TOPIC 2-POLITICAL LEADERSHIP AND CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA SINCE

INDEPENDENCE
Learning Objectives:
i. Understand the concept of leadership, political leadership and corruption in the light of
the Nigerian situation.
ii. Analyze the leadership crisis in Nigeria since independence.
iii. Describe the nature of corruption in Nigeria and their effects on Socio-economic
development
iv. Suggest ways of fighting corruption in Nigeria
In 2004, Transparency International ranked Nigeria as the 3 rd most corrupt country in the world after
Haiti and Bangladesh. TI also started that billions of dollars are lot to bribery in public purchasing,
particularly in the oil sector of the economy.
The United Nations Development programme (UNDP) declared that Nigeria maintained a 70% rise
in poverty in spite of an income of over 200 billion dollars in oil revenues since 1970 and her per
capita income had hardly improved ever since. This can be attributed to bad leadership.
1.0 CONCEPTION CLARIFICATION
Leadership:
Leadership may be defined as a body of people who lead and direct the activities of a group towards
a shared goal. It also denotes the ability to lead, direct and organise a group.
In line with this understanding, Norman Schwarzkopf (quoted in Reed, 2001) describes leadership as
a potent combination of strategy and character and strongly emphasised that, of the two elements,
character is the most preferred for leadership.
John Gardener, on his part, explains leadership as the process of persuasion or example by which an
individual induces a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his or
her followers.
leadership is a process of social influence by which a person influences others to accomplish an
objective and directs the organisation in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent.
A leader therefore is expected to demonstrate qualities, which embrace but not limited to good
character, vision, tact, prudence, and ability to lead by example because people basically ascribe
leadership to those who they feel can most enable them achieve important goals or objectives.
Leadership is about service
Political Leadership-
I. Refers to the ruling class that bears the responsibility of managing the affairs and
resources of a political entity by setting and influencing policy priorities affecting the
 territory through different decision-making structures and institutions created for the
orderly development of the territory.
II. It could also be described as the human element that operates the machineries of
government on behalf of an organised territory.
III. This includes people who hold decisionmaking positions in government, and people who
seek those positions, whether by means of election, coup d'état, appointment, electoral
fraud, conquest, right of inheritance or other means.
IV. Broadly defined, however, political leadership goes beyond the ruling elites that directly
manage 5 the affairs of a territory; it embraces the totality of the political class that has
the capacity to manipulate the machineries of government even from behind the scene.
CORRUPTION
According to the World Bank and Transparency International (TI), a leading global anti-corruption
watchdog, corruption is the abuse of public office for private gains for the benefit of the holder of the
office or some third party. Viewed from these definitions, political corruption can be broadly
understood as unethical behaviour, which violates the norms of the system of political order.
Consequently, when the political leadership class of a country espouses corruption, it becomes
difficult for it to act positively to the benefit of the state and its citizens. This has been the situation
the Nigerian state has found herself since independence. The political leadership class, in its quest to
secure or retain power, suppress opposition, and have access to unlimited funds for personal use,
have sacrificed positive leadership on the altar of corruption. Indeed, from the first generation of
political leadership class through the successive military and civilian generation of political leaders,
Nigerian political leadership had grown continually in corrupt practices. Political corruption has
become a cancerous phenomenon that pervades the Nigerian state unrestrained. Over the years, we
have seen the development of a vast system of institutionalised political corruption most times
emanating from the very top and pervading all governmental institutions with perverse influence on
the entire society
Characteristics of Trustworthy Political Leaders
1. Is fair and objective. A good political leader does not take what is similar to his views as
facts and base his decisions on that. He uses reliable and unfiltered information to make
judgments and to come up with resolutions. In other words, he stands above his own
believes to observe events objectively while the general public fails to do so. In addition,
he does not suffer from a self-serving bias.
2. Is not into hiding the truth for the sake of looking good. A good leader says it as it is
even if it feels uncomfortable for many to hear it. He is not a people pleaser in a sense that
he would say anything to please others even if that means manipulating or misguiding the
public. It takes a lot of courage to do this and a good leader has that courage.
 3. Is focused on specific, achievable, and measurable goals and demands outcomes. A
good leader is focused and does not get distracted. His goals, whether small or large, are
reasonable and achievable and are directed towards the long term results not quick and
temporary fixes that may backfire.
2.0 LEADERSHIP CRISIS IN NIGERIA
