Student Number: 130774011
Declaration
I, Adamson Joseph Kuseri Mkandawire, declare that I am the sole author of this dissertation, which has been written in partial fulfilment of the award of a Master of Public Administration Degree by the University of Bolton and that during the period of registered study I have not been registered for any other academic award or qualification, nor has any of the material been submitted wholly or partly for any other award. This dissertation is a result of my own research work, and where other people’s research was used, they have been duly acknowledged.
Adamson Joseph Kuseri Mkandawire
………………………… …………………….
Student Signature Date
Professor Mustafa Hussein
……………………… ……………………
Supervisor Signature Date
Dr. Becky Ward
………………………….. ………………………..
Supervisor Signature Date
Dedications
This Dissertation is dedicated to my loving wife Theresa Mkandawire, who patiently stood by my side as I struggled to complete this work and to my wonderful children Memory, Jenny, Rhoda and Nathan, for their extraordinary understanding as I devoted most of my time to studies. They will surely not ask again; “Daddie, are you still studying?”
Glory be to God the Almighty, whose grace is beyond comprehension.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the University of Bolton and Malawi Institute of Management team of lecturers and staff for the support throughout the duration of my studies.
To my office, DFID Malawi, I am sincerely thankful for the full academic sponsorship provided.
I would also like to sincerely acknowledge my supervisors; Dr Becky Ward and Professor Mustafa Hussein for their unwavering support and guidance which made this work a success.
Abbreviations and Acronyms used
FDGs : Focus Group Discussions
MP : Member of Parliament
NACS : National Anti-Corruption Strategy
NGO : Non-Governmental Organisations
NIS : National Integrity System
OECD : Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
TI : Transparency International
UNCAC : United Nations Convention against Corruption
USAID : United States Agency for International Development
Abstract
The introduction of the National Integrity System (NIS) in 1998 was seen as a bold step in the fight against corruption in Malawi. But against the backdrop of numerous cases of corruption in recent times, the question to ask is; how effective are the National Integrity System institutions in fighting corruption? This motivated the research which sought to assess the effectiveness of the NIS institutions in the fight against corruption in Malawi. Using Malawi Parliament as a case study, the objectives of the research were:
a) To establish effectiveness of Parliament as a National Integrity System institution in Malawi,
b) To determine the level of influence of Parliament in the fight against corruption
c) To recommend how Parliament as an Integrity System institution can better support the fight against corruption.
Based on the case study findings, the study concludes that parliament as an integrity institution is not effective to fight against corruption ostensibly due to weak capacity which includes lack of budgets and technical skills for staff and MPs, an executive arm of government which is arrogant and uncooperative, highly divisive political and personal interests in the National Assembly making debate on corruption issues highly difficult and untenable, dismal transparency and accountability by parliament itself due to removal of legislation that would have fostered horizontal accountability of Members of Parliament and house decisions and lack of linkages and coherency with other integrity and governance institutions.
Table of Contents
Declaration 1
Dedications 2
Acknowledgements 3
Abbreviations and Acronyms used 4
Abstract 5
Chapter 1: Fighting Corruption in Malawi: The problem, the context and argument...…………………………………………………………………………..8
1.1 Introduction 8
1.2 Background: Problem definition and current status of corruption in Malawi 10
1.3 Motivation to study the effectiveness of the National Integrity System Institutions 11
1.4 Why study Parliament as integrity institution 13
1.5 Research aim, objectives and questions 14
1.6 Structure of the report 14
Chapter 2: Literature Review 15
2.1 Introduction 15
2.2 Conceptualising corruption, the theoretical framework, the National Integrity System and integrity institutions. 16
2.2.1 Understanding Corruption: Notion and definition 16
2.2.2 Corruption: Theoretical framework 19
2.2.3 The National Integrity System (NIS) 22
2.2.4 The National Integrity System Institutions 24
2.2.5 National Integrity System Institutions in Malawi 25
2.2.6 Legal framework 31
2.2.7 Anti-Corruption Initiatives 32
2.3 National Integrity System- Tools and methodology of assessment 33
2.4 Determinants of effective integrity institutions 37
2.5 Conceptual framework 51
2.6 Research questions 52
2.7 Conclusion 52
Chapter 3: Research Methodology 54
3.1 Introduction 54
3.2 Selected research philosophy, approach and strategies 55
3.3 Validity, Reliability and Ethics 57
3.4 Limitations of the study 58
Chapter 4: Data collection and analysis 58
4.1 Introduction 59
4.2 Malawi Parliament General Background 59
4.3 Research Participants Demographic configuration 60
4.4 Key findings 61
4.5 Conclusion 81
Chapter 5: Discussions, Recommendations and Conclusions 81
5.1 Introduction 82
5.2 Discussions of findings 82
5.3 Recommendations 86
5.4 Areas for future research 87
5.5 Conclusion 88
