3. Introduction
3.3 Gift-Giving
3.3.2 Gift-giving in the Modern African Society
105
worthy of attention and important) aspects of the native judicial system, like oath taking or swearing by the gods, were still maintained, some of the warrant chiefs administering the native courts were notoriously corrupt, having been involved in awuf (gift-giving, dishonesty and so on) in the native judicial system. This might imply making the native courts notorious centres of awuf, in which any person interested, was out for what he could get (Amadi, 1992:87). It can be stated that awufu in the native judiciary system influenced the gift-giving, bribery and corruption in the native courts, all of which are still experienced in the modern period. A close look at this tradition may bring out some abnormalities or a possible negative consequence of the system of gift-giving.
What seems interesting in the traditional African culture of gift-giving is the type of materials used as gifts. What may usually be given as gifts can include kola nuts, tobacco, drinks, and similar very small things. The fact that these types of gifts are hardly of any economic value clearly indicates the dissimilarity between bribery and gift-giving in the traditional African society. For an average traditional African, the importance of such gifts lays ontological worth not in their economic values. In the next section gift-giving in the modern period is discussed.
106
world at large, it is known as advance gift-giving. In traditional African societies, gift-giving was not a condition for citizens to secure appointments, jobs, promotions, contracts and so on, but in modern society, gift-giving, either in cash or kind, is assumed to be indirectly one of the conditions required in getting things, especially in the public sector. The argument is not that gift-giving in modern society is no longer for appreciation, but that some gift-givingin contemporary society, especially in the public sector, has an ulterior motive, mainly as an expectation of favour.
Gift-giving is explained as among the African traditional cultural practices that enhances corruption and it is no longer a question of very petty things such as the open gift of a chicken and so on (Ekpo, 1979:164), but in the modern period, where there are set rules, such a practice now acts as a serious aid to corruption. So, in this sense, it is assumed that gift-giving in modern African society may not only be for appreciation, but is equally for expectation and may be demanded from the individuals bycivil servants.
According to Egbue:
With industrialization and modernization, coupled with the difficulties of recession, people more and more do not wait for the recipients of favour to show gratitude. Rather specific demands for gratitude are often imposed for transactions regarding employment, admissions to schools, elections, issuance of licenses, permits and so on (Egbue, 2006:86).
The quotation above implies that, it is no longer the person who gives the gift that expects, but also the recipient himself. The recipient expects that, for instance, for him to help the person in securing employment, a gift is supposed to follow. The recipient of the gift may not see this as corruption. This may not have been the aim of gift-giving in traditional African society, but as it stands today, gift-giving, indeed, constitutes a major basis for corrupt practices. It may be as a result of a lack of a clear distinction between public and private roles in African societies.
107
When a gift is demanded in this context, it is mostly in order to give undue favour to those who need it, but who actually donot merit this favour. Take for instance the case of employment where a government official is in a position to employ or give employment to people, he or she may demand gifts (cash or kind) for giving certain people employment. This may mean that without this gift, the solicitors may not get the expected favour. When there are many people seeking the job, employment will be given based on the gift given. Mostly the gift demanded may not be small, which usually leads to serious problems when the expected favour is not eventually granted. This kind of gift-giving is similar to a bribe. Here, the gift-giver is only compelled to give gifts for the favour wanted. Employment, in this instance, is only granted when the gift had to be given, otherwise no employment would be forthcoming.
From the above illustration, it is clear that this type of gift-giving is very corrupt. It means people cannot be granted favours if they do not have something to offer in exchange. When it comes to issues of employment, gift-giving eliminates the useful consideration of merit, which would eventually lead to fruitful results. One can as well argue convincingly that, more often than not, whenever gifts are given with ulterior motives, it is meant to by-pass due process and give favour to someone who may not deserve it. So, on this note, no matter the nature of the transaction, whether it concerns employment, admission, appointment, scholarship, promotion and so on, if it is not thrown open for fair consideration or due process, gift-giving plays a role and ismeant to thwart the procedures and, therefore, is corruption.
Gift-giving is equally used for expectation. The issue of gift-giving functions as an expectation when somebody gives for an ulterior motive and not just for appreciation (Gildenhuys, 1991). The individual that gives for expectation may only be looking for a favour from the recipient. This type of gift is the advance type of gift-giving and so comes before the favour is done. This aspect of gift-giving is usually popular and the success of it will determine future transactions. In this case, the civil servant who is in the position of granting a favour will do so without
108
demanding a gift, but will, of course, be expecting one. Where the expected gift is not given, it will have a negative effect on the favour that has been given, especially for the future. At other times, when the gift is not given on time, the favour that has been granted may be terminated, because of the experiences which people have had when gifts are delayed, they usually give on time so as to enjoy the benefit of the favour granted.
