ABSTRACT

Corruption is one of the most discussed concepts in the world. Usages escalate from bribery
through untoward business-government connections on up to culture and human nature.
Measures at the national level include amalgamations of perceptions and of “experience.” Since
corruption conveys shame and blame, concepts and measures are especially controversial.
Corruption is a significant financial crime which is estimated by the World Economic Forum to
cost about 5 percent of global GDP or $2.6 trillion dollars. Explanations of corruption, like
explanations of crime, tend to focus on the individuals who commit corruption and the wider
conditions which give rise to corrupt behavior. Approaches designed to reduce corruption
usually propose stiffer sanctions, institutional reforms and the passing of new laws. This paper
shows how definitions can be induced from examples and framed in terms of political economy
models. It examines the coherence, reliability, and predictive power of measures of corruption,
Also the purpose of this paper is to outline a complementary perspective with which to
consider corruption.

1|Page
WHAT IS CORRUPTION?
Corruption is a form of dishonesty or criminal offense undertaken by a person or organization
entrusted with a position of authority, to acquire illicit benefit or abuse power for one's private
gain. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement, though it
may also involve practices that are legal in many countries. Political corruption occurs when an
office-holder or other governmental employee acts in an official capacity for personal gain.
Corruption is most commonplace in kleptocracies, oligarchies, narco-states and mafia states.
Onigu Otite defined corruption as “the perversion of integrity or affairs through bribery, favour,
or moral depravity... societal impurity” (cited in Okafor, 2009). Lipset and Lenz (2000) define
corruption as an “effort to secure wealth or power through illegal means for private gain at
public expense” (Fagbadebo, 2007).
Corruption, according to Nkom (1982) is the perversion of public affairs for private advantage.
Nkom was also of the view that corruption includes bribery or the use of unauthorized rewards
to influence people in position of authority either to act or refuse to act in ways beneficial to
the private advantage of the giver and then that of the receiver. It includes the
misappropriation of public funds and resources for private gains, nepotism etc. In a similar vein,
Doig (1996) described corruption as, the use of official position, resources or facilities for
personal advantage, or possible conflict of interest between public position and private benefit.
This involves misconduct by public officials and usually covered by a variety of internal
regulations (Public Service Rules and Extant Rules). From the above, it is common to find people
nnnreferring to corruption as the perversion of public affairs for private advancement.
Therefore, corruption in this sense includes bribery, kickback, misappropriation, misapplication
or the use of one’s position to gain an undue advantage. Thus, any transaction which violates
the duty of a public office holder and aimed at acquiring or amassing resources illegally for
personal advancement and self gratification is seen as an act of corruption. Put differently, any
intentional deviant behavior for personal fore deal is a corrupt act. Gibbons (1976) sees
corruption in terms of politics and believes that political corruption has to do with the way
public office forsakes public interest measured in terms of mass opinion in order to ensure that
some form of political advantage are achieved at the expense of public interest.
A more encompassing description of corruption was given by Akindele (1995) who opined that
corruption is a socio-political, economic and moral malaise that is usually holistically permeates
all the nerves of any society. The concept of corruption, as observed by Akindele (1995), has
ideological, moral, cultural and intellectual discourse. Another simple, uncomplicated and
encompassing definition of corruption that is found to be useful is the one that sees the
phenomenon as the acquisition of that personal benefits which one (as a member of society
not public official alone) is not entitled to (Salawu, 2007).
Corruption, seen from this perspective therefore represents a departure from what the society
considers as correct procedures in exchange of goods and services on the part of everybody
that makes up the society. The implication is that corruption is seen in various societies from
the perspective of the prescribed social life of the people. The proposition is that, while some
societies speak of corruption mainly in terms of illegal acquisition of material resources or
benefits, others tend to broaden it by attaching social and moral values to it (Metiboba, 1996).

2|Page
The deduction from above is that what someone regards as a corrupt act is seen differently by
another person. The 1999 and other previous constitutions established a code of conduct for
public officers and made it a political objective for the state to abolish all corrupt practices
associated with abuse of power. However, it does not define corruption or give a list of acts
that will amount to corruption.

Bayley (1978) noted that: Corruption, while being tied particularly to the act of bribery, is a
general term covering the misuse of authority as a result of considerations of personal gain,
which needs not be monetary. On his part, McMullan (1978) asserts that: A public official is
corrupt if he accepts money or money‟s worth for doing something that he is under duty to do
anyway, 40 that he is under duty not do or be exercise a legitimate discretion for improper
reasons. Nye (1978) also defined corruption as: Behaviour which deviates from the normal
duties of public role because of private regarding (family, close private clique), pecuniary or
status gains or violates rules against the exercise of certain types of private regarding influence.
Within the Nigeria perspective, there are many theories that can explain corruption. Ekpo
(1979) in his article “Gift-giving and bureaucratic corruption in Nigeria” presented an
anthropological analysis. He argues that, the phenomenon in Nigeria has a history and that it is
infact a continuation of traditional gift-giving practices. Thus, the tradition of gift-giving … is a
prime mechanism of manipulation and influence in the social and cosmic order of traditional
Nigerian society. In his essay “Corruption in Nigeria: A structural approach”, Cohen (1979)
argues that colonialism, post colonial factionalism and rapid growth and change have created
certain structures in the bureaucracy (over centralization of decision making, excessive
hierarchy and programme inexperience). These maladaptive patterns, Cohen thinks, breed
corruption in the bureaucracy and in the larger society as well. Corruption is a value – oriented
word. It is difficult to discuss it without its moral aspects. It has become institutionalized in
Nigeria to the point that, virtually all public officials are engaged in one form of corruption or
the other. Ibrahim (2003) opined that, the military has entrenched the culture of public
corruption established by earlier civilian regime. It has also been observed that the statutory
criminal laws, the criminal and penal codes, do not define corruption. The Independent Corrupt
Practices (and other related offences) Commission (ICPC) Act 2000, and the Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act 2004 have now broadened the definition of corruption.
The EFCC act empowers the commission to investigate, prevent and prosecute offenders who
engage in: Money laundering, embezzlement, bribery, looting and any form of corrupt
practices, illegal arms deal, smuggling, human trafficking, and child labor, illegal oil bunkering,
illegal mining, tax evasion, foreign exchange malpractices including counterfeiting to currency,
theft of intellectual property and piracy, open market abuse, dumping of toxic, wastes, and
prohibited goods (EFCC Act, 2004).

3|Page
Everyone agrees with Lipset (1995) that corruption involves a deviation from the laws and
regulations with intent to abuse ones public office and obtain private benefits. Second, the
resources exchanged in corruption result in material advantages, as when a favourable public
decision is paid for with money. Corruption is therefore one form of influence of money on
politics. Third, that corruption always involves clandestine transactions as it is an unacceptable
form of transaction.

The truism that corruption is a surest route that hinders development in any society does not
need contention. Though, in some quarters, it is argued that corruption could trigger
development (Otite, 1986). However, despite this assertion, there is a widespread held opinion
condemning corruption in all ramifications and hence, worldwide outcry and call for eradicating
the scourge.