Appendix 1: Case Study Research Interview Guide 107
Appendix 2: Focus Group Discussions Guide 109
Appendix 3: Letter of Introduction to carry out the research 110
Chapter 1
Fighting Corruption in Malawi: The problem, the context and argument
1.1 Introduction
The recent revelations about massive loss of public resources through corruption commonly dubbed as “cash-gate” has raised serious concerns about how prepared the country is to detect, prevent and holistically fight corruption (Gwede, 2015). Since 1994 when Malawi embraced multi-party form of government, every government that has been elected, has put the fight against corruption at the centre of its policy drive (Malawi National Integrity System Assessment Report, 2013). However, the spate of corruption in recent times indicates that there is a critical gap between policy intentions and the reality on the ground as more cases of corruption have come to the fore, raising public interest and questions about whether the country is winning the fight against corruption or in fact losing the much taunted battle. The architecture to fight corruption has mostly thrived on political rhetoric rather than clear commitment and support to infrastructure that will comprehensively root out corruption. The introduction of the National Integrity System (NIS) in 1998 (National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS),1998 ) was seen as a bold step in the fight against corruption. But against the backdrop of numerous cases of corruption in recent times, the question to ask is; how effective are the National Integrity System institutions in fighting corruption? This leads to the examination and assessment of the effectiveness of the NIS institutions in the fight against corruption in Malawi and this is the central theme of this study. Rather than testing a theory, this study is a policy impact assessment of the National Integrity System institutions in Malawi to determine whether they are effective to fight against corruption. In order to carry out this policy assessment, various assessment tools have been examined ranging from the NIS Assessment toolkit championed by Transparency International (2010) to the OECD Public Sector Integrity: A Framework for Assessment (2005) to determine and establish clear benchmarks and criteria for judging integrity institutions’ effectiveness. However, before delving into these and in order to understand the seriousness of corruption in Malawi, the research discusses the problem of corruption in its sub-section 1.2 and shows that due to corruption, the country has suffered aid cut and the impact of this on the development of the country has been significant.
1.2 Background: Problem definition and current status of corruption in Malawi
Just like in many other nations in African and the Su-Saharan region, corruption has stood as a serious bottleneck for Malawi’s development Nawazi (2012). The country reels from various forms of corruption ranging from “political corruption”, petty but equally serious cases of bribery that negatively affect public service delivery to the most subtle and entrenched patronage and nepotism that aggravates inequality and poverty in the society. Mustafa (2005) noted that each year Malawi loses millions of public resources through “corruption, payments to ghost teachers, rentals for ghost houses and funding for ghost projects”. Currently, Malawi is grappling with a corruption scam involving public officers, top political elites and business gurus in which billions of public funds have been lost in what is called the “cashgate”. The impact of this is stark as reported in the following:
“Several donor nations are withholding aid to Malawi in reaction to a growing scandal over government graft known as Cashgate. The latest to announce the delay of funding are donors under the Common Approach to Budget Support (CABS) who are meeting in the capital, Lilongwe. Government authorities say this is likely to pose economic problems in a country where 40 percent of its national budget comes from donor aid”. (Masina, 2013).
Malawi receives 40% in budgetary support from donors and donors also support nearly 80% of Malawi’s development budget. However, due to corruption and poor governance, donors have cut their aid and this has affected development programmes. A review of ratings over the past three years shows that corruption is getting worse in Malawi. Based on the World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators (2010), Malawi scored 42.1% in terms of the control of corruption indicator. This was noted as a great improvement considering that in 2005 the country scored 27.3%. However, scores dived deep in the subsequent years. The 2011 Transparency International’s Daily Lives and Corruption, Public Opinion in Southern Africa survey (2011) found that 57% of Malawians saw corruption as having increased in public service delivery in the past 3 years. 58% of those interviewed confessed to have paid a bribe to access public services within the 1 year prior to the survey. On the Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom, “freedom from corruption” (2012), Malawi received a score of 34 out of 100 and the assessment found that corruption is serious and widespread. The 2013 Transparency International Corruption Perception Index gives Malawi a score of 37 out of 100 (the lower the score, the worse the corruption) and this shows that overtime corruption has steadily worsened in Malawi.
