Transparency International [TI] (the global coalition against corruption) has just released its 2009 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). Once again, Africa has the dubious honor of being Kleptocracy Central, the continental home of the most corrupt governments in the world. Leading the parade of kleptocracies are the regimes in Ethiopia, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Equatorial Guinea, Kenya and the warlords of Somalia.
The CPI measures “the perceived level of public-sector corruption in 180 countries and territories around the world” based on data and analysis provided by such organizations as the African Development Bank, Economist Intelligence Unit, IHS Global Insight, the Institute for Management Development, the World Bank and the World Economic Forum. A high index score on the 10 point scale means less perceived corruption.
TI defines corruption as “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain”. By that definition, the foregoing African countries scored an atrocious 3.0 or less. In certain countries, the corruption trend appears to be irreversible. For instance, in 2002, Ethiopia received a dismal score of 3.5 on the corruption index. In 2009, eight years after the ruling regime had established the “Federal Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission” (FEAC) with great fanfare and after periodic reports of “major accomplishments” in combating corruption, Ethiopia’s score dropped to an abysmal 2.7.
Corruption in Africa can no longer be viewed as a simple criminal matter of prosecuting a few dozen petty government officials and others for bribery, extortion, fraud and embezzlement, as FEAC seems to believe in its reports. As Peter Eigen, founder and chairman of TI argues, “[C]orruption leads to a violation of human rights in at least three respects: corruption perpetuates discrimination, corruption prevents the full realisation of economic, social, and cultural rights, and corruption leads to the infringement of numerous civil and political rights.” Beyond that, corruption undermines the very essence of the rule of law and destroys citizens’ trust in political leaders, public officials and political institutions.
The poor and powerless bear the brunt of corruption in Africa. The devastating impact of corruption on the continent’s poor becomes self-evident as political leaders and public officials siphon off resources from critical school, hospital, road and other public works and community projects to line their pockets. For instance, reports of widespread corruption in Ethiopia in the form of outright theft and embezzlement of public funds, misuse and misappropriation of state property, nepotism, bribery, abuse of public authority and position to exact corrupt payments and gain are commonplace. The anecdotal stories of corruption in Ethiopia are shocking to the conscience. Doctors are unable to treat patients at the public hospitals because medicine and supplies are diverted for private gain. Tariffs are imposed on medicine and medical supplies brought into the country for public charity. Businessmen complain that they are unable to get permits and licenses without paying huge bribes or taking officials as silent partners.
Publicly-owned assets are acquired by regime-supporters or officials through illegal transactions and fraud. Banks loan millions of dollars to front enterprises owned by regime officials or their supporters without sufficient or proper collateral. Businessmen must pay huge bribes or kickbacks to participate in public contracting and procurement. Those involved in the import/export business complain of shakedowns by corrupt customs officials. The judiciary is thoroughly corrupted through political interference and manipulation as evidenced in the various high profile political prosecutions. Ethiopians on holiday visits driving about town complain of shakedowns by police thugs on the streets. Two months ago, Ethiopia’s former president Dr. Negasso Gidada offered substantial evidence of systemic political corruption by documenting the misuse and abuse of political power for partisan electoral advantage. Last week, U.S. State Department spokesman Ian Kelley stated that the U.S. is investigating allegations that “$850 million in food and anti-poverty aid from the U.S. is being distributed on the basis of political favoritism by the current prime minister’s party.”
Over the past two years, high profile corruption cases have been reported in the media. According to FEAC, in one case it was established that “USD$16 million dollars” worth of gold bars simply walked out of the bank. FEAC described the heist as a “huge scandal that took place in the Country’s National Bank and took many Ethiopians by surprise [in which] corruptors dared to steal lots of pure gold bars that belonged to the Ethiopian people replacing them with gilded irons… Some employees of the Bank, business people, managers and other government employees were allegedly involved in this disastrous and disgracing scandal.”
