JUNE 2016

The CAACC has come up with a new research initiative which is the Monthly Research Analysis and Policy Information Requirements. Every month the Research Coordinator will be sending out the Monthly Research Analysis and Policy Information Requirements to liaison officers who in most agencies are the communications officers. This initiative is intended to collect as much information as possible from anti-corruption agencies by engaging liaison officers to collect information on behalf of the CAACC. The exercise will require anti-corruption agencies to supply data, intelligence and other news that they may have or may be able to unearth to contribute to the Cen-tre’s research projects. The information collected will greatly assist to set up the CAACC as a research hub. In addition, the information collected will be classified according to the four CAACC Pro-grammes which are Prevention, Investigation, Prosecution and Public Education. Under each programme, the information will be further classified under the CAACC’s three pillars which are capacity building, research, analysis and policy, and sharing and networking. Liaising officers will have the option to either fulfill the exercise in one month or collect the information over a period of time. We look forward to cooperating with all of the CAACC agencies in this new endeavor.

CAACC Monthly Research and Policy Information Requirements

Special points of interest: ““..research on power shows that powerful people construe others as a means to one’s end while simultaneously giving themselves excessive credit for good things that happen to themselves and their organizations…It is astoun-ding how rapidly even tiny and trivial power advantages can change how people act and think

– usually for the worse…” .” ― Robert Sutton

Inside this issue:

CAACC Monthly Research and Policy Requirements

1

Malawi ACB signs MOU with Insti-tute of Internal Auditors

1

EACC sponsors 2016 Kenya national drama

2

DCEC Launches Boammaruri 3

The role of civil society in corruption prevention

4

Dealing and combating Impunity and investigating the untouchables

5-7

Know other ACA’s 8

MALAWI ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU (ACB) SIGNS MOU WITH INSTITUTE OF

INTERNAL AUDITORS

In its quest to partner with various stakeholders in the fight against corruption in Ma-lawi, the Anti-Corruption Bureau signed a memorandum of understanding with Institute of Internal Auditors. This was done in recognition of the strategic role internal auditors play in prevention and detection of corrupt practices. The main focus of the partnership will be to develop and implement anti-corruption awareness programmes to prevent, detect, deter corruption and fraud and report malpractices to the Anti-Corruption Bureau. This is in agreement with the National Anti-Corruption Strategy which demands the involvement of all stakeholders in the fight against corruption in Malawi.

Mrs. Charity Mphande Director of Public Education

and Mr. Paul Nyirenda President of Institute of

Internal Auditors exchange copies of the

memorandum of understanding after the signing

Page 2

EACC SPONSORS 2016 KENYA NATIONAL DRAMA FESTIVAL

Various Schools, Colleges and Universities have won Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission awards at the

57th Edition of the Kenya National Drama Festival held in Meru County. The EACC rewarded various insti-

tutions of learning offering the best interpretation of the theme in their presentations. The festival overarch-

ing theme was Enhancing artistic talent for National Development The theme serves to foster young Ken-

yans willingness to use their abundant artistic talent to develop this great nation. The theme underscores val-

ues of resilience and self-regulation among Kenyans particularly the youth, in embracing challenges and ap-

plying great effort in pursuit of both at the individual and national goals. Through the partnership with Minis-

try of Education, Science and Technology, the Commission donated twenty trophies that were awarded to:

Best Play, Best Choral and Solo Verse in the anti-corruption and ethics category for the Primary, Secondary,

Colleges and University levels.

Deputy Secretary,

Mr. Michel Mubea

officially hands

over the EACC

trophy to the

Producer of the

winning play from

St. Mary's Yala

The EACC trophies were presented to institutions whose overall performance and interpretation of the

themes at the festival had the highest score. The winners of the trophies were: Wema Academy, St. Mary's

Yala with PRICK OF ROSES-This play calls upon us to rethink our value system as we seem to celebrate

villains and persecute our heroes; Kakamega High School performed: THE CROSS-The play depicts a criti-

cal role played by the teacher in molding a citizenry founded on proactive, diligence, innovation, diversity,

stewardship and forbearance; Kericho TTC with a Solo Verse: The SERPENT- The solo verse highlights the

creator of corruption and who and how to go about bringing its death and ensuring a corruption free nation;