Nigeria is a nation born in hope and optimism but has lived in anxiety for most of its 63-year history,
due to the country’s failure to produce a nationally acceptable leadership that transcends ethnic,
regional and religious boundaries that can unit its diverse peoples for mobilization towards national
development. All other factors of disunity, instability and underdevelopment have been nurtured and
given momentum by leadership failure. Criticisms against Nigerian leaders across local, state and
federal government levels are many and are justified. These include; corruption, unpatriotism,
selfishness, despotism, tribalism and religious bigotry.
Under successive Nigerian leaderships, almost every issue has been politicised and interpreted to
serve as a weapon of political domination or intimidation. As a consequence, various issues like
elections, census, state creation, political appointments, revenue sharing and lately, resource control
have ignited serious socio-political crises.
From Tafawa Balewa (1960- 1966) to Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2007), leadership crisis in the
country remains the same.
i. Alhaji Tafawa Balewa who ruled Nigeria from 1960-1966 lacked the capacity to chart a
progressive course for national development because of lack of consciousness of
development.
ii. General J. T. U. Aguiyi-Ironsi (January-July 1966) who was brought up under the most
passive and apolitical circumstances of colonialist military institution neither understood
the meaning of politics in general nor was he able to diagnose the specialties of the
Nigerian political system whose leadership was placed on his shoulders. He was neither
confused nor misled; he was simply ignorant and naïve.
iii. General Yakubu Gowon who ruled Nigeria from 1966 to 1975 was apparently the only
Head of Government anywhere in the world who had so much money that he did not
know what to do with it. The transient national affluence occasioned by the innocent but
unsolicited upsurge of mineral resources cast a spell of short-sightedness over Gowon and
his reactionary advisers. They mistook the transient flow of petroleum for a permanent
future of the Nigerian economy without conducting a critical analysis of the international
market forces which determine the cost of petroleum and its relevant place to national
development.
iv. General Murtala Muhammed’s emergence between (July 1975-February 1976) was
revolutionary as well as challenging. He brought a new sense of mission and was radical
in his approach to governance. He was cut short by the inordinate ambition of young
military officers, who could not comprehend his firebrand approach to governance. The
regime was, however, short to allow a better assessment.
v. Although General Olusegun Obasanjo who took over after the assassination of his boss,
General Murtala Muhammed, charted a new course for democratic governance and
constitutional development, he, however, has a pathological hatred for the intellectuals
and did not see any intellectual dimension that is germane to national development. His
policy actions were frustrating the Ivory Tower as he starved the universities of funds and
began the distortion of the educational institutions through untoward policy action.
vi. Shehu Shagari’s administration (1979-2003) also witnessed leadership crisis. His
government did not strive to dismantle the existing power structure and a social relation
that has kept Nigeria prostrate. His administration was characterized by a wild appetite for
transient materialism.
vii. In trying to achieve his desired goal of maintaining strict financial discipline and
accountability, Buhari who ruled the Nigerian state from 1983 to 1985 selectively
imprisoned corrupt politicians while draconian decrees were promulgated to check
leadership excesses. The chink in his leadership style was the misguided
conceptualization of the primary purpose of government as a gulag for the imprisonment
of civil society activists and critics of his government.
viii. The military president after General Buhari was General Ibrahim Babangida who turned
the country to a political laboratory, and came up with a grandiose political transition that
was described as the most expensive in Africa and at the end produced no democracy.
With his intelligence and personal charm, his visionary and innovative programmes,
Babangida could have been placed in the pantheon of revered political leaders in Nigeria
and Africa, however, he was unable to meet it with sincerity and discipline required of
good and selfless leadership. He deepened the culture of rent seeking and prebendal
politics and made little effort in infrastructure development.
ix. General Sani Abacha who ruled the country between 1993 and 1998 governed with iron
fist. While the entire country became an extension of his personal estate within a space of
five years, he amassed so much wealth than most countries in Black Africa put together.
His transmutation agenda was however cut short by divine intervention in 1998 when he
died mysteriously.
 x. Leadership was thrusted on the shoulder of General Abdusalam Abubakar. He was a cool-
headed and compassionate man, though he emptied the foreign reserves of the country in
the name of democratic transition. The transition process saw General Olusegun Obasanjo
coming to power again in 1999, this time as a democratically elected President. His effort
at combating corruption was fruitless as he and officials under him were corrupt. He sold
government property to himself and his cronies below the cost price. His successor,
Alhaji Yar’Adua was an incompetent leader who lacked the qualities of a good and strong
leader.
3.0 FACT AND FIGURES OF CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA

The culture of corruption had become entrenched in the Nigerian polity since the creation of modern
public service administration in the country.

i. The Warrant Chief System/Emirs- The warrant chief system emanated as a matter of
necessity from the lack of pre-existing chieftaincy traditions in some parts of Nigeria. The
warrant chiefs were hated because they were corrupt and arrogant. One of the most
important acts of resistance to the warrant chief system occurred among the Igbo of
eastern Nigeria during the famous 1929 women's revolt in which thousands of peasant
women protested against the introduction of taxes, the warrant chief system, and the low
prices of agricultural produce emanating from the global depression of the late 1920s.
Warrant Chiefs in the south and Emirs in the north tried cases and oversaw force labour.
This made them extremely powerful and corrupt. Corruption and hardship became so
wide spread that in 1919, a Panel of Enquiry submitted a report that reveal that
applications for Warrant was merely for the purpose of self-enrichment and that if this
warrant system was to be investigated on the issue of bribery and corruption about 90% of
the warrant chiefs would be imprisoned.
ii. In 1956, the Foster-Sutton Tribunal of Inquiry investigated the Premier of the defunct
Eastern Region, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, for his involvement in the affairs of the defunct
African Continental Bank (ACB).
The code of conduct for government officials stipulates that a government officer shall
relinquish his holdings in private business when he assumes public office.
The Foster-Sutton Tribunal discovered that Azikiwe did not severe his connections with
the bank when he became a Premier.
The Tribunal reported that Azikiwe continued to use his influence to promote the interests
of the bank.
 Moreover, Azikiwe, his family, and the Zik Group of Companies were the principal
shareholders of the African Continental Bank. As indicated in the report of the tribunal of
inquiry, the bank loaned over £163,000 to the Zik Group of Companies at a lower interest
rate and over an extended period, which meant that the Zik Group did not have to repay
the loans until 1971. Consequently, the African Continental Bank became a distressed
bank.
iii. In 1962, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the first Premier of the Western Region, was also
investigated and found guilty of corruption by the Coker Commission of Inquiry, it was a
three-man commission set up on 16 June 1962 by the Nigerian Federal
Government of Tafawa Balewa to investigate Western Region’s six
statutory corporations since 1 October 1954. The Coker Commission found
Awolowo guilty of gross financial misappropriation and of diverting funds totalling
N4.4 million in cash and N1.3 million in overdraft from government-owned
corporations to finance political activities . The Coker Commission is widely
believed to be motivated by an enduring desire to discredit
the Action Group administration.
In 1954, the Western Region Marketing Board could boast of £6.2 million.
However, by May 1962, the corporation had to exist on overdrafts amounting to over £2.5
million. A loan of £6.7 million was made to the Western Region government-owned
National Investment and Properties Co., Ltd. for building projects out of which only
£500,000 was repaid. The Western Region Finance Corporation and the Western Nigeria
Development Corporation also received loans of millions of pounds. None of these loans
were ever repaid. The Coker Commission of Inquiry found Chief Awolowo culpable for
the ills of the Western Region Marketing Board, due to his failure to adhere to the
standards of conduct, which were required of persons holding public office.
iv. In 1960, when Nigeria gained independence from the Britain, corruption had infliltrated
the habit of politicians. This was evidence by the series of Commission of Enquiry
established by Maj. Gen Aguiyi Ironsi into the affairs of Nigerian Electricity Cooperation
of Nigeria, Nigerian Airways Authority, Nigeria Railway Cooperation and Nigerian Port
Authority. The report indicted some noble politicians like Chief Festus Okotie-Eboh (first
indigenous minister of finance) etc. Corruption was the main reason why Maj. Kaduna
Nzeogwu staged the first coup in Nigeria’s political history.
v. Gowon’s Regime would have been incredibly fortunate and prosperous for Nigeria
because it coincided with the oil boom but he was confused and corrupt as he declared to
have told the world that Nigeria’s problem was not money but what exactly to do with it.
 His confusion and waste of the oil money was revealed further in the report of the
Political Bureau of 1987.
vi. Gen. Murtala Muhammed from inception promised to rid Nigeria of corruption. He
forfeited his own ill-gotten wealth to the Nation before carrying out his own War Against
Corruption.
vii. The Shagari Administration that governed Nigeria between 1979 and 1983 had many of
its state governors sentenced to ridiculous jail terms of a minimum of 100 years and a
maximum period of 340 years by the Buhari/Idiagbon military regime that seized power
from it. However, the Buhari/Idiagbon regime was short-lived because it was replaced by
the General Ibrahim Babangida military regime after a palace coup on August 27, 1985.
The corrupt nature and financial recklessness of the Babangida regime was detailed in the
Okigbo Panel Report of 1994.
A. The 1994 Okigbo Panel Report on the Reorganisation and Reform of the Central Bank
of Nigeria indicted former Military President, General Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida,
former Head of State, late General Sani Abacha, and former Governor of the Central
Bank of Nigeria, the late Alhaji Abdulkadir Ahmed, for mismanaging about $12.4
billion oil windfall between 1988 and 1994. A summary of the panel’s report
submitted to the Federal Government revealed that General Ibrahim Babangida’s