In another case involving a telecommunications deal with the Chinese, a high level regime official was secretly tape recorded trying to extort kickbacks for himself and other regime officials. FEAC reported that “there was another big corruption case at the Ethiopian Telecommunications Corporation that took many Ethiopians by surprise” which involved the “competitive tendering for the supply of telecommunication equipment.” After an investigation, FEAC “found out that nearly 200 million USD has been lost to corruption through the entire fraudulent and corrupt process.”
Many corrupt African regimes have sought to play an anti-corruption shell game to hoodwink their international donors and the multilateral lending institutions. Nowhere is this more evident than in Ethiopia. The regime established FEAC in 2001 with the aim of ferreting out and evangelizing against corruption. As of 2005, FEAC claims to have offered ethics and anti-corruption education to more than 15,000 people and provided advisory services for 267 ethics officers on how they should fight corruption. The Prosecution Department “filed charges against 79 alleged corruption offences and obtained convictions in 28 cases.”
In 2007/08, FEAC trained 325 individuals in corruption prevention strategies and “reviewed the practices and procedures” of 34 public offices and enterprises and 110 procurement, licensing, finance, human resources, health, education, media and other entities. It investigated 296 corruption suspects for claims of “undue advantage obtained/losses caused on government” in the astounding amount of Ethiopian Birr 2,180,311,361. Among the 296 cases, the largest percentage of suspects were investigated for abuse of power (43%) followed by forgery/fraud (30%), mal-administration/ betrayal of trust (13%); embezzlement (8%); bribery (2%) and other (4%). FEAC reported that “the Court ruled on 79 preparatory hearings. Verdicts on 66 cases were passed through trial proper. Some 31 of those verdicts were given in favour of the FEACC. During the budget year, the Court rendered rulings on 48 files, out of which suspects in 43 files were found guilty.” Many of the convicted defendants were sentenced to low prison terms with nominal fines.
It is obvious that the whole “anti-corruption” drama of the ruling regime in Ethiopia is intended as political theatre for the international donors and multilateral lending institutions. It is nothing more than window dressing. No high level official in good standing with the regime has ever been investigated or prosecuted for corruption. No convincing reason has been given to explain the delay in the trial of the alleged “gold scammers” and telecom bandits given the massive, serious and unprecedented nature of the crimes. In sum, by prosecuting low level officials and others for corruption, the regime aims to divert attention from itself.
Interestingly, by doing a little “reverse engineering” on the “anti-corruption” Commission’s reports, one can accurately reconstruct with precise detail the scope and magnitude of the public corruption problem in Ethiopia in each sector, and demonstrate the gross incompetence of the various public agencies. Suffice it to say that the evidence shows that the highest incidence of corruption today occurs in the area of “abuse of power”, which points to the absence of the rule of law and substantial lack of procedures, rules and regulations that ensure individual and institutional accountability. The corrupt use of power always results in the abuse of power.
Corruption persists in Ethiopia and other parts of Africa because the people who cling to power benefit from it enormously. Having FEAC investigate the architects and beneficiaries of corruption in Ethiopia is like having Tweedle Dee investigate Tweedle Dum. It is an exercise in futility and absurdity. FEAC’s claims of saving or thwarting the loss of billions of public birr by vigilant corruption detection and prosecution are laughable cock and bull stories. Most Ethiopians do not find corruption a laughing matter; but they do feel powerless and resigned to it. They view the whole anti-corruption effort with a jaded eye. At best, corruption control in Ethiopia today is a matter of triage: Does one start investigating corruption at the very top of the regime leadership, survey the bureaucratic middle and selectively prosecute, or focus on the petty local official and the street cop for dramatic effect?