Kaimosi TTC-The play revolves around the theft of public funds. In the play, elected leaders collude with

suppliers to rip off his subjects their hard earned collections; Maseno University- The EXECUTIVE CHEF-

the play depicts a scenario where the selection of an executive chef to undertake a national culinary assign-

ment encounters intrigues and personal interests which mar the whole process and procedure. Commission

staff also sensitised teachers, students and the general public on the work of the EACC. 310 institutions of

learning and close to 20,000 students, teachers and

the general public were reached during the two

week long festival.

Kaimosi TTC Cast pose for a photo with their

trophy at the EACC tent during the Kenya Na-

tional Drama Festival in Meru County.

DIRECTORATE ON CORRUPTION AND ECONOMIC CRIME (DCEC) LAUNCHES BOAMMARURI

The Director-General, Ms Rose N. Seretse officiated the launch of the new DCEC Boammaruri Mascot at Oasis Motel in Gaborone, Botswana. The Boammaruri project is intended to help learners in Primary Schools to grasp corruption issues at grass roots level, it borrows from the Rraboammaruri project which the DCEC ran for years and reviewed to fill in the gaps. In her opening remarks, the DCEC Director-General highlighted the following;

• The Mascot programme is meant to shift attention to young members of the population with the view to direct them to a desirable path at a tender age.

• It is painful that corruption stifles development, siphons off scarce resources that could improve infrastructure and overall livelihoods of citizens.

• DCEC does Public Educational programmes also with upper primary level so we endeavour to teach pupils principles on honesty and further caution them that dishonest individuals risk becoming career criminals in their adult life.

• When the youth are nurtured well, in a positive environment, far away from the path riddled with immorality, they would become upright as well as law abiding citizens in future.

• We cannot rely on one solution to fight crime or corruption hence the need to continually find ways to contain it together with its attendant evils.

• The old Raboammaruri mascot programme was put on hold and after reviewing it with the input of stakeholders and the reviews resulted in giving it a facelift that included a unisex name and desirable physical attributes that will appeal to their young customers.

• Parts of DCEC’s youth educational programmes are infused in anti-corruption concepts in Junior Secondary School curriculum, however with the reintroduction of Boammaruri at Primary School level, we believed that the strategy would afford them significant mileage in anti-corruption efforts at grass roots level.

• For corruption to be curbed and maintained at manageable levels it is paramount we forge strategic partnerships with the relevant stakeholders.

• The initiative would be rolled to a number of schools with intention to introduce the mascot to school learners in July 2016.

Page 3

Primary school students with Boammaruri

Adviser of Governance and An t i -Cor rup t ion D iv i s ion Commonwealth Secretariat, and some of the CAACC, DCEC and BOCONGO officers after the third collaboration meeting

THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN CORRUPTION PREVENTION

The Commonwealth Africa Anti-Corruption Centre is committed to both maintaining and fostering strong

national and regional networks which offers a unique focus on collaborative action. In an endeavour to

see this through, in March 2015, the Centre carried out a pilot corruption prevention civil society

conference in Botswana which will be rolled out across the other 17 member countries of the Common-

wealth in Africa. The main objective of this conference was to promote collaboration between

anti-corruption agencies and civil society organizations. The conference was opened with a vision and

direction to create a platform for the anti-corruption agencies, civil society, and the private sector to

work together in the fight against corruption.

This vision was in line with The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) which recognizes

the role of civil society in combating impunity by calling on governments to increase transparency,

improve public access to information, and to promote public contribution to government decision-making

processes. The UN Convention against Corruption is the only legally binding universal anti-corruption

instrument and its article 13 states that civil society should play an active role in combating corruption.