regime conspired with top officials of the Central Bank of Nigeria to squander the
entire fortune on unproductive or dubious projects. Even after Babangida had stepped
down from power in August 1993, the pillaging of the country’s coffer by his
successors through operations of secret accounts and other means continued.
B. As indicated in the Okigbo Report, in 1988, General Babangida authorised the
dedication of crude oil of 65,000 barrels per day (bpd) for the finance of special
priority projects including Ajaokuta Iron & Steel, Itakpe Iron Mining, and Shiroro
Hydro-electric projects. The account was also to be used for external debt buy-back
and the build-up of reserves. The quantity was subsequently increased to 105,000
barrels per day and in early 1994, to 150,000 barrels per day. In addition, a
Stabilisation Account to receive the windfall of oil proceeds of the Gulf War and a
Special Account for Mining Rights and Signature Bonus were opened. Altogether,
$12.4 billion was received into these accounts 14 from 1988 to June 1994, all of
which were frittered away dubiously leaving only a balance of $206 million as of 30th
June 1994.
C. Overall, neither the Dedication Account nor the Stabilisation Account was applied for
the purpose for which it was originally designed. the balances kept in these accounts
 were not included in the Federation Account, a practice that violated the fundamental
precepts of federal fiscal relations in Nigeria. By excluding these incomes from the
Federation Account, the respective shares of the State and Local Governments were
more or less confiscated by the Federal Government, thereby unilaterally violating the
revenue allocation formula.
D. Saddening enough, the Okigbo Panel Report was kept away from the prying eyes of
the Nigerian press and the public for eleven years. It is noteworthy to mention here
that up till date, the Federal Government is yet to officially release the Okigbo Panel
Report nor issued a White Paper on it.
E. while the document was kept secret, more terrible corrupt practices that virtually
collapsed the economy and impoverished several millions of Nigerians continued
unabated. In addition, it encouraged leaders, whether military or civilian, to engage in
the looting of public treasury and amassing wealth illegally with arrogance and
impunity.
viii. Economic Impact BB Corrupt practices- The economic impact of the corruption
perpetrated with these accounts on the country’s microeconomy was enormous. The gross
takings on these accounts from their inception in 1988 to June 1994 totalled $12.4 billion,
which was held totally outside the country’s external reserves. What is more, if the funds
were counted as part of the external reserves and were held as such, the impact on the
exchange rate in the years under review would have been so significant that the Naira
would have been stronger in 1994, in relation to the dollar, than it was in 1985 when it
stood at N1 to $1.004. More so, the burden of external debt to the Paris and London Clubs
and the pressure on the exchange rate would have been substantially mitigated if not
eliminated.
ix. Incontrovertibly, corruption became endemic in the 1990s during the military regimes of
Babangida and Abacha, but a culture of impunity spread throughout the political class
when democracy returned to Nigeria in 1999.
a. Throughout the eight years presidency of President Olusegun Obasanjo, he was fully
incharge of the petroleum ministry, where high-level corrupt practices took place with
impunity. The over $400 million invested on the Turn-Around Maintenance (TAM)
and repairs of the refineries failed to yield any positive result, and the contractors
awarded the contracts were never brought to book.
b. the report by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC)
indicated that 445,000 barrels of crude oil sold by the NNPC between January and
July 2002 was not accounted for in its financial report. The report further indicated
 that within the seven-month period, there was a shortfall of N302 billion as
undeclared revenue. The request by Haman Tukur, Chairman of RMAFC, to the
Presidency to compel Jackson Gaius-Obaseki, former Group Managing Director of
NNPC, to refund the remaining money into government’s coffer was never heeded.
More so, the joint panel of the National Assembly set up to probe the matter was also
hindered by the Presidency and top hierarchy officials of the People Democratic Party
on the ground that the probe would send negative signals abroad about corruption in
Nigeria, particularly because the Presidency directly oversees the petroleum ministry.
c. Again, during the first four years of the Olusegun Obasanjo administration, federal
ministers allegedly stole more than N23 billion from the public coffers. An audit
report released by Vincent Azie, acting Auditor-General of the Federation, showed
that the amount represented financial frauds ranging from embezzlement, payments
for jobs not done, over-invoicing, double-debiting, inflation of contract figures to
release of money without the consent of the approving authority in ten major
ministries. Rather than cautioning the ministers whose ministries were named in the
fraud or invite the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) to further
investigate the veracity of the alleged fraud, Vincent Azie was hastily retired by the
Presidency for procedural offences.
d. The National Identity Card scandal is another case of high profile corruption
perpetrated by the top echelon of the nation’s political leadership class. In 2001, the
administration of Olusegun Obasanjo awarded the $214 million National Identity
Card project to SAGEM S.A., a French company, under controversial circumstances
because the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company (NSPMC), which bided
for the same contract at a lower rate, was not obliged. It was alleged that seven
prominent public servants collaborated with SAGEM S.A. to scuttle the $214million
project.