One can not reasonably expect to root out corruption by setting up a toothless and feckless anti-corruption commission, or by paying lip-service to the cause of corruption eradication to impress international donors. Corruption in Ethiopia and many parts of Africa is the principal business of the State. Effective anti-corruption efforts require an active democratic culture based on the rule of law and a vigilant citizenry empowered to confront and fight corruption in daily life. In India, for instance, they have successfully organized local “vigilance commissions” against corruption. In Brazil, they counter corruption by engaging citizens in “participatory budgeting.” In Botswana, regarded to be the least corrupt country in Africa, it is said that they have a big welcoming poster adorning the Gaborone Airport with an unusual message to incoming travelers: “Botswana has ZERO tolerance for corruption. It is illegal to offer or ask for a bribe.”
FEAC says the major sources of corruption in Ethiopia are “poor governance, lack of accountability and transparency, low level of democratic culture and tradition, lack of citizen participation, lack of clear regulations and authorization, low level of institutional control, extreme poverty and inequity, harmful cultural practices and centralization of authority.” Not quite. Poor governance, lack of accountability and transparency and the absence of the rule of law are the root causes of extreme poverty, inequity…
(Alemayehu G. Mariam is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. He writes a regular blog on The Huffington Post, and his commentaries appear regularly on Pambazuka News and New American Media.)
One of Ethiopia’s most popular singers, Manalemosh Dibo, passed away today from natural causes, according to news sources in Ethiopia.
Manalemosh died in South Africa where she went to receive medical treatment after suffering from intestinal cancer for over a year.
Before going to South Africa Manalemosh was receiving treatment at Tikur Anbessa (Black Lion) Hospital in Addis Ababa. When her condition deteriorated, Tikur Anbessa doctors recommended that she gets treatment abroad. Ethiopian billionaire Al Amoudi covered her expenses to travel to South Africa.
Manalemosh was a young singer who’s popularity grew with each song she released. She is particularly well-known for her traditional songs such as Asabelew, Awdamet, and Minjar.
Below is a video of one of her most popular and Ethiopian Review’s favorite songs:
ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA — Thousands of people have participated in the 9th annual Great Ethiopian Run that was held Sunday in Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa. World marathon record holder Paula Radcliffe and Ethiopian long distance star Derartu Tulu launched the race as guests of honor.
Today’s overall winner was Tilahun Regassa, while Koreni Jelila won the women’s race. Each received $2,100 award.
The Great Ethiopian Run, which was started by Haile GebreSelassie in collaboration with Toyota Motor Company, is the biggest road race in Africa attracting tens of thousands of runners.
Today’s run was broadcast live for the first time by major international sport channels, according to event organizer Haile GebreSelassie.
Since 2006, the Great Ethiopian Run has been used by Addis Ababa residents to voice their anger and frustration at the Woyanne regime, as they have no other outlet. Public meetings and opposition rallies are prohibited by the U.S.-backed brutal regime of Meles Zenawi.
Today’s event was a little different. The Woyanne regime was not the only target. The 76-year-old opposition party leader Hailu Shawel was the focus of protest. He was condemned by the runners for signing an agreement with Meles Zenawi on the upcoming general election without any tangible change on the part of the Woyanne regime, such as the release of political prisoners, including Birtukan Mideksa, leader of one of the main opposition parties. (Read more in Amharic by Awramba Times here.)
United States Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs, Michele Bond, expresses concern over the sharp increase in adoption from Ethiopia.
QUESTION: Which countries do you see the sharpest increase in children ready for adoption? Is it related to conflict or poverty such as Zimbabwe?
MS. BOND: Well, the – one country that I could point to that had a sharp increase this year is Ethiopia, where the numbers that – it was up about 30 percent, and let me just – the – it was just over 2,200 children who were adopted this year from Ethiopia. That is not related to conflict. By and large, conflict is not one of the issues that tends to lead to a spike in adoptions, because children may be separated from their families but haven’t necessarily permanently lost those families as a result of population movements.