The Commonwealth Anti-Corruption Centre (CAACC) has availed its limited resources to assist

Commonwealth member states through their national Anti-Corruption Agencies to strengthen the

involvement of Civil Society in preventing corruption. The Centre is making continuous follow up on the

non-government organizations through their mother bodies and Anti- Corruption agencies, in this case

the DCEC, to check progress made to establish collaborations. The DCEC and Botswana Council of

Non-Governmental Organisations (BOCONGO) has formed working committees which will oversee/

facilitate the strategies for collaboration which ranges from awareness raising to policy formation, and

the implementation of the anti-corruption strategies at a national level among other things.

DEALING AND COMBATTING IMPUNITY AND INVESTIGATING THE UNTOUCHABLES (Continuation

from May 2016)

In last month’s article, we spoke of the investigator’s nightmare when called upon to investigate “untouchables” - people who believe they are above the law and who seem to benefit from impunity. In this article- we speak of the “untouchable’s psychology”. By analysing and trying to decipher how those “untouchables” think, it may help us to find their weaknesses. THE UNTOUCHABLE’S PSYCHOLOGY: When it comes to investigating persons who are assessed to be “untouchable”, it would seem to be wise to understand how they have acquired that status. What was it that motivated them and led them to reach a position in which not only are they perceived to be untouchable but they perceive themselves as such. We need first, therefore, to look at the “untouchable” general psychology.

It was Honore de Balzac- one of France’s great writers who said that “Behind every great fortune there is a great cri-me” and it is to Lord Acton that we owe the great phrase that “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely…” But Lord Acton said much more than that when he added to his famous phrase that “Great men are al-most always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority…”

It is also interesting to note what Harvard Professor Robert Sutton says about power in his famous book with the unusual title of “The no asshole rule”. He says:-

“..research on power shows that powerful people construe others as a means to one’s end while simulta-neously giving themselves excessive credit for good things that happen to themselves and their organizations…It is astounding how rapidly even tiny and trivial power advantages can change how people act and think – usually for the worse…”

We are also reminded what was said on Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) on the programme “The Book Show” on Radio Nationals on 13 November 2007 about power:-

“…People in power have a low ability if any ability at all or capacity to self-reflect….Their incapacity to self-reflect or introspect assist them in never having to question themselves…If they did they would be frightened about their meanness and hypocrisy”.

The incapacity to introspect, treating people as means to one’s ends, self-attribution of credit,…..etc. etc… tend to lead one to question the type of conscience that people in power- the “untouchables” possess.

In looking at issues conscience or more precisely the lack of it, one is taken to studies by such psychiatrists as Stout who has spent a lifetime dealing with sociopathic behaviour. Stout says that one in twenty five persons exhibit sociopathic cha-racteristics. Moreover, when one looks at what she and others have written in the domain of sociopathic behaviour and characteristics, we are confronted with the frightful prospect that most of our political leaders, industry leaders, politicians and high bureaucrats as well as wealthy tycoons exhibit sociopathic characteristics.

Interestingly, in that line of thinking, Jon Ronson who wrote “The Psychopath Test” – a book that refers to how he tested a number of famous Chief Executives (CEO’s) with what is called as the “Psychopath Test”- found that a large number of CEO’s “suffered” of a significant number of sociopath/psychopath characteristics. This goes some ways to explain the ab-surd, ignoble and grotesque salaries packages and bonuses that CEO’s remunerate themselves with even when they under-perform and bankrupt the corporations they’re in charge of. Many of those CEO’s that Ronson interviewed showed that they had no sentiments, care or feelings about their staff and were, by and large, interested in only one thing:- themselves.

SOCIOPATHIC CHARACTERISTICS:-

Various reading on the subject of sociopathic behaviour lists the following general characteristics:--Charm, Thrills

Various reading on the subject of sociopathic behaviour lists the following general characteristics:--Charm, Thrills and

risk-taking, seduction, remorselessness, self-centeredness, feelings of superiority, inability to introspect, winning,

absolute disregard/blindness for others and others’ feelings, manipulative.