Evidence may abound that corruption could aid development; no such evidence could be
claimed to any root most especially developing state (Nigeria inclusive). Compelling evidences
across the globe demonstrate that corruption is an anathema to development (khan, a).
Furthermore, evidences in Nigeria have shown that corruption does more harm than good. This
is evident in the fact that despite Nigeria‟s abundant natural resources the country is classified
among poor countries in the world. Added to this is the fact that about 54% of the population
earns less than $1 per day. It needs to be stated that the incidence of extreme paradoxes of
widespread and endemic poverty and hunger in the midst of plenty is a manifestation of
corruption enmeshed in deteriorating condition of living (Ali, 2008). Statistics had also shown
that “Nigeria is among the four largest economies in Africa” with a real GDP of 58.4 billion
dollar and a population of about 140m” (Ibid). Similarly, the enormous revenue generation
capacity from oil and non-oil sectors, woefully contrasts with the decaying public
infrastructures and extent of institutional development recorded. As it was rightly asserted by
Salawu (2007), the phenomenon of corruption in Nigeria has made it impossible for Nigerians
to enjoy the dividends of democracy and indeed the gifts of nature with which the country is
greatly and abundantly endowed. This scenario is an acknowledgement that the state of affair
in the country today is a reflection of pervasive corruption which has eaten deep into every
facets of Nigeria life. Without gain saying, it is a wide held belief that corruption is a way of life
in Nigeria and that it is responsible for broken promises and dashed hopes which has
characterized the lives of most Nigerians. It is not surprising to hear people saying that
Nigerians are corrupt. Making it a fait accompli. More so, Nigeria is a country where corruption
is rife and where greed for material acquisition and quest for political power had relegated to
the background morals preached by various religions. This is because despite our claim to be
religious, our quest for relevance had made nonsense of our self acclaimed religiosity and
nothing can be left undone by our elites and non-elites for the realization their self desire. The
end, it is believed, justifies the means. To this end, there is now the increasing realization about

4|Page
the ill effects of corruption on the nation’s social, political and economic fabrics. Though, it is
evident that there is no country that is totally free from corruption, the incidences of corruption
is on the increase especially in poor and underdeveloped states. The Anti corruption efforts of
the Nigerian government have proved ineffective, hence, large scale corrupt related cases,
accusations and counter-accusations. There were cases of missing funds, police pensions scam,
missing oil revenue or non-remittance into the federation account, contract scam, oil theft,
administrative inefficiency or dereliction of duty, illegal sale or allotment of government land
and property, bribery, extortion and other forms of corruption, economic and financial crimes.

Corruption can occur on different scales. Corruption ranges from small favors between a small
number of people (petty corruption) to corruption that affects the government on a large scale
(grand corruption), and corruption that is so prevalent that it is part of the everyday structure
of society, including corruption as one of the symptoms of organized crime. Corruption and
crime are endemic sociological occurrences which appear with regular frequency in virtually all
countries on a global scale in varying degree and proportion. Individual nations each allocate
domestic resources for the control and regulation of corruption and crime. Strategies to
counter corruption are often summarized under the umbrella term anti-corruption.

Stephen D. Morris, a professor of politics, wrote that political corruption is the illegitimate use

of public power to benefit a private interest. Economist Ian Senior defined corruption as an
action to (a) secretly provide (b) a good or a service to a third party (c) so that he or she can
influence certain actions which (d) benefit the corrupt, a third party, or both (e) in which the
corrupt agent has authority. World Bank economist Daniel Kaufmann, extended the concept to
include "legal corruption" in which power is abused within the confines of the law—as those
with power often have the ability to make laws for their protection. The effect of corruption in
infrastructure is to increase costs and construction time, lower the quality and decrease the
benefit.
Corruption can occur on different scales. Corruption ranges from small favors between a small
number of people (petty corruption), to corruption that affects the government on a large scale
(grand corruption), and corruption that is so prevalent that it is part of the everyday structure
of society, including corruption as one of the symptoms of organized crime. A number of
indicators and tools have been developed which can measure different forms of corruption
with increasing accuracy.
Petty corruption occurs at a smaller scale and takes place at the implementation end of public
services when public officials meet the public. For example, in many small places such as
registration offices, police stations, state licensing boards, and many other private and
government sectors.
Grand corruption is defined as corruption occurring at the highest levels of government in a
way that requires significant subversion of the political, legal and economic systems. Such
corruption is commonly found in countries with authoritarian or dictatorial governments but
also in those without adequate policing of corruption. The government system in many

5|Page
countries is divided into the legislative, executive and judicial branches in an attempt to provide
independent services that are less subject to grand corruption due to their independence from
one another.
Systemic corruption (or endemic corruption) is corruption which is primarily due to the
weaknesses of an organization or process. It can be contrasted with individual officials or agents
who act corruptly within the system. Factors which encourage systemic corruption
include conflicting incentives, discretionary powers; monopolistic powers; lack of transparency;
low pay; and a culture of impunity.  Specific acts of corruption include "bribery, extortion, and
embezzlement" in a system where "corruption becomes the rule rather than the
exception."Scholars distinguish between centralized and decentralized systemic corruption,
depending on which level of state or government corruption takes place; in countries such as
the Post-Soviet states both types occur Some scholars argue that there is a negative duty of
western governments to protect against systematic corruption of underdeveloped
governments. Corruption has been a major issue in China, where society depends heavily on
personal relationships. By the late 20th century that combined with the new lust for wealth,
produced escalating corruption. Historian Keith Schoppa says that bribery was only one of the
tools of Chinese corruption, which also included, "embezzlement, nepotism, smuggling,
extortion, cronyism, kickbacks, deception, fraud, squandering public monies, illegal business
transactions, stock manipulation and real estate fraud." Given the repeated anti-corruption
campaigns it was a prudent precaution to move as much of the fraudulent money as possible
overseas.

MANIFESTATION OF CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA

Colonialism, western education, the development of urbanization and monetization of the
economy with its attendant growth of individualism brought about dramatic changes in the
Nigerian state. The consular court system disrupted the traditional administration which the
white colonialists met. In its place was appointed the highly flawed indirect rule under which
appointment of personnel was arbitrarily made. Often times, appointees were unknown
people, different from the traditional heads and chiefs. Many of the appointed people were of
questionable character and were usually intoxicated by power, leading them to abuse and
misuse their positions. Corruption in the Indirect Rules system soon got to the attention of the
colonialists, as most of the warrant chiefs prospered materially through the process of bribery
and corruption.
The military that overthrown the civilians who took over from the colonialists cited corruption,
amongst others, as the reason for staging the coup. They gave instances of electoral corruption
and malpractices involving the use of money to buy votes, employment of thugs to intimidate
political opponents, hiring of assassins to eliminate political opponents, hijacking of electoral
boxes and materials, and the printing of fake voter cards. Unfortunately, military regimes
tended to be more corrupt than the regimes they seemed to have come to correct. The
unfortunate thing however, as observed by Salawu (2007) is that the military that took over in
1966 from the civilian government hoping to wipe out corruption in the Nigerian political
system ended up entrenching corruption on the nation. Despotism, which characterizes military

