantee the social needs of its citizens which are the main reasons the state and its machinery exist. This school of thought believes that social insecurity is the root causes of corruption. And there is no way to fight it apart from addressing the root cause rather than corruption itself. The first and best thing any rational government can do at this level is to deal holistically with the root cause of the act which will automatically reduce the act.

Any other thing apart from the primary cause in the name of fighting corruption is a mere waste of time and resources according to the proponents of the Social School of Thought. They equate fighting corruption by only punishing the convicted person mercilessly with a farmer that cuts a particular tree in his farmland yearly.  They contend that it is irrational for a farm to be cutting down a particular tree in his farmland yearly instead of uprooting it because it will re-grow after cutting.

Furthermore, the Social School of Thought lampooned the disciplines of the Radical School of Thought for been too short sighted. According to them capital punishment is incapable of curtailing corruption in corrupt state. That it is a mere dehumanization of social beings and waste of human life which is sacred. They argue that capital punishment may only be justified in a state where there is element of social security to the citizens. Those social deviants that exist in socially immunized state; due to greed, that it may be justifiable to caution them with some precautionary punishment to avoid spillover effect. The Social School of Thought also opined that there are low cases of corruption in some developed countries because there is security of social security systems in the states for the citizens not that they applied capital punishments.

Many western nations have understood that no matter how proactive a country legislates against corruption the laws cannot deter people from engaging in it except the primary cause of it is addressed. It is very vital to note that the law does not exist to prevent crime rather it exists to define it. Formulating and legislating anti-corruption laws is to define what corruption means not to prevent it. And too much legislations or too much laws on corruption will indirectly increase corruption because even the layman can know what it is and how best to engage in it and go scout free. Because one can only fall a victim of something he/she does not know much about. They believe that government has to address societal phenomena that induce corruption and give light punishment in the form of community services to the convicted person.

Another perspective is the Socialization School of Thought. This school of thought believes that corruption can only be fought in any society if there is total attitudinal change among citizens which can be achieved through positive socialization and orientation. Socialization is a process by which individuals acquire acceptable norms, values, beliefs, and attitudes etc., of society which are transmitted from one generation to another. It is only through socialization that citizens learn and institutionalize the acceptable societal norms. The proponents of socialization perspective contend that the importance of socialization and orientation in any society cannot be overemphasized. They argue that when the citizens are oriented on acceptable behavioural patterns they will shun corrupt practices voluntarily.

They believe that the best way to fight corruption is via adequate socialization and orientation. It can be in the form of cognitive, evaluative and affective processes. They also argue that if there is no positive change of attitude among citizens, any effort of government to checkmate corruption is a mere waste of time and resources. They also contend that corruption is committed by man who is a social being and rational being. That man knows that corruption is an illicit act yet he engages in it consciously. There is no other ways to curtail the act apart from proper orientation among the citizenry on the need for them to say no to all dishonest behaviour. They paid more emphasis on the importance of civic education in order for the citizens to know their civil responsibilities which will lead to attitudinal change. They argue that corruption will be a thing of the past only when citizens changed their attitudes from negative to positive and say no to corruption.

It is because of the proposition of the socialization school of the thought that made many countries to establish and incorporate socialization or orientation agencies in their political systems or as government institution. For example in Nigeria it is called “National Orientation Agency (NOA).

Their primary responsibility is to ensure positive attitudinal change among citizenry. All their messages centre on civic education which is based on the need for the citizens to be patriotic towards their state.

However, the Social School of Thought did not subscribe to the proposition of the Socialization School of Thought in the same manner the proponents did not agree with the Radical School of Thought. The disciplines criticize Socialization School for being superficial, theoretical and ignorant of social needs of the people. That they [disciplines of socialization school of thought] do not know the primary needs of man which has to be addressed before any other thing in any state.

