From Sept. 17 to 19, more than 800 anti-corruption officials from eight SADC countries will gather in Victoria Falls for an event featuring exhibitions, cultural activities, netball and volleyball.
The theme is “Scaling Up Integrity Actions Across SADC.”
Vice President Kembo Mohadi will open it.
The Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission is presenting the event as a regional demonstration of commitment to fighting corruption. It is also celebrating the conversion of Chinotimba Stadium into a permanent multi-sport facility for Matabeleland North.
Zimbabwe has another objective: improving on its performance at last year’s anti-corruption games in Namibia, where it won three silver medals in netball and volleyball and the award for Best Exhibitor.
There is something strange about that list of achievements.
An anti-corruption commission is measuring its performance partly in medals and exhibition prizes.
That would be harmless if the sporting competition were simply an addition to serious anti-corruption work.
But Zimbabwe is a country where corruption remains a major governance problem.
In Transparency International’s latest Corruption Perceptions Index, Zimbabwe scored 22 out of 100 and ranked 157th among 182 countries.
The one-point improvement from the previous year was presented as progress.
It was technically progress.
It was not a transformation.
Transparency International Zimbabwe’s executive director made that clear when the results were released. A one-point increase did little to alter the country’s overall corruption outlook.
This is the problem with events like the Expo and Games.
They make activity easy to confuse with progress.
There is no objection to bringing anti-corruption officials together. Regional cooperation matters. Investigators need relationships with their counterparts in neighboring countries, particularly when criminals can move money across borders faster than governments can exchange information.
There is evidence that such cooperation can produce something useful.
Are you enjoying reading this post? Receive Notifications via email when new articles are published
Get notified of new articles… Subscribe
In July, the anti-corruption agencies of Botswana, Zimbabwe and Zambia used a Victoria Falls summit to establish a tripartite alliance aimed at addressing gaps in cooperation over cross-border financial crime.
That is the kind of regional anti-corruption work worth celebrating.
It has a specific problem to solve.
It has identifiable institutions.
It can produce measurable results.
An exhibition stand cannot.
Neither can a volleyball medal.
SADC has an even more basic problem.
The regional body does not yet have its own framework for measuring progress against corruption. Its procurement documents for a study on the subject acknowledge that SADC currently relies on international measures such as Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index.
There is nothing wrong with using an international index.
But the CPI measures perceptions of public-sector corruption. It does not tell SADC whether a particular regional programme has prevented corruption, improved investigations or increased successful prosecutions.
The distinction matters.
Governments can hold conferences, sign conventions and establish committees without changing the incentives that allow corruption to flourish.
Southern Africa has plenty of agreements.
SADC has its Protocol Against Corruption. The African Union has its own convention. The United Nations has a global convention against corruption.
The region has spent years demonstrating that it knows what corruption is and what governments should do about it.
The harder question is whether governments actually enforce those commitments.
That is where the games become a distraction.
A three-day event can demonstrate solidarity. It can create contacts. It can generate publicity.
It cannot establish judicial independence.
It cannot make procurement transparent.
It cannot recover stolen public money.
It cannot guarantee that investigators can pursue politically connected suspects like “Dhunda”.
And it cannot make an anti-corruption institution effective simply because its officials have gathered under an anti-corruption banner.
The danger is not that anyone believes a volleyball tournament will eliminate corruption.
The danger is that governments are very good at celebrating visible activity because activity is easy to photograph.
A vice president opening a stadium is visible.
Officials gathering around an exhibition stand is visible.
A medal ceremony is visible.
A successful corruption investigation that quietly recovers public money is less visible.
So is a procurement system that prevents a corrupt contract from being awarded in the first place.
The distinction between those things is the distinction between performance and publicity.
Zimbabwe should be particularly careful about it.
A country that scores 22 out of 100 on a major global corruption measure does not need another demonstration that its officials can organize an event.
It needs evidence that institutions are becoming harder to corrupt.
That evidence should be measurable.
How many corruption cases are investigated?
How many reach court?
How many result in convictions?
How much stolen money is recovered?
How many public contracts are subjected to transparent competitive bidding?
How quickly are politically exposed persons investigated when credible allegations emerge?
Those are the numbers that matter.
The same standard should apply to SADC.
If the region wants to demonstrate that it is “scaling up integrity actions,” it should be able to show what has changed as a result.
The test should not be whether officials meet again next year.
It should be whether the institutions they represent are working better.
There is nothing wrong with playing volleyball in Victoria Falls.
There is nothing wrong with improving Chinotimba Stadium.
There is nothing wrong with officials from neighboring countries building relationships.
But none of those things should be mistaken for evidence that corruption is declining.
The real test will come after the banners are removed and the officials go home.
If Zimbabwe’s corruption score remains near the bottom of the global rankings, if SADC still cannot measure the effectiveness of its own anti-corruption programmes, and if the same officials return next year to another host country for another exhibition and another medal ceremony, the region will have demonstrated remarkable consistency.
It will have shown that it knows how to stage the fight against corruption.
What it will not have shown is that it knows how to win it.
You cannot medal your way out of corruption.
Source: You Can’t Medal Your Way Out of Corruption – Zealous Thierry
The post You Can’t Medal Your Way Out of Corruption appeared first on Zimbabwe Situation.