The Sunday Mail
Corruption Watch
Comm John Makamure
ONE of the most progressive pieces of legislation to fight corruption is the Public Entities Corporate Governance Act (Chapter 10:31).
The law was enacted in 2018 to provide for the proper governance of public entities in order to comply with Chapter 9 of the Constitution, which speaks to principles of good public administration and leadership.
The Act also provides a uniform mechanism for regulating the conditions of service of members of public entities and their senior employees.
Section 194 of the Constitution outlines the basic values and principles governing public administration as follows:
A high standard of professional ethics;
Efficient and economical use of resources;
Development-oriented public administration;
Impartiality and fairness in the provision of services;
Public participation in policy-making;
Public administration which is accountable to Parliament and the people;
Cooperation between institutions and agencies of Government at all levels;
Provision of timely, accessible and accurate information;
Cultivating good human resource management and career development practices to maximise human potential;
Public administration broadly representative of the diverse communities of Zimbabwe; and Employment, training and advancement practices based on merit, ability, objectivity, fairness, the equality of men and women and inclusion of persons with disabilities.
I have repeatedly pointed out that the bulk of the job of fighting corruption would be accomplished by the mere implementation of these basic values and principles. Transparency and accountability are at the heart of all these values and principles. Transparency means that decisions taken and their enforcement are done in a manner that follows rules and regulations.
It also means that information is freely available and directly accessible to those who will be affected by such decisions and their enforcement.
It also means that enough information is provided, and that it is provided in easily understandable forms and media.
Accountability is a key requirement for the successful fight against corruption. Not only governmental institutions but also the private sector and civil society organisations must be accountable to the public and to their institutional stakeholders.
In general, an organisation or an institution is accountable to those who will be affected by its decisions or actions. Accountability cannot be enforced without transparency and the rule of law.
That is exactly what the Public Entities Corporate Governance Act is trying to achieve. I must applaud the Office of the President and Cabinet Corporate Governance Unit for championing reforms in public entities’ corporate governance practices.
These reforms are in line with global trends.
According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), State-owned enterprises today account for over a fifth of the world’s largest enterprises as opposed to 10 years ago where only one or two of the enterprises could be found at the top of the league table.
This means that high standards of corporate governance of these entities are critical to ensure financial stability and sustain global growth.
One of the key reforms being actively considered by Government in order to bring sanity in State-owned enterprises is adopting the decentralised ownership model and move away from the current centralised ownership whereby line ministries act as the owners and regulatory authorities at the same time.
In its publication entitled, “Ownership and Governance of State-Owned Enterprises: A Compendium of National Practices (2018)”, the OECD says most of the countries it had surveyed had either adopted a centralised model for State ownership, had established a central holding company for an important portfolio of State-owned enterprises, or had established a central co-ordinating agency, often charged with monitoring performance or co-ordinating governance practices across the State-owned enterprise sector.
Some countries had a highly decentralised system, with the ownership of State-owned enterprises being exercised by a multitude of line ministries and no co-ordinating agency in place.
Adoption of this model in Zimbabwe may assist in addressing the issue of newly-appointed ministers moving quickly to dissolve State-owned enterprises boards and appointing their own people.
Mr Willard Manungo, the Secretary for State Enterprise Reform, Corporate Governance and Procurement, recently told a virtual meeting organised by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Zimbabwe, and the Public Accountants and Auditors Board that Government was cognisant of the need for continuous reform of the governance of State-owned enterprises by aligning laws that govern these entities with Section 2 of Second Schedule of Public Entities Corporate Governance Act, which includes separation of ownership functions from other State functions.
“This is popularly known as the decentralised governance model. This governance reform is already being implemented in various countries and it has reduced corruption practices in their State enterprises sector,” Mr Manungo said.
There are several provisions in the Public Entities Corporate Governance Act which if enforced can ensure the principles of public administration and leadership outlined above are given life.
The Act has provisions which promote disclosure and transparency, which are key provisions of an effective law in the fight against corruption.
Section 34 requires a member of a board or senior staff member of a public entity to disclose any interest they may have in any matter under board consideration. Section 11 requires full disclosure of members appointed to public entities boards with regard to qualifications, other boards they sit on and criteria of appointing them.
The list of all members with disclosures shall be kept up-to-date and available for inspection by members of the public at all reasonable times during the Ministry’s normal office hours.
Sections 13 (5) and 19 (6) require that a copy of model conditions of service and of any amendment or replacement be made available in electronic form for inspection by members of the public on the website of the public entity.
Section 22 (4) requires that a copy of the strategic plan be made available in electronic form for inspection by members of the public on the website of the unit and of the entity. Section 30 requires that Board Charters and Codes of Ethics be kept at the State Enterprise and Parastatal’s office, where they may be inspected by members of the public free of charge at all reasonable times during the entity’s business hours.
Part IV of Public Entities Corporate Governance (General) Regulations 2018, provides for the declaration of assets by board members and senior staff members of public entities. Another important provision is Section 23 (10) of the regulations which protect a board member or employee of a public entity who, in good faith, submits objections to questionable instructions.
Such officers who report on a questionable instruction shall not be dismissed or have their contract of appointment or employment terminated or any measure or sanction of a disciplinary nature on account of their objections to questionable instructions.
When it comes to investigations, Section 40 allows special investigations to be undertaken at any Public Entity with regards to affairs or dealings of the entity.
The investigations can take the form of forensic audits. This provision gives room for detecting any corrupt practices.
Governments make commitments to adopt international standards on fighting corruption. This has seen Zimbabwe ratify and domesticate standards enshrined in international conventions aimed at combating corruption and corruption-related offences.
In this regard, Zimbabwe is a signatory to the following corruption related Conventions: the United Nations Convention against Corruption (ratified on March 8, 2007); the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (ratified on December 12, 2007); the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (acceded to on July 20, 1993); the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (ratified on December 17, 2006); and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol against Corruption (ratified on October 8, 2004).
The adoption of the principles from these conventions is now part of the Zimbabwean law that deals with corruption.
Therefore, the legal framework is in line with international best practice in terms of fighting corruption.
These international commitments also send a positive signal on Government’s intention and seriousness in adopting international standards in fighting corruption.
The legal framework in Zimbabwe to fight corruption, which is aligned to internationally acceptable standards, provides basic benchmarks for an effective legal framework.
The Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) will, however, continue to push for further legal reforms to ensure the legal framework is water-tight to curb corruption.
Mr Manungo is indeed correct when he says legislation has the effect of deterring corruption by making it costly to engage in corruption practices through surcharges, fines or custodial penalties.
And to ensure enforcement of any law, he says there should be strong institutions that have powers, skills and reputation to detect corruption and enforce the law.
Commissioner Makamure is the ZACC spokesperson. He chairs the committee on prevention and corporate governance. ZACC Toll Free Lines: 08010101/08004367; Landline: + 263 242 369602/5/8. WhatsApp: +263 719529483; Whistle-blower reporting app: zacc.online/tipoffs; Email: [email protected], [email protected]
