Power and Corruption Paper PDF
Power and Corruption Paper PDF
The
essay was not shortlisted for the final report and therefore TNI does not take responsibility for its
contents. However the Editorial Board appreciated the essay and it is posted here as
recommended reading."
Abstract
Introduction
Corruption in Zimbabwe has devastating effects on the ability of poor people to access
basic services. Research on corruption has tended to focus on how political leaders and
administrators use their position to amass wealth. There is also a growing field of study in
petty corruption occurring in all sectors of social and economic life. All these forms of
corruption are intricately linked to power. Corruption can be considered as essentially a
problem of power. This paper uses Foucault’s perspectives on power to highlight how
corruption in all its forms is intricately linked access to and exercise of various forms of
power. Conventional studies (Zakiuddin, 2000) define corruption as the abuse of public
power for private gain which leads to an instrumentalist view of power. Such an analysis
hides the relational and micro workings of power. In this sense, power is understood as
possession, as something owned by those in power. Borrowing from Foucault power is not
something that can be owned, but rather something that acts and manifests itself in a
certain way; it is more a strategy than a possession. Power has to be understood as a
system in which network of relations are in which individuals are the vehicles of power, not
its points of application (Foucault, 1980). This understanding of power thus provides a
better analysis of corruption in which simply focusing on ruling elites in Zimbabwe as
‘holders’ of power hides interesting dimensions into how a change in the relations of power
and not only a change of politicians is the best of fighting corruption.
Corruption is often described as an individualistic act which involves the use of authority
for personal gain (Hodgson and Jiang, 2007). When building towards sociology of
corruption the emphasis is on understanding corruption as a social rather than individual
phenomenon. That is why a focus on power emphasises the social nature of corruption:
“Corruption can be seen not so much as an objective practice existing in a vacuum, but as
a social act whose meaning needs to be understood with reference to social relationships”
(Harrison, 2006, p. 15). Power from a Foucauldian perspective is also defined from a
social relationship perspective which allows for an analysis of corruption as social act. In
this way the focus is on the social institutions and not individuals in understanding the
origins, mechanisms and solutions to the problem of corruption.
Defining concepts is an enterprise fraught with contestations. Within the context of this
paper definitions of power and corruption need to be rooted within the socio-cultural
systems. Power within the context of this discussion borrows from Foucault’s theories on
the micro physics of power. For Foucault, any study:
…of power should begin from below, in the heterogeneous and dispersed
microphysics of power…where it is exercised over individuals rather than
legitimated at the centre; explore the actual practices of subjugation rather than the
intentions that guide attempts at domination; and recognize that power circulates
through networks rather than being applied at particular points (Jessop, undated, p.
4).
Power thus has to be understood as diffuse, embodied and enacted. It cannot be
understood as a concentrated at a centre or as a possession as Foucault (1998, p. 93)
notes, ‘power is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it comes
from everywhere.’ When understanding corruption in Zimbabwe it is thus important to
highlight how power understood this way transcends politics and is as an everyday,
socialised and embodied phenomenon. In theorizing the decentredness of power, Foucault
also provides interesting insights into how corruption is not the preserve of political elites
but rather it is endemic in all relationships in society. Power and corruption thus need to be
understood externally in the places where it is applied. Power, conceptualized as a
network of relations requires the study of the networks of individuals who constituted a
certain problem as such and subsequently managed to establish a regime in the form of
localized power/knowledge. Taking this to corruption it means that corruption as an issue
of power is made through localized networks.
In Zimbabwe corruption is evident in all aspects of life for example reports of bribes to
traffic police, paying to get a job or basic services such as drivers license or passport. It is
the use and not only abuse of power that needs further analysis in the Zimbabwean
context. Islam (2001) argues that the use of power as a deployment of strategy can also
be a point of analysis for corruption. Power can also be interpreted as use of strategy and
in the case of Zimbabwe; corruption has been used as a survival strategy by many in
different positions at the expense of the poor who often have to pay more for many basic
services. Table 1 above outlines the various types of corruption. Corruption is broadly
defined in this study as the intentional misperformance or neglect of a recognised duty, or
the unwarranted exercise of power, with the motive of gaining some advantage more or
less directly personal (Alatas, 1980). Such a definition whilst contested allows for a starting
point to debate the concept as a sociological phenomenon. Emphasis on the relationship
between power and corruption also highlights the social reproduction of corruption. By this
I mean how power structures and social activities transmit corruption and its impacts from
one generation to the next. Young people are socialized into a corrupt system and adopt
norms that value corruption.