INVESTIGATION OF “UNTOUCHABLES”:-

As soon as an investigator is facing the prospect of having to investigate a person identified as “untouchable”, one can im-mediately assume that the person possesses power and influence, can manipulate a situation that does not suit him or her and create obstacles to whatever he or she identifies as threatening to his/her power/influence.

and risk-taking, seduction, remorselessness, self-centeredness, feelings of superiority, inability to introspect, winning, absolute disregard/blindness for others and others’ feelings, manipulative

POWER:-

Power is inextricably linked to influence, authority and the issue of “untouchable-ness”. For this reason we need to look at what power is made of and how it is acquired.

Six Bases of Power Legitimate power Also called "Positional power", it is the power of an individual because of the relative position and duties of the holder of the position within an organization. Legitimate power is formal authority delegated to the holder of the position. It is usu-ally accompanied by various attributes of power such as uniforms, offices etc. This is the most obvious and also the most important kind of power. Referent power Referent power is the power or ability of individuals to attract others and build loyalty. It's based on the charisma and interpersonal skills of the power holder. A person may be admired because of specific personal trait, and this admiration creates the opportunity for interpersonal influence. Here the person under power desires to identify with these personal qualities, and gains satisfaction from being an accepted follower. This is the second least obvious power, but the most ef-fective. Referent power can be a big responsibility, because you don't necessarily have to do anything to earn it. There-fore, it can be abused quite easily. Someone who is likeable, but lacks integrity and honesty, may rise to power – and use that power to hurt and alienate people as well as gain personal advantage.

Expert power Expert power is an individual's power deriving from the skills or expertise of the person and the organization's needs for those skills and expertise. Unlike the others, this type of power is usually highly specific and limited to the particular area in which the expert is trained and qualified. Reward power Reward power depends on the ability of the power wielder to confer valued material rewards; it refers to the degree to which the individual can give others a reward of some kind. This power is obvious but also ineffective if abused. People who abuse reward power can become pushy. If others expect that you'll reward them for doing what you want, there's a high probability that they'll do it. Coercive power Coercive power is the application of negative influences. It includes the ability to demote or to withhold other rewards. The desire for valued rewards or the fear of having them withheld that ensures the obedience of those under power. Co-ercive power tends to be the most obvious but least effective form of power as it builds resentment and resistance from the people who experience it. Threats and punishment are common tools of coercion. Implying or threatening that some-one will be fired, demoted, denied privileges, or given undesirable assignments – these are examples of using coercive power. Informational power Informational power is based on the potential use of informational resources. This influence can occur through such means as rational argument, persuasion, or factual data. Members of a group can make information into power by giving it to others who need it, by keeping it to themselves, by organizing it in some way, by increasing it, or even by falsifying i t ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. OBSERVATIONS:-

The first observation that must be made is that untouchables rarely admit to wrong-doing. It is simply not in their charac-ter, psychology or perspective. They believe themselves to be above the average person- they believe in their own superi-ority and even, in some extreme cases, their own divinity, infinity and infallibility. So for them, the allegations cannot exist- if they exist, they belong in another realm and have been “created” for a purpose aimed at diminishing their status, power and position.

Bar to Prosecution:-No one is above INVESTIGATION. This needs to be stressed because often investigation and prosecution are confused. It may be that some “untouchables” cannot be prosecuted under the law, but the bar to prose-cution is not a bar to investigation. In fact even when an “untouchable” is by law un-prosecutable because he or she holds a political position that may provide that “right”, he or she still can be investigated and the investigation – even once com-pleted- can be en-livened when the person is no longer under the protection of the law. It is often the case that investiga-tion of an allegation against an “untouchable” who is by law protected against prosecution is filed on the basis that prose-cution cannot follow. The assumed close relationship between prosecution and investigation is sometimes taken to the extreme in such a way that in effect, investigations are sabotaged even before they start.

Stories and Contexts: - “Untouchables” – like all “suspects” will want to change the context – the backdrop of your investigation notwithstanding that the backdrop for any investigation is simply always the same- legality. It is the law that supplies the dynamics for any investigation. But “untouchables” prefer other “contexts” and “backdrops” – other dynamics if you prefer. The usual ones are listed hereunder:-

1.Politically-motivated allegation:-The allegation is politically motivated by the “untouchable’s” opponents. You, the investigator, are being used in a political plot to destroy the “untouchable’s” “great” reputation and political status and position.