In another respect, the idea of giving gifts can be carried out in order to entice someone or tie them down to act in a particular manner. In this case the person in the position to grant the favour is not compelled to grant the favour, and he or she may not even have a prior arrangement with those intending to offer gifts and may not even know them. The effect of the gift on this kind of person is that it draws attention and makes the receiver of the gift show some concern or reciprocate in an expected manner. The gift-giver may later make requests from the receiver, which puts him or her under obligation. This is simply because he or she has been tied down by a particular gift or present. The granting of favours, in this respect, shows an appreciation for the gift that was given, or in another sense reciprocates the kind gestures offered earlier. This example may better explain why a chieftaincy title is given to a prominent politician, who in the real sense does not merit it. This politician is in the position of offering jobs, or admission into a university and so on. If a child or kinsman of the Chief, who had earlier given the chieftaincy title to this prominent politician, is in need of a job or admission, the politician in question will not hesitate to grant such a request as a means of reciprocity.
From the above illustration, one can argue that there is no corruption in the transaction, but on the other hand, it is clear that the politician chose to give out his favour simply because a kind of gift was given, which made him reciprocate. The politician could also have chosen to act otherwise and favour others in need. In most situations like this, there are usually many people in need of the said favour and where it goes bad is when others more qualified for that post are not considered.
109
It can thus be stated that traditional African cultural systems have led to corruption, taking into consideration the present discourse. According to Erwin Schwella:
The giving of gifts as rewards is an accepted social practice in many of our traditional societies. But from a rational bureaucratic point of view, this traditional gift system is unethical and corrupt, even though the transition from the existing traditional social pattern to modern practices constitutes a gradual process. As a result the earlier social actions are often still practised, but these actions constitute corruption and maladministration within the context of a rational bureaucratic system (Schwella, 1991:58).
Once again, the traditional gift-giving practice is seen as a way of corruption, although it can be debated from different angles. While some argue that the system is not corrupt, others say that it leads to corruption.
The cultural system of gift-giving, which has metamorphosed into a modern system of corruption, can also take the form of facilitating payments. Facilitating payments, according to Antonio Argandona, consist of small payments or gifts made to a person, generally a civil servant or an employee of a private company, to obtain a favour, such as expediting an administrative process; obtaining a permit, license or service (Argandona, 2005: 251),
This kind of gift-giving, does not appear to be the worst form of corruption that exists, but rather it has to do with some kind of injustice, although not outright injustice, on the part of the payer. The payer, in this situation, is only entitled to whatever he requested. As far as this kind of gift-giving is concerned, Argandona explains that, because of the way facilitating payment is carried out “public opinion tends to condone such payments; often they are assumed to be unavoidable and are excused on the grounds of low wages and lack of professionalism among civil servants and disorganisation in government offices” (Argandona, 2005: 251).
Facilitating payment as a kind of gift-giving can be regarded as corruption, due to
110
the negative effects it has on the economy, as it can serve as additional costs for companies and citizens
Though facilitating payments is corruption, and a petty corruption for that matter, some of its characteristics are not negative as such, but rather they may be considered as normal ways of doing things. It does not end at this; the person who makes the payment is normally entitled to what he is asking for. This invariably means that facilitating payments do not involve cases where entitlements are not given. It should be noted that facilitating payments can be considered as lesser forms of corruption, as confirmed by Argandona when he states that, “virtually all references to facilitating payments distinguished them from „real‟ corruption by stressing the small size of the payments, which is clearly seen as a distinguishing factor” (Argandona, 2005: 254). This implies that facilitating payments are sometimes seen as a normal way of doing things and they are common in many African countries.
It can be confusing when placing the issue of facilitating payments alongside gift- giving and comparing them. Gift-giving, can be regarded as payments done to show gratitude or appreciation and goodwill and the major reason why gifts are given is to create an atmosphere of friendship and, if possible, to put the receiver in a position to always see the giver in a favourable light. Facilitating payment differs in that its purpose is to speed up services by thecivil servants.
The practice and theory of gift-giving actually differs. In theory, the difference between a gift and facilitating payments or bribery is that gift-giving is done without the intention of obtaining a direct benefit for the giver, whereas either facilitating payments or bribery does. However, in practice, this distinction is not so clear, due to the fact that the giver may, indeed hope, to get some direct favour or benefit (Argandona, 2005:254).