6|Page
regimes, destroyed a culture of accountability. The once cherished culture of probity in public
affairs soon yielded to a place of graft and the standard of public morality continued to worsen.
Characteristically, military regimes upon taking power and in fighting corruption, sack or
remove from office or dismiss some individuals allegedly found to be involved in corrupt
practices, forcibly seize/confiscate corruptly acquired property through legislation (decree).
Such actions were, however, regarded as arbitrariness as it lacks an acceptable culture of
probity and tended to be abused. A more serious attempt at tackling this problem was made
under Muhammadu Buhari/Tunde Idiagbon regime (1984-85). Institutional efforts taken to deal
with the problem of corruption by the past administrations include, the Corrupt Practices
Decree of 1975; the Public Officer (Investigation of Assets) Decree No. 5 of 1976, which was
supplemented by the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunals as spelt out in the
1979 constitution. Others include the Shehu Shagari‟s Ethical Revolution (1979-83), the War
Against Indiscipline (WAI) campaign under the Buhari/Idiagbon junta. The Babangida
administration introduced what was then tagged the National Committee on Corruption and
other Economic Crimes (NCCEC) in its bid to deal with the perennial problem of corruption.
However, a more serious attempt at tacking the problem was made under the Buhari/Idiagbon
regime (1984/1985).
In spite of the various efforts made and measures taken by successive military administrations
to rid Nigeria of corruption, the phenomenon of corruption, as it presents itself in the Nigerian
polity has assumed an endemic, alarming and systemic proportions to the extent that the
pervasive mentality for the worship of 'worldly things'; money, properties, or assets acquisitions
has become the order of the day. To some analysts, corruption in Nigeria is characterized by
extensive and intensive corruption properly protected by the „Official Secret Act‟ and
„Immunity Clause‟ strategically embodied in the Nigerian Constitution of 1999. These two
features of the constitution informed the opinion of some Nigerians that the constitution
indirectly encourages corruption. Moreso, the perceived life-style and sudden inexplicable
acquisition of wealth by ex-military and serving personnel, their relatives and accomplices,
coupled with lack of transparency in governance, informed the conclusion that military regimes
were institutionalizing corruption and corrupt practices and, thereby enthroning a culture of
graft (Ribadu, 2006).
The situation of corruption in Nigeria has presented an anomic situation in which anybody can
get away with his/her loots no matter the amount of money involved and the material costs to
the nation. The This Day Newspaper reported that the level of leakages in Nigeria has attracted
an annual rate of $25.76 billion loss to fraud related crimes in the last five years and that on a
daily basis too; the country is losing about $70,575,342 to corruption and other related crimes
(Salawu, 2007). Given its alarming rate, particularly because of its damaging implications, the
phenomenon constitutes a national question which needs to be examined in all its
ramifications. In other word, every effort should be exerted to stem its spread and growth. It
must be tackled head log no matter whose ox is goosed.
This ugly picture has become insurmountable since independence and every strategy fashioned
to address or tackle the menace has not yielded the desire outcome. Most of the national
earnings particularly from the oil sector since independence have been gulped by different
forms of corruption. The level and rate of corruption and, lack of accountability have remained

7|Page
an impediment to Nigeria's developmental drive and responsible for the increasing level of
poverty in the country
This unpalatable situation of corruption x-rayed above informed President Olusegun Obasanjo's
stern focus on corruption. To this end, the government established two agencies – Independent
Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, (ICPC) and Economic and Financial
Crime Commission, (EFCC) to achieving the purpose. The sentiment echoed by El-Rufai was
that, corruption has reached an endemic level in Nigeria and that despite measures taken to
stem its spread; it has continued unabated (Odekunle, 2006). He (Odekunle) stated further that
every effort evolved at addressing the scourge have always been frustrated by the evolution of
even more effective and sophisticated methods of corruption (ibid). In 2001 alone, Nigeria was
said to have lost more than N23b (Alanamu et al, 2008). Oby Ezekwesili – Senior Special
Assistant (SSA) to the President on Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligence Unit (BMPIU) was
quoted by Newswatch (2004) to have said that “the unit (BMPIU) had saved N125b from over
bloated contracts. The figure is considered an equivalent of 30 percent of the capital budget for
fiscal year 2004” (Salawu, 2008).

PERSPECTIVES ON CORRUPTION
There are several perspectives on corruption; namely, the idealistic, functionalist and Marxist,
Moralists, Social censure and Social Constructionist perspectives
(1) The idealistic theory, according to Nkom (1982) is based on the assumption that the ideals which
people have determine the way they live and the way their society is organized. The school believed
that corruption should be seen in terms of the nature of social and moral values prevailing in
the society. Metiboba (1996) subdivided this perspective into traditionalist and modernist. The
Modernists, he says, adopt western social values and attitudes associated with colonialism. He
opined that the traditionalist, adopt traditional practices such as gift-giving, ethnic loyalty and
other parochial tendencies.

(2) The Functionalist school of tort sees corruption as a deviant behavior which stems from the
social structure of the society and exerts a definite pressure upon certain individuals in the
society to engage in non-conforming or conforming conduct. Flowing there from is the fact that
a society in which there is an exceptionally strong emphasis upon specific goals without a
corresponding institutional means or procedures, will inevitably lead to what Durkheim called
“anomie” normlessness or deviation”. In Nigeria, material acquisition has become the ultimate
goal and the society does not appear to be concerned with how one “makes” it. All that is
important is that one has “arrived” (Alanamu et al, 2008).

(3) Marxist – contends that it is not people‟s consciousness that determine their wellbeing but
the way the society organizes the production, distribution and exchange of goods and services
that determines their material conditions.

8|Page
(4) The Moralists school see "corruption as an immoral and unethical phenomenon that
contains moral aberrations from moral standards of society, causing loss of respect for and
confidence in duly constituted authority" (Gould, 1991; cited in Khan, a). Corruption is
therefore seen as deviation from formal rules for personal aggrandisement.
(5) Social Censure believes that proper understanding of corruption "should take into
consideration the capacity of the state to produce a particular form of social relations and shift
the theoretical emphasis to the interplay of law, ideologies and political economy" (Khan, a).
(6) Social Constructionists opined that actors involved can be studied by relating them to
contextual information on their social positions, interests and stakes in the system (Khan, a).

METHODS/WAYS OF CORRUPTION
In systemic corruption and grand corruption, multiple methods of corruption are used
concurrently with similar aims.
Bribery
Bribery involves the improper use of gifts and favors in exchange for personal gain. This is also
known as kickbacks or, in the Middle East, as baksheesh. It is a common form of corruption.
The types of favors given are diverse and may include money, gifts, sexual favors, company
shares, entertainment, employment and political benefits. The personal gain that is given can
be anything from actively giving preferential treatment to having an indiscretion or crime
overlooked.
Bribery can sometimes form a part of the systemic use of corruption for other ends, for
example to perpetrate further corruption. Bribery can make officials more susceptible to
blackmail or to extortion.
Embezzlement, theft and fraud
Embezzlement and theft involve someone with access to funds or assets illegally taking control
of them. Fraud involves using deception to convince the owner of funds or assets to give them
up to an unauthorized party.
Examples include the misdirection of company funds into "shadow companies" (and then into
the pockets of corrupt employees), the skimming of foreign aid money, scams and other
corrupt activity.
Graft
The political act of graft is when funds intended for public projects are intentionally misdirected
to maximize the benefits to private interests of the corrupt individuals.
Extortion and blackmail
While bribery is the use of positive inducements for corrupt-aims, extortion and blackmail
center on the use of threats. This can be the threat of violence or false imprisonment as well as
exposure of an individual's secrets or prior crimes. This includes such behavior as an influential
person threatening to go to the media if they do not receive speedy medical treatment (at the
expense of other patients), threatening a public official with exposure of their secrets if they do

9|Page
not vote in a particular manner, or demanding money in exchange for continued secrecy.
Influence peddling
Influence peddling is the illegal practice of using one's influence in government or connections
with persons in authority to obtain favors or preferential treatment, usually in return for
payment.
Networking
Networking can be an effective way for job-seekers to gain a competitive edge over others in
the job-market. The idea is to cultivate personal relationships with prospective employers,
selection panelists, and others, in the hope that these personal affections will influence future
hiring decisions. This form of networking has been described as an attempt to corrupt formal
hiring processes, where all candidates are given an equal opportunity to demonstrate their
merits to selectors. The networker is accused of seeking non-meritocratic advantage over other
candidates; advantage that is based on personal fondness rather than on any objective
appraisal of which candidate is most qualified for the position.
Abuse of discretion
Abuse of discretion refers to the misuse of one's powers and decision-making facilities.
Examples include a judge improperly dismissing a criminal case or a customs official using their
discretion to allow a banned substance through a port.
Favoritism, nepotism and clientelism
Favoritism, nepotism and clientelism involve the favoring of not the perpetrator of corruption
but someone related to them, such as a friend, family member or member of an association.
Examples would include hiring or promoting a family member or staff member to a role they
are not qualified for, who belongs to the same political party as you, regardless of merit.
Some states do not forbid these forms of corruption.
CAUSES OF CORRUPTION
According to a 2017 survey study, the following factors have been attributed as causes of
corruption;

 Greed for money/desires.