So we are watching adoptions and examining the situation in Ethiopia very carefully, because it’s a very serious concern when you – if you see the number of adoptions start to increase sharply, you want to be sure that the infrastructure if that country is equipped to monitor and carefully vet every one of those cases. Rapid growth isn’t necessarily a good thing.
QUESTION: You are mentioning experiences from other continents. How is the experience here in the Western Hemisphere between Latin American countries and the U.S.?
MS. BOND: When the United States joined The Hague Convention in April 2008, that made us a Hague partner for quite a few countries which prefer to limit their adoption interchanges with fellow – to fellow Hague countries. So there are some countries where we – American are now eligible to adopt that they might not have been before. And developing those contacts and those relationships is not something, again, that happens overnight. But I think that we may see a shift in some countries of more interest in looking for homes for children in the United States if they haven’t been able to have them adopted locally.
More generally, we have Guatemala, which is a country in which new adoptions cannot begin at this point. Guatemala is a Hague country and they are working to establish Hague-compliant procedures —
QUESTION: In Mexico?
MS. BOND: Mexico is a country where there are surprisingly few adoptions to the United States, and that is – it’s surprising in the sense that we have – we share such a long border. But there is a pretty strong reluctance in Mexico to allow children to be adopted by foreign families, even Mexican American families. And so by and large, the majority of the adoptions that we see are intra-family adoptions, not adoptions by people who are unrelated to the child.
QUESTION: On Ethiopia, you’re not entirely clear what’s causing the spike of adoptions?
MS. BOND: Well, I think what’s causing the spike of adoptions is that there are, first of all, many children in the country who are homeless and/or living in institutions and need homes. And there are people who are working to try to identify those children and match them with people in the United States and in other countries who are interested in adoption. Our concern about it is that you can easily find yourself in a situation where it’s difficult to tell the difference between children who genuinely don’t have a family and those who have been documented to look like they don’t.
And unless you have the host government with – well equipped to investigate itself, to document, to lock in the identity of these children, then it can be very hard to prevent the missed documentation of children, and situations where, for example, birth parents are coerced or persuaded to relinquish their children for money or not, but – when it’s something that they wouldn’t have considered doing if someone hadn’t been pressuring them to do it. Obviously, that’s not something that we want.
QUESTION: So there are some suspicions maybe that there’s a racket going on or –
MS. BOND: It’s something that the Ethiopian Government is carefully looking at and so are we and so is every other government whose citizens are adopting there. Ukraine, as it happens, is another country where we saw a 30 percent increase in adoptions last year. In the case of Ukraine, however, that’s not – it’s not something that we see as a trend. The numbers tend to go up and down a bit. So it can be hard to know whether you’re definitely seeing a movement in one direction or the other.
QUESTION: Let me just follow on quickly, if you don’t mind, please. What we want to know clearly, not just from one particular country (inaudible), let’s say from around the globe. As far as criteria for – like it’s a conflict or poverty or what causes or brings those children for adoption basically to the U.S.? Is it the regional conflicts? You are saying (inaudible) or elsewhere, war or homeless or the parents are dying and that – I mean, what are the major causes of the adoption of people (inaudible) of people, or children coming here?
MS. BOND: All right. The question is what are the typical reasons that children are placed for inter-country adoption. And when you talk about countries around the world, including the United States, which also has children that are adopted by foreign families and leave here to go and live in a foreign country —
QUESTION: Yeah. I’m sorry, let’s say India or let’s say sometimes they say – they seek asylum. What’s the difference between asylums or other adoption for children, let’s say? Are there children also in that category or for —
MS. BOND: Okay. Let me get to that question in a moment, if I may. The reasons that children are available for adoption by foreign citizens vary in different countries. In China, typically the reason has been that there were children, little girls, who were born and placed for adoption by families who were hoping that they might have a son.