4.0 POLITICAL LEADERSHIP, CORRUPTION AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT

Like most developing countries, Nigeria is still grappling with the dilemma of corruption that has
largely retarded social development, undermined economic growth, discouraged foreign investments
and reduced the resources available for infrastructural development, public service, and poverty
reduction programmes.

Much more disturbing, the scourge of corruption leaves the poor perpetually disproportionately
under-privileged, even as it renders the development of democracy and the building of a society of
opportunity more problematic. Thus, by diverting assets away from their intended use, corruption can
be said to be the single most important factor responsible for the failure of governance and lack of
sustainable socio-economic development in Nigeria.

Without doubt, the unpardonable failure of the political leadership class managing the affairs and
wealth of the country had inevitably brought severe misery to many voiceless and helpless Nigerians.
It must also be mentioned here that Nigeria’s post-independence political bureaucratic and military
elites had terribly pillaged the nation’s common wealth and national patrimony with impunity,
thereby denying Nigerians access to economic prosperity and quality living condition. Also
disheartening, is the fact that the volume of development assistance totalling about $400 billion that
flowed into the country 19 for socio-economic development between independence and the collapse
of military dictatorship in 1999 was atrociously squandered by the political leaders of the period. The
mismanagement of resources of such quantum which was worth six times the resources committed to
the rebuilding of Western Europe after a devastating Second World War simply defines the
callousness of the political leadership class towards the socio-economic wellbeing of the country.

Distortion of governmental expenditure- A noticeable consequence of corruption on the political and

economic wellbeing of Nigerians has been the distortion of governmental expenditure. This often
results in diversion of public investment on large-scale projects, typically military or infrastructure
projects, rather than on the provision of necessary public services such as health, roads, housing, and
education. Mostly, the Nigerian government at all levels spends relatively more on large and hard-to-
manage projects, such as airports or national stadia, to make room for fraud because execution of
such project makes fraud easy. Consequently, development projects are made unnecessarily complex
so as to justify the corrupt huge expenses on them. This situation makes it inevitable for the limited
but valuable fund earmarked for development to disappear into private pockets.