 Higher levels of market and political monopolization
 Low levels of democracy, weak civil participation and low political transparency
 Higher levels of bureaucracy and inefficient administrative structures
 Low press freedom
 Low economic freedom
 Large ethnic divisions and high levels of inter-group favoritism
 Gender inequality
 Poverty
 Political instability
 Weak property rights
 Contagion from corrupt neighboring countries

10 | P a g e
  Low levels of education
 Lack of commitment to society
 Extravagant family 

The general framework for analyzing the causes of corruption can be discerned from three (3)
levels; International, National and Individual levels (Khan, a).
a) International Level-the competitiveness of the International markets, according to Khan, gives
multinational companies an incentive to offer bribes to gain an advantage over other
competitors in the system. The Siemens scandal, the National Identity Card saga and
Halliburton case are some of the corruption cases involving international companies in Nigeria.
b) National Level- the development strategy of the government may increase opportunities and
incentives for corruption. Three types of relationships exist at this level; that is, the relationship
between the government (elected and appointed officials) and the civil service; between
government and the judiciary and, between government and the civil society/private
organisation or individuals. What comes to mind here is, connivance and privileges. This could
be when awarding contracts or giving concessions for economic reasons or granting of rights
(such as privatisation of government owned businesses).
c) Individual Level - This deals with business regulation, management of foreign aids, outright
diversion of public resources, collection of mobilization fees without execution of the project or
abandonment of projects when the amount for the project has been paid or poor execution of
the project, a culture of affluent and get rich syndrome, unbridled competition between and
among different classes of individual and the tendency to acquire more so as to gain advantage
and retain one's position or aspire for a higher position. This explains why politicians spend a lot
of money during elections period.

CAUSES OF CORRUPTION IN DIFFERENT SECTORS

Corruption can occur in many sectors, whether they be public or private industry or
even NGOs (especially in public sector). However, only in democratically controlled institutions
are there an interest of the public (owner) to develop internal mechanisms to fight active or
passive corruption, whereas in private industry as well as in NGOs there is no public control.
Therefore, the owners' investors' or sponsors' profits are largely decisive.
Government/public sector
Public corruption includes corruption of the political process and of government agencies such
as the police as well as corruption in processes of allocating public funds for contracts, grants,
and hiring. Recent research by the World Bank suggests that who makes policy decisions
(elected officials or bureaucrats) can be critical in determining the level of corruption because
of the incentives different policy-makers face.
Within the political system
Political corruption is the abuse of public power, office, or resources by elected government
officials for personal gain, by extortion, soliciting or offering bribes. It can also take the form of
office holders maintaining themselves in office by purchasing votes by enacting laws which use
taxpayers' money. Evidence suggests that corruption can have political consequences- with
citizens being asked for bribes becoming less likely to identify with their country or region.

11 | P a g e
The political act of graft (American English) is a well known and now global form of political
corruption, being the unscrupulous and illegal use of a politician's authority for personal gain,
when funds intended for public projects are intentionally misdirected in order to maximize the
benefits to illegally private interests of the corrupted individual(s) and their cronies. In some
cases government institutions are "repurposed" or shifted away from their official mandate to
serve other, often corrupt purposes. See too State Capture.
The Kaunas golden toilet case was a major Lithuanian scandal. In 2009, the municipality of
Kaunas (led by mayor Andrius Kupčinskas) ordered that a shipping container was to be
converted into an outdoor toilet at a cost of 500,000 litai (around 150,000 euros). It was to also
require 5,000 litai (1,500 euros) in monthly maintenance costs. At the same time when Kaunas's
"Golden Toilet" was built, Kėdainiai tennis club acquired a very similar, but more advanced
solution for 4,500 euros. Because of the inflated cost of the outdoor toilet, it was nicknamed
the "Golden Toilet". Despite the investment, the "Golden Toilet" remained closed for years due
to the dysfunctionality and was a subject of a lengthy anti-corruption investigation into those
who had created it and the local municipality even considered demolishing the building at one
point. The group of public servants involved in the toilet's procurement received various prison
sentences for recklessness, malfeasance, misuse of power and document falsifications in a 2012
court case, but were cleared of their corruption charges and received compensation, which
pushed the total construction cost and subsequent related financial losses to 352,000 euros.
Various sources acclaim the Spanish People's Party – Partido Popular -, to be Europe's most
corrupt party, with about yearly 45 billion euro worth of corruption.
On 7 July 2020, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a global think tank, released a
report claiming the Emirati city, Dubai, of being an enabler of global corruption, crime and illicit
financial flows. It stated that the global corrupt and criminal actors either operated through or
from Dubai. The city was also called a haven for trade-based money laundering, has it gives
space to free trade zones, with minimal regulatory laws and customs enforcement.
Within the police
Police corruption is a specific form of police misconduct designed to obtain financial benefits,
personal gain, career advancement for a police officer or officers in exchange for not pursuing
or selectively pursuing an investigation or arrest or aspects of the "thin blue line" itself where
force members collude in lies to protect other members from accountability. One common
form of police corruption is soliciting or accepting bribes in exchange for not reporting
organized drug or prostitution rings or other illegal activities.
Another example is police officers flouting the police code of conduct in order to secure
convictions of suspects—for example, through the use of falsified evidence. More rarely, police
officers may deliberately and systematically participate in organized crime themselves. In most
major cities, there are internal affairs sections to investigate suspected police corruption or
misconduct. Similar entities include the British Independent Police Complaints Commission.
In the judicial system
Judicial corruption refers to corruption-related misconduct of judges, through receiving or
giving bribes, improper sentencing of convicted criminals, bias in the hearing and judgment of

12 | P a g e
arguments and other such misconduct. Governmental corruption of judiciary is broadly known
in many transitional and developing countries because the budget is almost completely
controlled by the executive. The latter undermines the separation of powers, as it creates a
critical financial dependence of the judiciary. The proper national wealth distribution including
the government spending on the judiciary is subject to the constitutional economics.
It is important to distinguish between the two methods of corruption of the judiciary: the
government (through budget planning and various privileges), and the private. Judicial
corruption can be difficult to completely eradicate, even in developed countries. Corruption in
judiciary also involves the government in power using the judicial arm of government to
oppress the opposition parties in the detriments of the state
In healthcare
Corruption, the abuse of entrusted power for private gain, as defined by Transparency
International is systemic in the health sector. The characteristics of health systems with their
concentrated supply of a service, high discretionary power of its members controlling the
supply, and low accountability to others are the exact constellation of the variables described
by Klitgaard, on which corruption depends.
Corruption in health care is more dangerous than in any other sector, because it affects health
outcomes and is literally deadly. It is widespread and yet, little has been published in medical
journals about this topic and as of 2019 there is no evidence on what might reduce corruption
in the health sector. Corruption occurs within the private and public health sectors and may
appear as theft, embezzlement, nepotism, bribery up till extortion, or as undue influence and
occurs anywhere within the sector, be it in service provision, purchasing, construction and
hiring. In 2019, Transparency International has described the 6 most common ways of service
corruption as follows: absenteeism, informal payments from patients, embezzlement, inflating
services and the costs of services, favoritism and manipulation of data (billing for goods and
services that were never sent or done).
In the education system
Corruption in education is a worldwide phenomenon. Corruption in admissions to universities is
traditionally considered as one of the most corrupt areas of the education sector. Recent
attempts in some countries, such as Russia and Ukraine, to curb corruption in admissions
through the abolition of university entrance examinations and introduction of standardized
computer-graded tests have largely failed. Vouchers for university entrants have never
materialized. The cost of corruption is in that it impedes sustainable economic growth.
Endemic corruption in educational institutions leads to the formation of sustainable corrupt
hierarchies. While higher education in Russia is distinct with widespread bribery, corruption in
the US and the UK features a significant amount of fraud. The US is distinct with grey areas and
institutional corruption in the higher education sector. Authoritarian regimes, including those in
the former Soviet republics, encourage educational corruption and control universities,
especially during the election campaigns. This is typical for Russia, Ukraine, and Central Asian
regimes, among others. The general public is well aware of the high level of corruption in
colleges and universities, including thanks to the media, Doctoral education is no exception,

