When the NRM Government came into power in 1986, it came with an agenda of fighting corruption ranking it No.7/10 “Elimination of corruption and misuse of power”.
In July 2009, H.E President Museveni assented to an Anti-corruption Act of 2009 intending to provide for the effectual prevention of corruption in both the public and the private sector, to repeal and replace the Prevention of Corruption Act, to consequentially amend the Penal Code Act, the Leadership Code Act and to provide for other related matters. The anti-corruption unit was established to purposely handle corruption cases.
President Yoweri Museveni’s public speaking these days; corruption in government is a major problem delaying and derailing Uganda’s socio-economic transformation, and has recommitted to “crush it.” According to the president, the subterfuge is widespread down to the parish levels where officials extort money to provide public service meant to be free of charge. The recently 7 days concluded retreat of the entire cabinet, permanent secretaries, and NRM Central Executive Committee (CEC) dubbed ‘self-introspection’ ought to come out decisive and with concrete measures to nail the thieves in government to effectively deliver efficient services, assuage public disappointment and anger.
By doing all this, it means that the NRM government under the stewardship of President Museveni has never supported corruption tendencies in this country from the start.
The government loses a lot of money every financial year going into the wrong hands of greedy individuals, we end up facing poor social service delivery in our local communities, and many government programs have failed due to corrupt officials.
Ugandans should not leave this war to President Museveni and the anti-corruption unit alone, Citizen Participation in the fight against corruption is pivotal though it can have traction in the dues course but Citizens have the right to participate in decisions that affect the social services and economic transformation of their country and such participation is an instrumental driver of democratic and socio-economic change and a fundamental way to empower citizens. Citizen participation can also be described as “a process which provides private individuals an opportunity to influence public decisions and has long been a component of the democratic decision-making process”.
Citizen participation is classified as direct or indirect, with direct citizen participation being regarded as the process by which members of the society share power with public officials in making substantive decisions related to the community.
Citizen participation in anti-corruption efforts encompasses dynamics and approaches that may differ from citizen participation in other public processes, given that the State may not always provide citizens the same access to space and information concerning fighting corruption.
Corruption bypasses the laws and rules that were democratically established and excludes those who do not participate in corrupt exchanges (e.g. services that are meant to be for the public are allocated to those who bribe or based on clientelism by political leaders).
For this reason, the role of citizens is better understood in terms of social accountability, where the citizens oppose corruption by keeping it in check, critically assessing the conduct and decisions of their leaders, and officeholders, reporting corruption misdoings and crimes, and asking for appropriate countermeasures.
Concrete ways in which individual citizens may contribute to the fight against corruption include reporting corruption to the authorities or through the media, whistleblowing, and sensitization campaigns that aim to create a culture of integrity and zero tolerance for corruption. Sometimes even refusing to participate in corrupt practices is an important act of resistance.
It is worthwhile dedicating a few lines to the issue of reporting on corruption, as this is one important avenue through which individual citizens can participate in anti-corruption efforts.
As technology has advanced, the anti-corruption unit should come up with new methods for citizen reporting corruption online using their mobile gadgets, and also provide links to the outcomes of investigations. Another approach to reporting corruption outside official channels is through the use of crowdsourcing and social media.
In many countries around the world, there is a concrete risk of the normalization of corruption and the decline of public criticism of manifestations of corruption. In an ironic twist, corruption ends up being considered a necessary evil or even a shortcut to access some important goods. In such contexts, the critical attitude of citizens toward corruption is weakened or altogether lost.
In other cases, high levels of corruption, citizen frustration with public sector corruption, and poor governance (which often corresponds to high levels of corruption) may lead to citizen apathy, a lack of civic engagement, and a lack of trust in the political and democratic process.
Apathy and indifference are dangerous because when citizens fail to hold public officials accountable, corruption spreads even further, together with impunity for corrupt conduct.
Citizen apathy or a lack of civic engagement may be addressed by empowering citizens and by introducing innovative approaches to citizen participation.
It is crucial that in all countries, citizens can recognize corruption and are empowered to participate, to avoid the consequences of unabated corruption, such as deep inequalities, increased levels of private dishonesty, the demoralization of public instability, and even violent extremism.
The Author Is a Patriotic NRM Cadre.
Contact: masuumi93@gmail.com
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