Corruption has become part of everyday life in Zimbabwe (National Integrity Systems,
2006/7). According to the 2012 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index,
Zimbabwe ranks joint 163 out of 176 countries. Though there is a contestation over the
use of this index, corruption remains a major problem affecting the Zimbabwean economy.
According to Hardoon and Heinrich (2011) report 52% of Zimbabweans have paid a bribe
to a service provider. Yamamoto (2014) provides a detailed analysis of corruption in
Zimbabwe highlighting how the political elite have consistently used their power to
accumulate wealth without consequences. He alleges that:
…the scandals have been popping out of the bottle one after another. To name but
a few, these include the Paweni scandal (1982), National Railways Housing
Scandal (1986), Air Zimbabwe Fokker Plane Scandal worth $100 million (1987),
Zisco Steel blast Furnace Scandal (1987), Willowgate Scandal (1988), ZRP
Santana Scandal (1989), War Victims Compensation Scandal (1994), GMB Grain
Scandal (1995), VIP Housing Scandal (1996), Boka Banking Scandal (1998), ZESA
YTL Soltran Scandal (1998), – Harare City Council Refuse Tender Scandal (1998),
Housing Loan Scandal (1999), Noczim Scandal (1999), – DRC timber and diamond
UN reported scandals (1999), GMB Scandal (1999), – Ministry of water and rural
development Chinese tender scandal (1999), Harare Airport Scandal (2001),
pillaging and milking of Ziscosteel (2005-8), pillaging of diamonds in Chiadzwa
(2006-present), the Airport Road Scandal (2008-2014), the perpetual milking of
Zimbabwe and the pillaging of the central bank under Gideon Gono 1.
What is curious is how no major political leader involved with the scandals has been
arrested for corruption. According to Yamamoto this is because Mugabe has continuously
protected corrupt ministers who are actually rewarded with promotions. It is only in 2014 at
the peak of factional infighting within ZANU PF that chronic corrupt practices by powerful
elites are being published in the government owned papers 2.
Corruption has supported the creation and maintenance of neo patrimonial state which is
described below:
In neopatrimonial regimes, the chief executive maintains authority through personal
patronage, rather than through ideology or law….relationships of loyalty and
dependence pervade a formal political and administrative system and leaders
occupy bureaucratic offices less to perform public service than to acquire personal
wealth and status. The distinction between private and public interests is purposely
blurred….personal relationships…constitute the foundation and superstructure of
political institutions (Bratton and van der Walle, 1994, p. XLVI).
Yamamoto believes that the “the type of corruption morphed into a patronage form which
was severely backed by politicians.”3 Politicians use their access to resource to build
political empires and loyalty. In the case of the president it is easier to control politicians
within his party by sheltering them from prosecution.
The Zimbabwe Revenue Authority estimated that in 2012 alone Zimbabwe lost US$2
billion to corruption4. A report by the Anti Corruption Trust of Southern Africa argues that
“Zimbabwean politicians perceive politics as an opportunity for amassing wealth instead of
helping the people” (ACT Southern Africa, 2012, p. 7). Political corruption is thus a reality
of Zimbabwean socio-economic context. This has further developed into a patronage
system in which allegiance to the president is rewarded by immunity to prosecution.
Corruption has become institutionalized 5 within Zimbabwean social systems. It is a case of
normalizing the abnormal and accepting that the rules of the game demand favours, bribes
and extortion. A newspaper report quotes Transparency International researchers’ arguing
that in Zimbabwe corruption is involved in all manner of everyday activities including
paying bribes to pass examinations, sex in exchange of passing examinations,
paying bribes to get driver’s licences and passports, youths being used to
perpetrate political violence in exchange of money, bribing policy officers,
immigration officials, and even getting money using unorthodox means 6.