13 | P a g e
with dissertations and doctoral degrees available for sale, including for politicians. Russian
Parliament is notorious for "highly educated" MPs High levels of corruption are a result of
universities not being able to break away from their Stalinist past, over bureaucratization,  and a
clear lack of university autonomy. Both quantitative and qualitative methodologies are
employed to study education corruption, but the topic remains largely unattended by the
scholars. In many societies and international organizations, education corruption remains a
taboo. In some countries, such as certain eastern European countries, some Balkan countries
and certain Asian countries, corruption occurs frequently in universities. This can include bribes
to bypass bureaucratic procedures and bribing faculty for a grade. The willingness to engage in
corruption such as accepting bribe money in exchange for grades decreases if individuals
perceive such behavior as very objectionable, i.e. a violation of social norms and if they fear
sanctions regarding the severity and probability of sanctions.
Within labor unions
The Teamsters (International Brotherhood of Teamsters) is an example of how the
civil RICO process can be used. For decades, the Teamsters had been substantially controlled
by La Cosa Nostra. Since 1957, four of eight Teamster presidents were indicted, yet the union
continued to be controlled by organized crime elements. The federal government has been
successful at removing the criminal influence from this 1.4 million-member union by using the
civil process.
In religion
The history of religion includes numerous examples of religious leaders calling attention to
corruption in the religious practices and institutions of their time.
Jewish prophets Isaiah and Amos berate the rabbinical establishment of Ancient Judea for
failing to live up to the ideals of the Torah. In the New Testament, Jesus accuses the rabbinical
establishment of his time of hypocritically following only the ceremonial parts of the Torah and
neglecting the more important elements of justice, mercy and faithfulness. Corruption was one
of the important issues during the Investiture Controversy. In 1517, Martin Luther accuses
the Catholic Church of widespread corruption, including selling of indulgences. In
2015, Princeton University professor Kevin M. Kruse advances the thesis that business leaders
in the 1930s and 1940s collaborated with clergymen, including James W. Fifield Jr., to develop
and promote a new hermeneutical approach to Scripture that would de-emphasize the social
Gospel and emphasize themes, such as individual salvation, more congenial to free enterprise.
Business leaders, of course, had long been working to "merchandise" themselves through the
appropriation of religion. In organizations such as Spiritual Mobilization, the prayer breakfast
groups, and the Freedoms Foundation, they had linked capitalism and Christianity and, at the
same time, likened the welfare state to godless paganism.
In philosophy
19th century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer acknowledged that academics,
including philosophers, are subject to the same sources of corruption as the society they
inhabit. He distinguished the corrupt "university" philosophers, whose "real concern is to earn
with credit an honest livelihood for themselves and to enjoy a certain prestige in the eyes of the

14 | P a g e
public" from the genuine philosopher, whose sole motive is to discover and bear witness to the
truth.
To be a philosopher, that is to say, a lover of wisdom (for wisdom is nothing but truth), it is not
enough for a man to love truth, in so far as it is compatible with his own interest, with the will
of his superiors, with the dogmas of the church, or with the prejudices and tastes of his
contemporaries; so long as he rests content with this position, he is only a φίλαυτος [lover of
self], not a φιλόσοφος [lover of wisdom]. For this title of honor is well and wisely conceived
precisely by its stating that one should love the truth earnestly and with one’s whole heart, and
thus unconditionally and unreservedly, above all else, and, if need be, in defiance of all else.
Now the reason for this is the one previously stated that the intellect has become free, and in
this state, it does not even know or understand any other interest than that of truth.

CORPORATE CORRUPTION
In criminology, corporate crime refers to crimes committed either by a corporation (i.e.,
a business entity having a separate legal personality from the natural persons that manage its
activities), or by individuals acting on behalf of a corporation or other business entity
(see vicarious liability and corporate liability). Some negative behaviours by corporations may
not be criminal; laws vary between jurisdictions. For example, some jurisdictions allow insider
trading.
Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. Petrobras, more commonly known as simply Petrobras (Portuguese
pronunciation: [ˌpɛtɾoˈbɾas]), is a semi-public Brazilian multinational corporation in
the petroleum industry headquartered in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The company's name translates
to Brazilian Petroleum Corporation – Petrobras. The company was ranked No. 58 in the
2016 Fortune Global 500 list. It is being investigated over corporate and political collusion and
corruption.
Odebrecht is a privately held Brazilian conglomerate consisting of businesses in the fields of
engineering, real estate, construction, chemicals and petrochemicals. The company was
founded in 1944 in Salvador da Bahia by Norberto Odebrecht, and the firm is now present in
South America, Central America, North America, the Caribbean, Africa, Europe and the Middle
East. Its leading company is Norberto Odebrecht Construtora  Odebrecht is one of the 25
largest international construction companies and led by Odebrecht family.
In 2016, the firm's executives were examined during Operation Car Wash part of an
investigation over Odebrecht Organization bribes to executives of Petrobras, in exchange for
contracts and influence. Operation Car Wash is an ongoing criminal money
laundering and bribes related corporate crime investigation being carried out by the Federal
Police of Brazil, Curitiba Branch, and judicially commanded by Judge Sérgio Moro since 17
March 2014.
ARMS FOR CASH
"Arms for cash" can be done by either a state-sanctioned arms dealer, firm or state itself to
another party it just in regards as only a good business partner and not political kindred or

15 | P a g e
allies, thus making them no better than regular gun runners. Arms smugglers, who are already
into arms trafficking, may work for them on the ground or with shipment. The money is often
laundered and records are often destroyed. It often breaks UN, national or international
law. Payment can also be in strange or indirect ways like arms paid for in post-war oil contracts,
post-war hotel ownership, conflict diamonds, corporate shares or the long term post-war
promises of superfus future contracts between the parties involved in it, etc...
In 2006 Transparency International ranked Angola a lowly 142 out of 163 countries in
the Corruption Perception Index just after Venezuela and before the Republic of the Congo with
a 2.2 rating. Angola was at 168th place (out of 178 countries) on Transparency International's
Corruption Perceptions
Index (CPI), receiving a 1.9 on a scale from 0 to 10. On the World Bank's 2009 Worldwide
Governance Index, Angola had done very poorly on all six aspects of governance assessed.
While its score for political stability improved to 35.8 in 2009 (on a 100-point scale) from 19.2 in
2004, Angola earned especially low scores for accountability, regulatory standards, and rule of
law. The score for corruption declined from an extremely low 6.3 in 2004 to 5.2 in 2009.
The country is regarded poorly and that corruption is wounding the economy badly despite the
emerging oil industries wealth.
The Mitterrand–Pasqua affair, also known informally as Angolagate, was an
international political scandal over the secret and illegal sale and shipment of arms from the
nations of Central Europe to the government of Angola by the Government of France in the
1990s. It led to arrests and judiciary actions in the 2000s, involved an illegal arms sale to Angola
despite a UN embargo, with business interests in France and elsewhere improperly obtaining a
share of Angolan oil revenues. The scandal has subsequently been tied to several prominent
figures in French politics.
42 individuals, including: 42 people, including Jean-Christophe Mitterrand, Jacques
Attali, Charles Pasqua and Jean-Charles Marchiani, Pierre Falcone. Arcadi Gaydamak, Paul-Loup
Sulitzer, Union for a Popular Movement deputy Georges Fenech, Philippe Courroye  the son
of François Mitterrand and a former French Minister of the Interior, were charged, accused,
indicted or convicted with illegal arms trading, tax fraud, embezzlement, money laundering and
other crimes.
LEGAL CORRUPTION
Though corruption is often viewed as illegal, a concept of legal corruption has been described
by Daniel Kaufmann and Pedro Vicente. It might be termed as processes which are corrupt, but
are protected by a legal (that is, specifically permitted, or at least not proscribed by law)
framework.
Examples
In 1994, the German Parliamentary Financial Commission in Bonn presented a comparative
study on "legal corruption" in industrialized OECD countries. They reported that in most
industrial countries foreign corruption was legal, and that their foreign corrupt practices ranged
from simple legalization, through governmental subsidization (tax deduction), up to extreme
cases as in Germany, where foreign corruption was fostered, whereas domestic was legally

