5. Introduction
5.1 Corruption and Public Sector in Pre-Colonial Africa
According to Eric Ayisi pre-colonial Africa refers to the period “when African people managed their own affairs and administered justices among themselves”
(Ayisi, 1972: 42). Pre-colonial Africa practiced what may be known as “a hierarchical system of traditional government” (Dia, 2000:380).The system of government was mainly organised on tribal levels and ruled by chiefs. It is the religious functions of the chiefs that equally conferred political power on them. The chiefs and their ruling cabinets, which comprised the heads of lineages and representatives of the ancestors and also other elders, were responsible for the making of laws and for arbitration. The members of the law-enforcement agencies, though this usually depended on the locality, consisted of age-grades, cult slaves, diviners and so on (Oriji, 1988:461).Therefore, “a major characteristic of this
140
governance system was manifested in the way rulers were elected and removed from office. Rulers were not self-appointed but selected by specific bodies whose choices then had to be approved - usually by a council of elders or a similar body”
(Dia, 2000:381).
In pre-colonial Africa, there were certain things that made the public sector very unique, which, incidentally, may have contributed to the low level of corruption.
An important thing to note aboutpublic sector in pre-colonial Africa is that there were consultations. The chiefs did not rule alone; they usually consulted with members of the council before taking any action. This is to say that:
When important decisions had to be made, chiefs tended to consult village councils (composed mainly of the elder lineage heads) and to seek unanimity, even if doing so required very lengthy discussion.
Majority rule, winner-take-all, other forms of zero sum games were not acceptable alternatives to consensus decision-making (Dia, 2000:382).
What is important about the type of governance in the pre-colonial period is that everybody in one way or the other is involved in the government.
In pre-colonial Africa, there seemed to have been an understanding ofthe way people went about their assignments. People in pre-colonial Africa understood that they were from the same ancestors and any type of unethical practice would not be taken lightly by their ancestors. Therefore, they had to be honest while discharging their duty, as any act of dishonesty would invite the wrath of the ancestor who watched over them. For instance, in job recruitment, “it is relatively easy to select people for specific assignments. There was cohesion, because all descended from the same ancestors and no one would wish to let the ancestors down by being defiant” (Biobaku, 1987:46). Biobaku further confirms that in pre-colonial government, “specialised jobs call for people who are well-known for their appropriate specialized skills” (Biobaku, 1987: 46). This suggests that people attached importance to high moral values such as honesty and love in pre-colonial Africa.
141
Another good thing that featured and helped to keep corruption at bay in the pre- colonial government was discipline. Those serving the public tried to discipline themselves. This was because any person that deviated from the ethical standard had tobe punished by the community.No community would welcome any kind of unethical behaviour from its members (Osei-Hwedie and Osei-Hwedie, 2000: 46).
Speaking of corruption in traditional Africa, Gyekye points to corrupt practices which were exacerbated by colonialism and post-colonial experience. Involvement in corruption was one of the causes of deposition of chiefs, including “unwarranted disposal of stool property” in “unimportant matters” (Gyekye1997:202). Electoral candidates, likemodern democratic candidates, distributed gifts and bribes to the electors. Bribes were even distributed by prospective candidates to electors to remove an allegedly incompetent or irresponsible chief. Thus, both „enstoolment‟
(enthronement) and „destoolment‟ (dethronement) in traditional Africa were occasions for political corruption. This represents a remarkable shift to what was obtainable in traditional African society before colonialism.Corroborating this point, Gyekye recalled that there were tendencies of corruption in pre-colonial Africa but these were controlled by well thoughtout traditional measures. For instance, “it was to check political corruption that certain chiefs were not allowed to own property in traditional Africa. The traditional African society was thus, not free from corruption, but there were measures practical measures used to mitigate corruption and keep it at bay” (Gyekye, 1997: 204)
The point here is that in pre-colonial Africa, institutions that would have encouraged corruption, such as the monetory system were at then still undeveloped.
At such, while people were involved in corruption, corruption was still at a very minimal level.Also, since corruption is concerned with the breaking of moral norms and moral norms were not properly developed in pre-colonial African it becomes difficult to talk about breaking what does not exist. This point is supported by Mukandala in his submission that though” there was an attempt at rule making and enforcement but the rules were fuzzy, covered only a few activities, and were
142
constantly broken” (Mukandala, 2000:2). The coming of the Europeans to Africa brought into the African public sector rules to be followed and with it awareness of corruption and complex institutions that encourage corruption.