2.Competitively-motivated allegation:-The allegation is “competitively” motivated by the “untouchable’s” commer-cial competitors- who aim at stealing the ‘untouchable’s” success and market share.

3.The Investigator’s craving for fame:-The allegation is based on the idea that you- the investigator- enjoys “stealing” the “untouchable’s” success and that by investigating him/her you will gain celebrity.

4.The low-status of the Investigator:-The allegation is “dangerous” as you- the investigator- cannot possibly realize the damage you will be causing to society if the “untouchable” is no longer able to operate, the “untouchable” here is in-dispensable and you – the investigator- should realize this and use a utilitarian approach to the allegation. You the investi-gator should think that the potential temporary removal of the untouchable from society (by imprisonment) will surely cause a proportional removal of all the great good that the untouchable contributes to society!

5.The low petty allegation:-The allegation is common- you the investigator- is targeting the “untouchable” with some-thing that in his/her position everyone does, therefore your investigation is biased and personal.

6.The “plot”:-The allegation is a plot in which you- the investigator- is being used, as a puppet as it were- in a grander scheme that you the investigator could not possibly know anything about!

7.The investigator is a pawn:-The allegation is of such a petty nature that it is proof that you- the investigator- is being used by the “untouchable’s “rivals and/or enemies.

8.The “class-struggle” case:-The allegation is based on a “class” struggle. You the investigator reflects the envy the jealousy of those whom the “untouchable” believes are jealous and envious of his/her success and that because of this success and achievements, you- the investigator- believe that the “untouchable” should be punished.

9.The “hidden” and “closed off criminal environment” argument: - In this argument, the untouchable will tell you that what he/she is being investigated for is “petty” and that you-the investigator- should really go and look further afield where there simply is bigger, greater crimes being committed and which of course you- the investigator- is being kept away from by wasting time investigating him/her! (Note: - this is when you- the investigator- ask the untouchable to report to you what those Big and Greater crimes by others are!!!)

The “if not me- others” argument: - Here the untouchable will explain that there is nothing wrong with what he/she’s done, that the crime he/she is accused of in “run of the mill” and that if he/she did not commit the crimes he/she is accused of, someone else would commit them and that as soon as he/she is removed to prison, someone else will auto-

matically move into the criminal space that he/she has vacated!

F.MONTIL

ANTI-CORRUPTION EXPERT CAACC-GABORONE.

KNOW OTHER ACA’S

National Anti-Corruption Commission -Cameroon

The National Anti-Corruption Commission of Cameroon, CONAC, is spear-heading

the fight against corruption in the Central African nation. The National Anti-

Corruption Commission of Cameroon, better known by its French acronym CONAC,

is an independent public structure created by Presidential Decree No. 2006/088 of

March 11, 2006, with a mandate to contribute to the fight against corruption in

Cameroon. Following the appointment of the pioneer Commissioners by the Head of

State on March 15, 2007, effective work began in 2008.

Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission- Kenya

The Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) is a public

body created by the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes

Act in 2003. The KACC became fully operational in August

2005 and replaced previous agencies and units working on

corruption-related issues. The KACC is responsible for in-

vestigating and preventing corruption, economic crimes and

educating the public on the dangers of corruption. The

KACC does not have any prosecution powers, but forwards

cases to the Attorney General.

From KACC to EACC Pursuant to Article 79 of the Constitution, Parliament disbanded KACC on 24th August 2011 through enact-

ment of the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission Act (EACC), 2011. The EACC was established on 5th

September 2011.

Commonwealth Africa Anti-Corruption Centre

Private Bag 00344, Gaborone, Botswana

+267 3604 200/3984437

www.thecaacc.org

VISION

To be a World class African Anti corruption resource centre that promotes ethics, integrity and good governance.

MISSION

To effectively support anti-corruption initiatives and promote cooperation and research in Commonwealth Africa with integrity and

professionalism.

VALUES

1. Transparency 2. Accountability 3. Integrity 4. Professionalism 5. Fairness

Like our Facebook page, Commonwealth Africa Anti Corruption Centre