16 | P a g e
 prosecuted. The German Parliamentary Financial Commission rejected a Parliamentary
Proposal by the opposition, which had been aiming to limit German foreign corruption on the
basis of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA from 1977), thus fostering national export
corporations. In 1997 a corresponding OECD Anti-Bribery Convention was signed by its
members. It took until 1999, after the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention came into force, that
Germany withdrew the legalization of foreign corruption.
FOREIGN CORRUPT PRACTICES OF INDUSTRIALIZED OECD COUNTRIES 1994
STUDY
The Foreign corrupt practices of industrialized OECD countries 1994 (Parliamentary Financial
Commission study, Bonn).
Belgium: bribe payments are generally tax deductible as business expenses if the name and
address of the beneficiary is disclosed. Under the following conditions kickbacks in connection
with exports abroad are permitted for deduction even without proof of the receiver:

 Payments must be necessary in order to be able to survive against foreign competition

 They must be common in the industry
 A corresponding application must be made to the Treasury each year
 Payments must be appropriate
 The payer has to pay a lump-sum to the tax office to be fixed by the Finance Minister (at
least 20% of the amount paid).
In the absence of the required conditions, for corporate taxable companies paying bribes
without proof of the receiver, a special tax of 200% is charged. This special tax may, however,
be abated along with the bribe amount as an operating expense.
Denmark: bribe payments are deductible when a clear operational context exists and its
adequacy is maintained.
France: basically all operating expenses can be deducted. However, staff costs must correspond
to an actual work done and must not be excessive compared to the operational significance.
This also applies to payments to foreign parties. Here, the receiver shall specify the name and
address, unless the total amount in payments per beneficiary does not exceed 500 FF. If the
receiver is not disclosed the payments are considered "rémunérations occult" and are
associated with the following disadvantages:

 The business expense deduction (of the bribe money) is eliminated.

 For corporations and other legal entities, a tax penalty of 100% of the "rémunérations
occult" and 75% for voluntary post declaration is to be paid.
 There may be a general fine of up 200 FF fixed per case.
Japan: in Japan, bribes are deductible as business expenses that are justified by the operation
(of the company) if the name and address of the recipient is specified. This also applies to
payments to foreigners. If the indication of the name is refused, the expenses claimed are not
recognized as operating expenses.

17 | P a g e
 Canada: there is no general rule on the deductibility or non-deductibility of kickbacks and
bribes. Hence the rule is that necessary expenses for obtaining the income (contract) are
deductible. Payments to members of the public service and domestic administration of justice,
to officers and employees and those charged with the collection of fees, entrance fees etc. for
the purpose to entice the recipient to the violation of his official duties, can not be abated as
business expenses as well as illegal payments according to the Criminal Code.
Luxembourg: bribes, justified by the operation (of a company) are deductible as business
expenses. However, the tax authorities may require that the payer is to designate the receiver
by name. If not, the expenses are not recognized as operating expenses.
Netherlands: all expenses that are directly or closely related to the business are deductible. This
also applies to expenditure outside the actual business operations if they are considered
beneficial as to the operation for good reasons by the management. What counts is the good
merchant custom. Neither the law nor the administration is authorized to determine which
expenses are not operationally justified and therefore not deductible. For the business expense
deduction it is not a requirement that the recipient is specified. It is sufficient to elucidate to
the satisfaction of the tax authorities that the payments are in the interest of the operation.
Austria: bribes justified by the operation (of a company) are deductible as business expenses.
However, the tax authority may require that the payer names the recipient of the deducted
payments exactly. If the indication of the name is denied e.g. because of business comity, the
expenses claimed are not recognized as operating expenses. This principle also applies to
payments to foreigners.
Switzerland: bribe payments are tax deductible if it is clearly operation initiated and the
consignee is indicated.
US: (rough résumé: "generally operational expenses are deductible if they are not illegal
according to the FCPA")
UK: kickbacks and bribes are deductible if they have been paid for operating purposes. The tax
authority may request the name and address of the recipient."
“SPECIFIC” LEGAL CORRUPTION: EXCLUSIVELY AGAINST FOREIGN COUNTRIES
Referring to the recommendation of the above-mentioned Parliamentary Financial
Commission's study, the then Kohl administration (1991–1994) decided to maintain the legality
of corruption against officials exclusively in foreign transactions and confirmed the full
deductibility of bribe money, co-financing thus a specific nationalistic corruption practice
(§4 Abs. 5 Nr. 10 EStG, valid until 19 March 1999) in contradiction to the 1994 OECD
recommendation. The respective law was not changed before the OECD Convention also in
Germany came into force (1999). According to the Parliamentary Financial Commission's study,
however, in 1994 most countries' corruption practices were not nationalistic and much more
limited by the respective laws compared to Germany.
Particularly, the non-disclosure of the bribe money recipients' name in tax declarations had
been a powerful instrument for Legal Corruption during the 1990s for German corporations,
enabling them to block foreign legal jurisdictions which intended to fight corruption in their
countries. Hence, they uncontrolled established a strong network of clientelism around Europe

18 | P a g e
 (e.g. SIEMENS) along with the formation of the European Single Market in the
upcoming European Union and the Eurozone. Moreover, in order to further strengthen active
corruption the prosecution of tax evasion during that decade had been severely limited.
German tax authorities were instructed to refuse any disclosure of bribe recipients' names from
tax declarations to the German criminal prosecution. As a result, German corporations have
been systematically increasing their informal economy from 1980 until today up to 350 bn € per
annum, thus continuously feeding their black money reserves.
SIEMENS CORRUPTION CASE
In 2007, Siemens was convicted in the District Court of Darmstadt of criminal corruption against
the Italian corporation Enel Power SpA. Siemens had paid almost €3.5 million in bribes to be
selected for a €200 million project from the Italian corporation, partially owned by the
government.
The deal was handled through black money accounts in Switzerland and Liechtenstein that
were established specifically for such purposes. Because the crime was committed in 1999,
after the OECD convention had come into force, this foreign corrupt practice could be
prosecuted. It was the first time a German court of law convicted foreign corrupt practices like
a national practice, although the corresponding law did not yet protect foreign competitors in
business.
During the judicial proceedings it was disclosed that numerous such black accounts had been
established in the past decades.
EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION
i. Corruption perpetuates social, economic and political inequality (khan,b) and thus, aggravates
mass poverty as poor people on the average pay higher proportion of their incomes in bribes.
This, in economic parlance, retards economic growth. The misappropriation and
mismanagement of public resources by successive regimes, has rendered millions of Nigerians
poor, unemployed and uneducated. This can be described as oil that worsens factors related to
overall human development. In the words of Osoba (1996), it is an anti-social behavior
conferring improper benefits contrary to legal and moral norms, and which undermine the
authorities to improve the living conditions of the people (Aluko, 2009).
ii. Corruption also diverts public expenditure from sectors that benefit the poor the most, away to
the sectors and project where kick-backs can readily be obtained by public officials. In effect,
distorted priorities of public policies and diversion of public resources which could have been
productively employed to increase productivity bring about effectiveness and efficiency of
government performance becomes the order of the day. This also endangers the fiscal viability
of the state as substantial portions of government revenues do not reach government coffers.
Because the system creates avenue for leakages. Corruption, it is averred, can bring about
skewing of the composition of public expenditure from social services that are important to the
poor (Audu, 2008).
iii. Corruptions can also cause reduction in quality of goods and services available to the public, as
some companies could cut corners (thereby producing sub-standard goods to increase profit
margins. Put differently, it generates allocative inefficiency (Khan, b) by permitting the least
efficient contractor or most costly supplier with the highest ability to bribe those who award