The disciples of social school of thought asked some relevant questions to the advocates of the socialization perspective which they failed to answer. Some of the questions are: First and foremost; can a hungry, foodless and homeless man become a genuine patriot? Can socially excluded and disenfranchised citizens by the state become patriots? Can a hungry man attain socialization and orientation lecture and also reasons well? How can one become patriotic to a government that is threatening his social existence?  How can one become loyal to a government that made him/her less human, unprotected, and vulnerable to hunger, diseases, poverty, and ignorant? The answer is definitely No! It is not possible because been patriotic comes only into play when citizens are show the sense of inclusiveness, love, oneness, identity and worthiness by the government. In other words, the state has to foster a feeling of belonging and involvement among citizenry. The dignity of man has to be restored before any other thing whether orientation or whatever.

Hence, there is no doubt that socialization is a vital tool to achieve an ideal society which is the main dream of everybody but it is secondary or auxiliary or dependent variable. Therefore the propositions by the disciples of the Radical and Socialization Schools of Thought are in order and embody very vital approaches on ways to tackle corruption holistically but they are secondary or auxiliary factors as we have stated which need not come first.

We have analyzed the three different and coordinate perspectives on how to fight this national cankerworm called corruption in any state precisely in Nigeria. We can see that the propositions by the disciples of Social School of Thought are more logical and sound than the other two schools thought to some extent. For this reason we have adopted it in this literature as our preferred approach or method of tackling or fighting corruption in human society. We shall briefly do more justice to it by explaining it again and recommending it to all countries in the world, especially those where corruption has devastated and caused national crisis due to insecurity of the social security systems.

Naturally, man who is a social being under normal conditions will not engage in any asocial act. The only condition that can make him to do so is when his social needs are under threat. This may lead him in illicit acts in order to immune himself from social danger and be able to defeat these three basic enemies of man which are poverty, ignorance and diseases. That is the reason why we defined corruption as an act of moral perversion (i.e. deviating from normal or standard way of life). That Nigeria has always being rated high in Corruption Perceptions Index annually by Transparency International [TI] does not mean that Nigerians are special species that are corrupt in nature but because of societal condition where corrupt practices flourish due to lack of social security.

Therefore there is no other fruitful way to prevent the act except through the protection of the social wellbeing of the citizens no matter how little they may be. This is because it has power to stimulate the behavior of man. It is under this situation that citizens will be able to show acts of patriotism and social solidarity to their state which will voluntarily reduce all forms of corrupt practices to the barest minimum.

It is clear that a patriotic person cannot engage in any illicit act that will derail or tarnish the image of his state. Government is like father in the family and we all know what will be the state of the family when a father tries to neglect his primary responsibilities vice versa.

Man under normal condition is a gentle being who needs not excessive capital accumulation. He can only engage in the act of primitive capital accumulation when his future is not guaranteed. For instance, if the future of citizens is secured there will be no need for a person to operate more than five different foreign bank accounts, and for a father to operate bank accounts in name of a five-year old child that is worth millions of naira. This kind of behaviour (primitive capital accumulation) is an empirical indicator of a lack of social security for the citizenry. This act is more rampant in a socially vulnerably state like Nigeria. He who does that is doing it due to the fear of the unknown.

In summary, we are recommending that every country should pay unalloyed attention to the social security of their citizens because it has stimulant power to make or mar any state. Social security is the best form of security any state can give to its citizens.

Let the principle of utilitarianism which believes in “the greatest happiness for the greatest number” be the primary guide to every state in formulating and implementing their policies. This means that the actions or inactions of government should be measured by how extent they provided pleasure over pain to the citizens. The policies of government can either be judged as good or bad based on how far they provided happiness to the greatest number of the people. Any government policy that fails to ensure the citizens’ happiness is a failed one.

If there is no social security there will be no other securities. As we have stated somewhere in this work that armed security as we have it today is the perversion of social security system. Social insecurity led to armed security because government knows that it has failed in its primary responsibilities and is now prone to attack by the governed. Therefore, it (government) has to arms itself against the socially disadvantaged citizens. If not because of social insecurity what will make citizens to take up arms against their state. If not because of social insecurity, armed security may be relatively unnecessary. The importance of social security for any state is inexhaustible and cannot be overemphasized.                     Tackles social insecurity kills corruption and develop your state!