Corruption is thus interwoven in all facets of daily live in Zimbabwe. This places a serious
burden especially on vulnerable and poor groups. Getting tenders or contracts in both the
public and private sector is predicated on the ability to provide a bribe or ‘cut’ responsible
officials. Corruption is a criminal offence in Zimbabwe most
Zimbabwe has since independence in 1980 increasingly become a patrimonial state based
on the control of state apparatus to ensure continued grip on power by Robert Mugabe
and the ruling ZANU PF party. In such a context the use of violence, political intimidation
and police brutality become an important part of everyday life. Zimbabwe since 2000 has
been dominated by violence, political intolerance and intimidation, economic implosion,
food insecurity and general uncertainty. In many ways this crisis was an unavoidable
culmination of unresolved and deep-rooted resource and race disparities, but it has been
dominated by ZANU-PF‘s often-ruthless struggle to retain power. There was a sudden
instrumentalisation of power in what Selby calls the rejuvenation of the security state:
Had ZANU PF lost power in 2000, senior officials would probably have been held
accountable for a range of unresolved issues such as the genocide in
Matabeleland, key corruption scandals of the 1990s, and the looting of the War
Victims‘ Fund. Senior officials therefore had a clear interest in retaining power which
clearly influenced ZANU PF‘s post-2000 strategies. The nature of the state changed
considerably during the late 1990s with the co-option of the war veterans and the
growing influence of an impatient and radical empowerment alliance (Selby, 2006,
p. 3).
Raftopoulos and Phimister (2004) elucidate that this authoritarianism involved an internal
reconfiguration of Zimbabwean state politics leading to the emergence of domestic
tyranny. The political elite has thus developed an elaborate system to protect their power
and access to resource through an elaborate security state as well as passing legislation
such as Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and the Access to Information and
Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) to protect themselves from public scrutiny and control
the masses (Human Rights Watch, 2012). Access to political power is thus important to
influence success in other socio-economic spheres of public life in Zimbabwe.
Corruption in all places and in all spaces: Foculdian analysis of power and
corruption
Political corruption
Politicians in Zimbabwe have used their positions to amass vast wealth. There are many
examples of politicians involved in corrupt activities. Below is an excerpt from a Harare
City Council report on alleged corruption Minister of Local Government Honourable
Chombo (MP)
Contrary to Council policy that an individual must not get more than one residential
property from the Council, the Minister acquired vast tracts of land within Greater
Harare and registered them in companies associated with him. It remains disturbing
to note that the Minister (Dr Chombo) would identify pieces of land in the City,
influence Council Officials to apply to him (Chombo) for Change of land use, and
then sit over the same applications and approve the changes. He would then write
to Council officials asking to buy the same stands and obviously get them. Land
reserved for recreational activities would end up having Title Deeds in his
company’s name. A case in point is Stand 61 Hellensvale Harare, measuring almost
20 hectares. According to the Advice of Payment the Minister paid US$2 300 for this
stand (City of Harare, 2010, p. 8).
Political power in the position of minister was in this case important in acquiring land. The
power is vested in the position and not the person (Foucault, 1986). This explains why
removing an official will not end corruption rather the focus should be on changing
institutional relationships. It is within these institutional relationships that political power is
deployed as a strategy to amass wealth.
Nepotism
Nepotism is the most common example of how corruption has been accepted as a way of
life in Zimbabwe. The exercise of power to ensure one favours relatives or friends is widely
accepted as a way of doing business at the expense of those who are outside such
networks. In such instances power is located in the social networks that allow people
access to goods and services in undeserving ways. When power is viewed within the
context of networks and social capital it becomes clear how it's more a strategy than a
possession. According to young people in Zimbabwe you have to know someone to get
anything in this country. Accessing a job or services is not easy without finding whether
you know someone who knows someone at the institution. Power of networks allows
people to avoid long queues, access housing or even access places at colleges. Almost
access to everything which includes tenders, business contracts and all manner of private
and public goods and services require knowing someone who can influence decisions in
your favour. Paying bribes to officials is also done through networks as accessing them
directly is impossible. Power understood through networks of corruption in this way “must
be analyzed as something which circulates, or as something which only functions in the
form of a chain…Power is employed and exercised through a netlike organization…
Individuals are the vehicles of power, not its points of application” (Foucault, 1980, p. 98).
Relationships encompass the whole society which makes corruption steeped within
everyday relations. Corruption and power are thus not the possession of one class or an
individual but rather are decentredness. Whilst the powerful are often involved in high level
political corruption affecting a lot of people, corruption is also practiced by the majority of
the people in various ways and spaces. Through social relationships for example
accessing a place for your child in good high schools is made easier.
Conclusion
Using a cross section of cases, the paper has highlighted how power understood as
diffuse helps in understanding the pervasive nature of corruption. The paper has provided
a base point of developing the sociology of corruption in Zimbabwe. It argued that
corruption is a social issue and needs to be studied within everyday relationships of people
in society. Individuals are implicated in corruption scandals but they do not operate in a
social vacuum. Analysis of the micro physics of power within social contexts can provide
new and interesting ways of understanding corruption. The paper concludes that like
power, corruption is everywhere. It is not limited to one class or group; it takes various
forms from low level petty corruption to political corruption. In all these instances power is
deployment as a strategy to ensure benefit for individuals. To combat corruption there is
need to realize that it is beyond removing or arresting individuals but rather reforming
social system that promote asymmetrical power relations.