19 | P a g e
 government contracts or awarding contracts to cronies or companies where they have interest.
Cumulatively, these acts undermine the reputation and make government agencies ineffective
and inefficient and impact negatively on the wellbeing of the people.
iv. Corruption also impacts negatively on efficient mobilization and management of human and
material resources. It can also alienate modernity–oriented civil servants and cause them to
reduce (or withdraw) their service and to leave the country for greener pasture (the „brain-
drain‟ episode is tied to corruption) as many Nigerians believe it is profitable to work outside
Nigeria’s shore.
v. Corruption is a cause of low investment with a resultant effect of reduced economic growth
both at foreign and at the domestic level. An economy undermined by corruption has the effect
of discouraging foreign investment and public donors. The resultant effect of this is shortage of
fund for productive investment. Simply put, corruption hinders direct foreign investment.
vi. Corruption has a negative impart on human rights of the citizenry. A country with a corrupt
government will have no regard for people‟s fundamental human rights as guaranteed in the
constitution. Hence, it desecrates the rule of law and distorts the entire decision-making
process, undermines the credibility and legitimacy of government. Even, those who tried to
expose corrupt activities find themselves to blame as they can be dealt with and the culprits
walk away without being punished. This has encouraged the acceptance of the saying “join
them if you cannot beat them”
vii. It has also caused political decay and economic downturn in Nigeria and, depending on the
scale; it has led to social conflict and violence as competing groups vie for state power which is
the source of distribution of resources and other amenities in the country. This made politics
all-comers job and is seen as surest means to affluence, earn respect and recognition.
SOLUTIONS FOR CORRUPTION
The following recommendations are some of the probable solutions to this scourge of
corruption;
a. Introducing or launching national reorientation programmes to educate people on the negative
impacts and the need to eradicate corruption in all facets of Nigerian's public life. MAMSER,
National Orientation Agency, War Against Indiscipline, War Against Indiscipline and Corruption
are some of the steps, programmes, agencies and measures taken to tackle corruption. Why
these efforts did not yield fruit or failed to achieve the desired outcome in the past is that the
leaders who introduced these programmes distance themselves from its tenets and doctrines.
Leadership, as the dictum says, has to be by example and as such the doctrines of such
programmes must be enforced right from the top to the bottom.
The conclusion that these efforts failed because there was no political will to checkmate,
control and eliminate corruption in Nigeria‟s public life is absolutely true.
b. Moral Regeneration: This involves value re-orientation which de-emphasize the use of money
or wealth for recognition and relevance and, political contests. The influence of money as a
factor in politics must be curtailed and discouraged, People should be encouraged to vote for
people‟s qualities rather than money. Religious leaders‟ consistency and vigour in their
campaign against corruption must be intensified, encouraged and promoted. The
indispensability of the role of the agents of socialization, in this regard, should not be

20 | P a g e
 underplayed. This is because they are the vehicle for mobilization of potential human resources
and agent of change of behaviour and value re-orientation.
c. The government must introduce an equitable wages and incentive system and improve other
conditions of work so that the level of poverty could be reduced and the quality of life
improved. This will inevitably reduce civil servants' vulnerability and susceptibility to corruption.
This must go hand in hand with prompt payment of the workers monthly wages and salaries.
d. Prosecution of erring individuals or people found to be involved in any corrupt practice and if
found culpable should be punished. This goes with forfeiture of assets and property acquired
illegally. If deemed expedient by the court, anybody convicted must be also be given long term
imprisonment. This will serve as deterrent to others. This requires strengthening and tightening
of prosecution techniques. Since corruption is a relationship of „give and take‟ both the giver
and the receiver must be prosecuted. No one receives bribes, if nobody offers it.
e. Government should go beyond the mere pronouncement of anti-corruption policies. It should
rather provide good governance and an enabling environment for democratic ideals to thrive.
f. Societal efforts must be geared towards the abolition of the “winner-takes-all syndrome” as this
is what makes political contests a matter of life and death.
g. The people should be given the right sense of values which should be inculcated in the people
so that they could respect others for their honesty and not just for their wealth. This will help to
develop a positive social attitude and enforcing a code of public ethics. This could lead to
strengthening and checking abuses of power and privileges.
h. Strengthening the police in the war against corruption should include training and retraining of
management and staff officers in fraud and other financial crimes investigation and forensic
accounting, adequate remuneration and motivation. The investigation process should go in
tandem with current realities as it methods must be capable of tracking, discover, expose and
prove beyond reasonable doubt any corrupt allegations.
i. Anti-corruption body and transparent monitoring unit should be established in all public
institutions, empowered and made functional in such a way as to detect and report corrupt
officials for prosecution.
j. Strengthening the constitutional institutions set up to fight corruption–e.g Code of Conduct
Bureau, Code of Conduct Tribunal, Public Complaints Commission. This may require
amendment of the enabling acts and make their existence relevant and proactive and,
operations effective, efficient and result oriented. With this, their existence and public
resources expended on them could be justified.
k. Increase awareness on the economic, political, social and legal cost of corruption and corrupt
practices on individual and the society at large. Campaigns of honesty, probity and
accountability must be intensified, encouraged, promoted and institutionalized.
l. An open system of government (Khan, b) this is linked to accountability and has come with the
name “Freedom of Information Act”, where there is a constitutional and legal structure for
disclosure and to make available all official documents when it is demanded for or required.
This platform enables the existence of a free media and open avenues to investigate and
expose corrupt practice at whatever level and no matter the status of who is or those involved.

21 | P a g e
m. Above all, the country needs committed leadership, a re-oriented public service, a vibrant
judiciary and an organised and vocal civil society. There must be a synergy between and
amongst these structures of the state. The need for collaboration requires that institutions,
departments, groups, and individuals whose activities border on fight against corruption work
closely together. This calls for a complex web of interrelated institutional remedies. The
collaboration is essential if the ravage, destruction of life and property caused by corruption are
to be brought under control.