And the fact is that – there was a reference in one question to age requirements and other requirements being imposed on adopting parents – the number of children available for adoption in China has diminished. And the number of people who are interested in adopting in China is much higher than the number of children that are – that need homes. And that’s one reason that the Chinese Government imposed the changes and the requirements for adopting parents. They were simply trying to reduce the pool of all well-qualified people who were applying to adopt. They had many more than they could vet and many more than they needed.
In some other countries, the children are in care because of local poverty. But what’s important is that in some countries, children may be placed in institutions by their families because the families know that’s a place where the children will be fed and cared for and educated. And there are countries where the families then anticipate that the children will return home when they’re a little bit older, maybe 10 or 12, old enough to contribute to the family and help their parents.
And so that’s one of the things that we have to be on guard against. The fact that a child is in an orphanage and has been there for some time doesn’t make him an orphan in the sense – well, in any sense, he’s not a child who needs a home. He has a family.
I think – I hope that that’s helpful in terms of the —
QUESTION: Yeah, only about asylum, if – if you had any case of the child or somebody had asked asylum for a child rather than adoption.
MS. BOND: The question is about whether children also come into the United States as asylees, as people who are seeking asylum from our government as opposed to adoption. Getting asylum is a very different sort of process. And in order to apply for asylum, a person has to show that he is facing some sort of persecution or threat in his own country. Typically, unaccompanied children would not be likely to apply for asylum. That would be rare.
MR. TONER: We have time for just one more question.
QUESTION: Can I just ask very quickly for you to speak in a little more detail about your comment that some other countries are approaching the United States about adopting American children? Who are those countries and how many American kids are adopted overseas?
MS. BOND: Since we joined The Hague, so since April of 2008, there are 71 American children who have been adopted by foreign families. Thirty-seven of those were adopted under The Hague, so that means that they were adopted to Hague partner countries and the adoption began after April 1, 2008 – the work on it, because as you know, it takes months to complete these things. So we’re still at a stage where the majority of outgoing adoptions are non-Hague, but we anticipate that they’re going to be primarily Hague.
The typical countries – Canada, Western Europe, Australia, countries that are our Hague partners and where local adoption opportunities are very limited, they’re very – relatively few children available for adoption. To their credit, several of the governments that have approached us have said that they are particularly interested in identifying waiting children in foster care as candidates for adoption by their citizens. They are not trying to compete for healthy newborn infants.
MR. TONER: Thank you very much, I appreciate it.
QUESTION: Thank you.
(The above is part of the briefing by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Michele Bond on National Adoption Day on November 20, 2009. Read the full transcript here)
Except one, all members and officials of Lidetu Ayalew’s Ethiopian Democratic Party (EDP) in Tigray have resigned en mass protesting the deal Lidetu signed recently with Meles Zenawi on the conduct of the May 2010 general elections in Ethiopia.
In an interview with the VOA, Ato Tekle Bekele, chairman of EDP in Tigray and member of the party’s central committee, said that EDP has turned itself into a supporter of the TPLF/EPRDF regime, instead of a genuine opposition party.
Click here to listen: [podcast]http://www.ethiopianreview.com/audio/voa-november-20-2009.mp3[/podcast]
Ato Tekle said that he and his comrades decided to take a stand and resigned after repeated discussions with the party’s leadership failed to bring result.
Lidetu is not the only surrenderist who is facing rebellion inside his organization over the traitorous deal with Woyanne. Ethiopian Review sources in Addis Ababa are reporting that trouble is also brewing for Hailu Shawel inside his All Ethiopian Unity Party. Two weeks ago, a senior member of AEUP, Major Argaw Kabtamu, has resigned after expressing disgust over the agreement of surrender to the Woyanne tribal junta.
One of Ethiopia’s most popular singers, Manalemosh Dibo, passed away today from natural causes, according to news sources in Ethiopia.
ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA — Thousands of people have participated in the 9th annual Great Ethiopian Run that was held Sunday in Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa. World marathon record holder Paula Radcliffe and Ethiopian long distance star Derartu Tulu launched the race as guests of honor.