3. Introduction
3.3 Gift-Giving
3.3.3 When Gift-giving is seen as Corruption
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).
111
very similar problem to distinguishing between a gift and a bribe. When does a gift become a corrupt act? According to Gildenhuys “the purpose of ethics in the public sector is to eliminate the uncertainty between what seems to be right and what is in effect wrong; to identify each possibility of conflict between right and wrong lies, however, beyond the ability of the average person” (Gildenhuys, 1991: 42) .
This shows that making a distinction between what seems to be right, but is in effect wrong, is a difficult but not an impossible task. He further observes that, the problem for civil servant is in the decisions; for instance, whether some gifts such as, Christmas presents, invitations for free hunting trips and so on are bribes or sincere tokens of friendship. For Gildenhuys, such gifts appear so innocent and sincere, but then, he wonders, why should a civil servant not accept such gifts from the members of the public who thank him for his good services to them. When a civil servant demands a gift from the public, such a gift is seen as corruption.
According to Gildenhuys “the truth is that no member of the public presents gifts to politicians or civil servants without ulterior motives” (Gildenhuys, 1991: 42).
Furthermore, he claims that, so far he has not yet come across someone in the private sector who loves politicians and civil servants so much as to present them with gifts without expecting anything back from the receiver. This implies that gifts can be seen as corruption whenever there are ulterior motives in presenting such gifts. In other words, where there is no ulterior motive in gift-giving, it is then free from corruption. Sometimes, the way the gift is presented to the receiver will clear up any doubt whether such a gift has an ulterior motive behind it or not. For instance, if a gift is presented along with a request from the person, it is assumed that there is something else behind the gift.
Again, when a civil servant starts to derive income from gifts, benefits or other forms of hospitality from individuals, corporations or foreign governments, besideshis salary, this may amount to corruption. According to in the POS Reports, gift-giving of this nature can sometimes be in the form of free trips abroad, complementary boxes at sporting events, a case of wine, or free cable television and
112
so on. It is assumed, that whencivil servant, for instance, start attracting to themselves outside income and interests, there exists the possibility of conflict between officials‟ public duty and private duty Wilmot (1996). However, what can possibly determine when a gift is corruption, may still be attributed to the major intention of the giver.
The intention behind gift-giving in the public service, for instance, seems sometimes to be corrupt. This is because, according to Osei-Hwedie and Osei- Hwedie, “a gift is not necessarily a bribe for it depends on the circumstances and inten” (2000: 46). The circumstances and the intention of the giver may not be clear to the receiver most of the time. It can be stated that, most often, the intention might be to please the receiver so that the giver is favoured. Again, the intention for the gift-giving may be to maintain good relationships with superior officials. For instance, since the promotion of civil servants sometimes depends on the recommendation of superiors, the junior officials may not find it easy to abstainfrom giving annual „gifts‟ to their superior officials and also at other important occasions that may connect them to the superior officials. This is a kind of gift-giving that is based on negative intention. It may not be uncommon for some senior civil servants to keep a record of the names of those who give this annual
„gift‟ so that they are rewarded, as those who fail to give could be punished. It is because some civil servants want to get what they want at all costs, that they go the extra mile through gift-giving in order to find favour with their superiors. In these instances, a police or customs officials could end up giving the money collected from road users to their superior officials, but “the officers also have to give annual
„gifts‟ to their superiors and other occasional gifts on important occasions in the latter‟s family life, such as marriages, baptisms, funerals” (Arifari, 2006:207). It may not matter whether the gift is small or big, whether it is given in the open or in private. From the definition of corruption, there seems to be a distinction between one‟s public and private roles. This is what many people are not clear about. This may be one of the reasons why gift-giving is an acceptable value in the private sector but not in the public sector.
113