1.3 Motivation to study the effectiveness of the National Integrity System Institutions
There is little evidence about the effectiveness of the National Integrity System Institutions in the fight against corruption in Malawi. Established in 2009 through the launch of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS), the National Integrity System in Malawi has been in operation for 5 years and there has been no focus on how the integrity institutions have changed the dynamics in the fight against corruption.
Although Transparency International carries out National Integrity System (NIS) country assessments, and the recent one being in 2013 for Malawi (NIS Assessment report, 2013), the focus is on identifying weak and strong performers of the NIS and not on their effectiveness in the overall fight against corruption. The NIS assessment does not provide a critical analysis of how these institutions (pillars) have contributed to the fight against corruption. The NIS Tool Kit (2010) emphasises that the NIS Assessments create an empirical basis that “adds to the understanding of strong and weak performers” but this is based on the criteria which assess the institution’s enabling environment (NIS Tool Kit, 2010) and not their effectiveness. In the wake of increasing public concerns about corruption, it calls to question whether the National Integrity System institutions have any effect on rooting out corruption or the system is another “white elephant”. The problem here is that the NIS assessments do not focus on the contribution and influence the NIS institutions have on the broader fight against corruption. So although strong NIS pillars can be identified, but without a deep assessment of the effect these pillars have on fighting corruption, it will remain a mystery why Malawi is still facing increasing corrupt practices. Although Malawi established the NIS with its 8 pillars (institutions) that includes the legislature, corruption in the country still soars. The 2013 Corruption Perceptions Index shows that Malawi performs far below average; nursing a score of 37 out of 100 and ranking 91 out of 177 countries assessed (Transparency International, 2013). Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom (2014) shows that Malawi has a score of 31.9 out of 100 on “freedom from corruption” and this means that corruption is a serious challenge.
1.4 Why study Parliament as integrity institution
According to the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (2008), parliament is a crucial pillar of the National Integrity System and studying parliament within the context of the effectiveness of the National Integrity System institutions as a key policy option for Malawi to fight against corruption would better reveal whether the introduction of the integrity system has changed the way corruption is being dealt with in Malawi. Parliament is a governance institution, makes laws and holds other branches of governance to account. Alamgir, Mahmud, Iftekharuzzaman (2006) in the paper entitled “Corruption and Parliamentary oversight: Primacy of the political will” observe that the
“Success of anti-corruption efforts is a function of the degree of the strength, independence and effectiveness of key institutions of the national integrity system like the parliament, the executive, the law enforcement agencies, the judiciary, the anti-corruption commission, and the media. The lead must be taken by the public representatives, especially members of the parliament who should develop their own self-regulatory mechanisms and set examples for others to follow”
By choosing parliament, this research will study the effectiveness of the central infrastructure to fight corruption in Malawi.
1.5 Research aim, objectives and questions
Research aim
The aim of this research is to understand the effectiveness of Parliament as National Integrity System institution on the fight against corruption in Malawi.
Research objectives
The research objectives are as follows:
d) To establish effectiveness of the Parliament as a National Integrity System institution in Malawi,
e) To determine the level of influence of Parliament in the fight against corruption
f) To recommend how Parliament as an Integrity System institution can better support the fight against corruption.
1.6 Structure of the report
This dissertation is organised into five chapters. This chapter has introduced the problem of corruption in Malawi, discussed the context and argument for this research and presented research objectives. Chapter two presents various concepts related to corruption and focuses on relevant theories vis-à-vis the Principal Agent and Public choice theories. It also reviews the National Integrity System and discusses available literature on determinants of effective National Integrity System institutions. Chapter three lays out the research methodology and shows that this is a qualitative research based on interpretivist paradigm. In Chapter four, the research presents data collected based on Malawi Parliament as a case study. This chapter also highlights the key findings. Chapter five is the last and discusses the key findings and sets out recommendations for various stakeholders.