CONCLUSION
Reflective of the manifestations of corruption in the political, social, administrative and
economic life of the Nigeria state is the decaying infrastructure, inadequate medical services,
falling standard of education, neglect of the basic/ fundamental needs of the people, loss of
resources (human and material). Added to the above are the routine road blocks by
conventional and mobile police. It could also be seen in the way and manner elections are
conducted vis-à-vis electoral malpractices either by politicians, political parties, and electoral
officials. Administrative bottle-necks which make it expedient for corrupt acts to strive. Inflation
of contract sums so that certain group of individual or people could be compensated for their
assistance before the contract was awarded. Ethnic clandestine and similar biological and
primordial relationships are favoured.
It is obvious that bad governance is the bane of national development. In order to break this
cycle, accountability and transparency have to be guaranteed and the people have to be
involved in issues that affect their lives and immediate environment. Transparency and
accountability in governance will help to increase sense of national community.
A failed, corrupt and inept leadership coupled with unfavourable domestic socio-political
environment have plunged development performance in Nigeria into the abyss. An informed
civil society is necessary to balance the power of the Nigerian State. This could be a solution for
ending the brazen abuse of powers and privileges by public officials and stimulate a
psychological reorientation towards meaningful development. A genuine monitoring of
government policies and programmes could lead to the detection of corrupt practices.
An effective action against corruption has to involve effective sanction, greater political
transparency as a means of removing secrecy under which corruption flourishes. Much is yet to
be seen from the passage of the Freedom of Information Act. Above of any social problem
deserves a societal focus, attention and efforts. To this end, all members of the Nigerian society
has the responsibility to educate, mobilize, enlighten and sensitizing it members towards a
tradition of honesty, excellence, truth, reputation, good name and other moral virtues that
would Nigeria a better place for all.
Conclusively, it is noteworthy to acknowledge that it is impossible to eliminate corruption
entirely but its magnitude and cases can be minimized or reduced. This stage could be referred
to as negligible or tolerable corruption level.

22 | P a g e
 REFERENCES
Agara Babatunde (2006) “Bureaucratic Corruption and Corruption of the Bureaucratic Process”
in Hassan A. Saliu, Jacob F. Olorunfemi, Usman Lateef and Samuel B. Oludoyi (eds) Democracy
and Development in Nigeria, Vol. I. Conceptual issues and Democratic Practice. Lagos: Concept
Publications Ltd. pp. 231 – 257.

Akindele, S.T. (1995) Corruption: An Analytical Focus on the Problems of its Conceptualization.
Ife Psychological 3 (1).

Alanamu, Ayinla S, Yinusa A. Muhammed and Adeoye Muhammed N. (2007) “Corruption and its
implication for National Development under the Fourth Republic” in Hassan A. Saliu (et al) (eds)
Perspectives on Nation-Building and Development: Political and Legal Issues. Lagos: Concept
Publications Ltd, . pp. 219-232.

Alatas, V. (2006) “Gender and Corruption: Insight from an Experimental Analysis

(http://www.economic. unimelb.edu. au/lcameron/paper/ gender/pdf).

Aluko Yetunde A. (2009) “Corruption in Nigeria: Concept and Dimensions” in David U.

Igun, U. A. and Mordi, A. A. (eds) Contemporary Social Problems in Nigeria. Ijebu Ode:
Shebiotimo Publications.

Aluko, M.A.O. (2002) “The Institutionalization of Corruption and its impact on Political Culture and
Behaviour in Nigeria” in Nordic Journal of African Studies 11 (3): pp. 393 – 402.

Ango Abdullahi (1986) “Corruption: the Greatest Obstacle to National Development” in

Femi Odekunle (ed) Nigeria: Corruption in Development Being the Proceedings of the Nigerian
Anthropological and Sociological Association, held in Zaria, 10-13 May, 1982, pp 8-10.

Audu, S. Mohammed (2008) “Emerging Issues in the Culture of Corruption in Nigeria:

Implications for National Development” in Hassan A. Saliu, (et al) (eds) Perspectives on Nation-
Building and Development: Political and Legal Issues. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd, . pp. 211-
218.

23 | P a g e
 Bamidele, J.A. (2010) “An Overview of Corruption as a Dilemma Towards the Attainment of
Vision 20:2020 in Journal of Administration, Vol 3, No 3, pp. 161 – 173.

Enweremadu and Emeka E. Okafor (eds) Anti-Corruption Reforms In Nigeria Since

1999: Issues, Challenges and The Way Forward IFRA Special Research Issue Vol. 3,

Fagbadebo, Omololu (2007) “Corruption, Governance and Political Instability in Nigeria” in

African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, Vol. 1 (2) pp 028 – 037.

Gibbons, K.M. & Rowat, D.C. (1976) Political Corruption in Canada. Toronto: McClelland and
Stewad.

Jimoh Ayodele (2006) “The National Question and Obasanjo‟s Anti-corruption war: An
Evaluation of the Awareness and Moral Suasion Campaigns” in Hassan A. Saliu, Ayodele Jimoh
and Tunde Arosanyin (eds) The National Question and Some Selected Topical Issues in Nigeria.
Ilorin: Faculty of Business and Social Sciences, University of Ilorin. pp. 51 – 68.

Khan Mohammad M (a) (n.d) “Political and Administrative. Corruption: Concepts, Comparative.
Experiences and Bangladesh Case”
http://unpanl.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN019105.pdf

Khan Mohammad M (b) (n.d) “Problems of Democracy: Administrative Reform and Corruption”
http://www.cdrb.org/journal/2003/1/2.pdf

Levi, M. and Nelken, D. (1996) “The corruption of politics and the politics of corruption: An
overview” Journal of Law and Society, Vol 23, pp. 1 – 17.

Lipset, S.M. (editor) (1995) “Corruption” The Encyclopedia of Democracy, Vol. I, London:
Routledge. pp. 310 – 313.

Metiboba, S. (1996) “Corruption and National Development: A Cost-Benefit Analysis” in

Nigeria: in Ogunsola J.A (ed) A Book of Readings in Public Administration. Ilorin: Dada Printers

24 | P a g e
 Nkom, S. (1982) “Ethical Revolution as an Antidote for Corruption in Nigeria “Paper presented
at the N.A.S.A Annual Conference held in Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, May 10 – 13.

Njoku Uzochukwu J (2005) “Colonial Political Re-Engineering and the Genesis of

Modern Corruption in African Public Service: The Issue of the Warrant Chiefs of South Eastern
Nigeria as a Case in Point” Nordic Journal of African Studies Vol. 14(1) PP 99–116

Obuah Emmanuel (2010) “Combating Corruption in a “Failed” State: The Nigerian

Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)” In Journal of Sustainable Development in
Africa Volume 12, No.1, Pp 27-53.

Odekunle, G.F. (2010) “Fighting Corruption in Nigeria Social Structure: A Roadmap to

Quantum Development” in Journal of Administration, Vol 3, No 3, pp. 112 – 125.

Okafor Emeka Emmanuel (2009) “Combating High-Profile Corruption in Transitional

Societies: Overview of Experiences from Some African Countries” in Anthropologist, Vol.11 No.
2, pp 117-127.

Onweme M.S (1986) “Corruption in the Nigerian Police Force” in Femi Odekunle (ed) in
Femi Odekunle (ed) Nigeria: Corruption in Development Being the Proceedings of the Nigerian
Anthropological and Sociological Association, held in Zaria, 10-13 May, 1982, pp 111-116.

Otite Onigu (1986) “On the Sociological Study of Corruption” in Femi Odekunle (ed)
Nigeria: Corruption in Development Being the Proceedings of the Nigerian Anthropological and
Sociological Association, held in Zaria, 10-13 May, 1982, pp 11-19.

Ribadu Nuhu (2007) “Case Studies on Corruption and Financial Crimes” Central Bank of
Nigeria. Bullion Vol I, No 1.

Salawu Bashiru (2007) “Towards Solving the Problem of Corruption in Nigeria: The
ICPC under Searchlight” in Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 1.pp83-92.

Salawu Bashiru (2008) “The ICPC and the War Against Corruption” in Hassan A. Saliu, Isah H.
Jimoh, Noah Yusuf and Emmanuel O. Ojo (eds) Perspectives on Nation-Building and

25 | P a g e
 Development in Nigeria: Political and Legal Issues. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd, . pp. 233 –
250.

Yerima, Wilson Musa “A Nexus between Corruption and Economic Growth in Nigeria
(Unpublished).

26 | P a g e