Social ill - It is difficult to think of any social ill in the country that is not traceable to the
embezzlement and misappropriation of public funds, particularly as a direct or indirect consequence
of the corruption perpetrated by the callous political leadership class since independence. The cycle
of poverty keeps growing with all its attendant consequences even as the rate of unemployment
remains perpetually high. By giving mediocrity advantage over intelligence through nepotism and
cronyism, intellectual capital, which is the bulwark of development and advancement, has continued
to drift abroad in search of greener pasture. Paradoxically, the scourge of corruption has left the
country straddling two economic worlds at the same time. To state the obvious, the country has
found itself in the quagmire of a country too rich to be poor and at the same time too poor to be rich.
Thus, this has made it inevitable for every Nigerian to be a victim of corruption
Collapse of healthcare delivery system and the education sectors- As a consequence of unparalleled
and unrivalled corruption in Nigeria, the healthcare delivery system and the education sector have
become comatose and are nearing total collapse. Government spending has been considerably
reduced towards these vital social sectors of the economy and others of equal importance, which are
supposed to be of high priority to government. To this end, the resultant effects have been
catastrophic as different forms of malpractices and corrupt practices have rubbished the Nigerian
educational system, which is perceived from the outside as inadequate and, its product, 20
substandard

More so, corruption in the health sector has also given room for counterfeit and adulterated drugs to
find easy passage into the country with little or no resistance until 1999 when Professor Dora
Akunyili took over the leadership of the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and
Control (NAFDAC). It would be recalled that her first point of duty was an attempt to eradicate fake
and adulterated drugs. This effort almost cost her her life when gunmen suspected to have been sent
by importers of fake and adulterated drugs attacked her in 2005. Infrastructural facilities have long
been in an abysmal state and to shore up its dwindling income, much of which was embezzled under
successive governments and siphoned to foreign bank accounts, government resorted to excessive
taxation of the already economically deprived and impoverished populace.

Failure of attaining economic potentials- Perhaps the most tragic effect of corruption on Nigeria has
been the failure of the country to attain its economic potentials. Despite its substantial natural and
human resources, Nigeria remains desperately poor due to bad management of its wealth by
successive corrupt governments. Today, Nigeria is one of the poorest countries in the world. Its
unadjusted GNP per capita of $300 leaves it in 164th position among other countries in 1999. The
per capita GNP PPP (purchasing power parity) figure of $820 looks better at first glance but it ranks
199th out of the 209 countries covered in the World Bank’s 2000 World Development Report.

In 2010, Nigeria’s GDP per capita (PPP) of $2,365 ranked as 138th in the world out of the 180
countries, while the GNI per capita (PPP) of $2,160 left the country in the 172nd position out of the
215 countries listed in the World Development Indicators Database (World Bank, 2011). These are
not just abstract statistics. An average Nigerian leads an appallingly difficult life that is worse in
most ways than the situations in other Third World countries. Unfortunately, the country has not
been able to breakthrough with any significant step that would dramatically improve the living
conditions of its mostly impoverished population due to the high level of corruption in the system.
The Corruption Perception Index (CPI) released annually by Transparency International has
consistently listed Nigeria among the most corrupt nations of the world. The 1996 study of
corruption by Transparency International and Goettingen University ranked Nigeria as the most
corrupt nation, among 54 nations listed in the study (cited in Moore, 1997). The 1998 Transparency
International Corruption Perception Index (CPI) ranked Nigeria as the fifth most corrupt nation out
of 85 countries listed in the rating (The Transparency International Corruption Index, 1998). The
2001 Corruption Perception Index rated Nigeria second most corrupt nation among 91 countries
listed (The Transparency International Corruption Index, 2001). The 2002 Corruption Perception
Index ranked Nigeria third most corrupt 21 nation out of the 102 countries listed (The Transparency
International Corruption Index, 2002). Similarly, the 2003 Corruption Perception Index also rated the
country as the second most corrupt nation out of 133 countries listed (The Transparency International
Corruption Index, 2003). Although the trend improved a little from the 2005 Corruption Perception
Index ratings, Nigeria still languishes within the first ten most corrupt nations of the world.