Earlier this week, former South African President Jacob Zuma, who had just completed serving a 15-month jail term for contempt of court for refusing to answer charges of corruption and “state capture”, came out guns blazing, accusing his successor, President Cyril Ramaphosa, of engaging in the same crime, and urging the ruling party to reject him in favour of his former wife.
During an excited press conference, Mr Zuma accused President Ramaphosa of hiding four million US dollars under his mattresses to avoid paying tax, loot that burglars gleefully stole.
But instead of handling the matter with a little finesse, the president allegedly organised for the burglars to be kidnapped and bribed to keep quiet. As a result, according to Mr Zuma, President Ramaphosa is not only corrupt, he is treasonous.
You really can’t beat that for drama. Although Mr Ramaphosa, who is by no means a poor man – his net worth is something in the region of US$450 million, which makes US$4 million pocket change – defended himself by saying the money was proceeds from the sale of livestock, he may have to explain what it was doing under mattresses.
This comes at the wrong time because the ruling African National Congress (ANC) is about to meet to decide who to front for the presidency in 2024.
Quite obviously, Mr Zuma does not believe he ever did anything wrong. Unfortunately, there are still a few racketeering, money laundering and fraud charges hanging over his head, but at 80 years of age, very few believe he will face jail time again. Nor would it be wise to incarcerate him, for it would be a death sentence.
After all, of the 15-month sentence, he spent only three behind bars and was subsequently confined to Nkandla on account of ill-health. However, instead of resting, the indefatigable Mr Zuma seems to believe this is payback time, and he could very well deny Mr Ramaphosa a second term.
[Incidentally, if you want to know all about the old man and his peculiar ways, watch on YouTube the old, hilarious sketch by the multi-talented actor/comedian Trevor Noah, “Saying Goodbye to Jacob Zuma”. That is where I learnt what “State capture” means long before it was popularised by the Kenya Kwanza propaganda team.]
However, this is not about South Africa or the tribulations faced by its presidents, past and present; this is about the role that corruption plays in the governance of nearly all African states, and why the vice is so wildly popular among the continent’s rulers.
Unfortunately, in very few countries does graft determine the fate of any of those rulers, which makes South Africa somewhat unique. It is well-nigh impossible to jail former heads of state over graft in Africa; they either hang on to power, flee into exile, or they are dispatched to the netherworld by power-hungry putschists.
One may then ask: as a leader, what is so attractive about robbing your people when you already have more than enough? Is it merely because you can do it with complete impunity?
This age-old question defines African politics, but mindless avarice does not explain everything, especially when the consequences are all too clear. According to the World Bank, corruption is the single-most important reason why the poor will always remain poor.
The moment leaders divert public resources into their own pockets, they are actually robbing those who elected them. A corrupt leadership weakens the state, and a chronically fragile state does not have the wherewithal to fight graft. It is a cyclical, no-win situation.
Coming closer home, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Kenya Kwanza administration does not have the war against the vice anywhere near the top of its priorities.
The explanation for this is crystal clear; this country is in a very bad shape at the moment, considering that the prolonged drought is already costing many lives, foreign debt repayment is crippling all available options, the prices of most commodities, including food and fuel, have shot up sky-high, rampant insecurity is still a deadly menace that defies all solutions, and, sadly, quite a number of senior members of the new administration are still stuck in the past seeking scapegoats as though that was the answer.
In that respect, it would be unfair to accuse the new administration of lack of seriousness when they do not wax lyrical about slaying the dragon of corruption.
Even if it is true that some would not be comfortable saying it because they are quite complicit in the malfeasance of the past, still it would not hurt if they acknowledged publicly that there is, indeed, a problem which they mean to sort out in due course.
After all, like it or not, wishing away graft is not an option. That is why it was encouraging to hear President William Ruto declare early this week:
"The fight against corruption must be won. Our government intends to wage this fight and demonstrate its commitment to zero tolerance to corruption by making all public servants accountable and submitting to the oversight of Parliament and other constitutionally mandated institutions." He’s quite to the point.