Author Biography
Dr. Manase Chiweshe is a Senior Lecturer in the Institute of Lifelong Learning at Chinhoyi
University of Technology. He is a young African scholar with interest in African gender and
youth studies. His other interests include agrarian studies, sport studies, urban and rural
sociology. He has published on gender issues and is also an advocate for youth rights in
Zimbabwe. Dr Chiweshe’s work revolves around the sociology of everyday life in African
spaces with special focus on promoting African ways of knowing. His recent work has
concentrated on large scale land deals and youths in agriculture with a special focus on
girls. He has published in journals such as Critical African Studies, African Identities,
Agenda, Agrarian South and Journal of Asian and African Studies among others. He is
part of a network of young global scholars who met Quito, Ecuador in 2013 and are the
process of publishing a book on urban processes across 17 cities all over the world. In
2013, Dr Chiweshe was involved in writing two chapters for Transparency International
Zimbabwe State of Corruption Report focusing on land and corruption. He has also
contributed to the ongoing Transparency International Global Report on corruption in sport.
Dr Chiweshe’s PhD work which has subsequently been presented in Geneva and
published with UNRISD focused on grassroots organising in farms that emerged post Fast
Track Land Reform in Zimbabwe. He has presented numerous papers international
conferences across the world. Dr Chiweshe has also won writing fellowships with Future
Agricultures Consortium and OSSREA.
References
National Integrity Systems. (2006/7). "Country Study Report, Final Report: Zimbabwe
(2006/7)". Retrieved 17 May 2007 from
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/nis/nis_reports_by_country
ACT Southern Africa. (2012). Zimbabwe: Corruption Cases: Lest We Forget: Bad
Leadership Examples for Accountability, Transparency and Integrity in Zimbabwe. Harare:
ACT Southern Africa.
Alatas, S.H. (1990). Corruption: Its Nature, Causes and Functions. Avebury: Albershot.
Bracking, S. (2010). Governance and Corruption. A4ID Annual Law & International
Development Training Programme 27th November 2010 College of Law, London.
Bratton, M, and van de Walle, N. (1994). Neo-patrimonial Regimes and Political Transition
in Africa. World Politics, 453-89
City of Harare (2010). Special Investigations Committee’s Report on City of Harare’s Land
Sales, Leases and Exchanges from the Period October 2004 to December 2009. Harare:
City of Harare.
Foucault, M. (1980). Truth and power. In C. Gordon (ed.), Power/Knowledge (pp. 107-
133). Brighton: Harvester.
Foucault, M. (1986). Disciplinary Power and Subjection. In S. Lukes (ed.), Power, (pp.
229-242). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Foucault, M. (1998). The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge. London: Penguin.
Global Witness. (2012). Financing a Parallel Government? The involvement of the secret
police and military in Zimbabwe’s diamond, cotton and property sectors. Retrieved 17 June
2013 from:
http://www.globalwitness.org/sites/default/files/library/Financing_a_parallel_government_Zi
mbabwe.pdf
Hardoon, D. and Heinrich, F. (2011). Daily Lives and Corruption: Public Opinion In
Zimbabwe. Harare: Transparency International.
Hodgson, G.M. and Jiang, S. (2007). The economics of corruption and the corruption of
economics: An institutionalist perspective. Journal of Economic Issues XLI(4), 1043-1061.
Martin, A. and Taylor, B. (2012). Reap What You Show: Greed and Corruption in
Zimbabwe’s Marangue Diamond Fields. Ottawa: Partnership Africa Canada.
Raftopoulos, B. and Phimister, I. (2004). ‘Zimbabwe Now: The Political Economy of Crisis
and Coercion.’ Historical Materialism, 12(4), 355-382.
Selby, A. (2006). Commercial Farmers and the State: Interest Group Politics and Land
Reform in Zimbabwe. Unpublished DPhil Thesis, Oxford University.
Transparency International. (2012). Research Paper on the Power Dimension to Mineral
related Corruption, Retrieved from 23 May 2014
http://archive.kubatana.net/docs/econ/tiz_mineral_related_corruption_130114.pdf