Question 1

Development requires effective governance and institutions that can deliver. Institutions that
are held to account for results by citizens or other state institutions deliver services better.
Therefore, Good Governance and Accountability are principles whose application is essential
to a country achieving genuine democracy and development. Good Governance brings along
respect of human rights, the rule of law, effective peoples participation in development, as
well as transparent and accountable processes and institutions. Henceforth, this essay is an
attempt to discuss the principles of good governance, democracy, hierarchy and
accountability.

Governance, is the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are
implemented or not implemented, (Howard, 2008). Since decisions made can be good or
bad, the analysis of the process by which we arrive at decisions is important governance. This
also requires that we understand who the actors are in governance. These actors include
government and, depending on the level of government under discussion, other actors such
as: NGOs, political parties, the military, the police, farmers organizations, religious leaders,
the media, multinational corporations and lobbyists. All the other actors, apart from
government and the military, are called civil society.

Good governance is, therefore, that kind of governance that adheres to a number of special
characteristics, (Ibid). It is participatory by allowing the masses to be part of the decision-
making process; it is consensus-oriented as it seeks for broad consensus in society rather than
permitting minority views to override all other views; and it is accountable since leadership at
national or local government level as well as in the private and public spheres will have to
answer to the masses at some point in time.

Furthermore, good governance is transparent in that decisions are taken and enforced in a
manner that conforms to the rules and regulations of a given community; it is responsive in
that institutions and processes seek to serve all stakeholders within a reasonable timeframe;
and it is effective and efficient as processes and institutions produce results that meet the
needs of society while making the best use of the resources at their disposal, that is
sustainable use of resources and protection of the environment, (Opcit).

Weiner (1967) argues that good governance is equitable and inclusive as all members feel
that they have a stake in what is being done and do not feel excluded from the mainstream of
society; and it adheres to the rule of law for fairness and impartiality.

It is for these reasons that democracy and good governance are often used interchangeably as
one seems to commend the virtues of the other.

Government accountability requires that public officials, elected or unelected, have an
obligation to explain their decisions and actions to the citizens. Government accountability
can be achieved through a number of mechanisms. These can be political, legal or
administrative mechanisms designed to fight corruption and to ensure that public officials
remain answerable and accessible to the people they serve, (Ibid).

Government accountability
Government accountability can be achieved through a number of ways which include among
others conducting free and fair elections. It is argued by Grigsby (2005) that if voters are not
satisfied with the performance of a political leader, they may vote them out of office when
their term comes to an end. Furthermore, Political accountability of public officials is
determined by whether the officials occupy an elected versus appointed position, how often
they are subjected to re-election and the number of terms they can serve in a political office.
Last but not the least, the legal accountability mechanisms include instruments like the
constitution, legal acts, decrees, rules and regulations that prescribe actions that such public
officials can and cannot take and how citizens may take action against those officials whose
conduct is considered unsatisfactory ( ibid,).

Principles of Modern Democratic Rule
These are sometimes referred to as the pillars, tenets, or principles of democratic rule and
they are as follows;
Citizen participation: This means that citizens are part and parcel of what happens in their
society or country. The citizens are part of the decision-making process on matters that affect
them. Communication is a two-way consultative process, that is; bottom-up as well as top-
bottom before any decision is reached (Christian, 1996).

Equality: This means equality before the law, equality of opportunity in the realization of
individual capacities without regard to ones race, gender, ethnic background, religion or
whatsoever, (Ibid).

Political tolerance: This means the ruling masses are mindful and respectful of the interests
of the minority. Grigsby (2005) asserts that while there may be differences between the
people by way of race, religion, descent and culture they rise above such differences and give
room for discussion, debate and accommodation of different viewpoints.

Accountability: This is when elected leaders or public officials have to answer to the
common citizens regarding their actions, decisions or indecisions during the time they are or
were occupants of the public offices, (Ibid).

Those found to be performing to the required standards are rewarded by their continued stay
in office while those found to be lacking in one way or another are punished (Opcit).

Transparency: To be transparent means that leaders allow for public scrutiny of what they
do while in public office, (Grigsby, 2005). The citizens are allowed to attend public meetings
and are free to obtain information on what happens in public offices, who makes what
decisions and why. Transparency is a step towards accountability.

Regular, free and fair elections: Regular elections ensure that the citizens are not stuck with
bad leadership but that they have the opportunity to throw out incompetent leaders through
free and fair elections. Weiner (1967) puts forward an argument that Free and fair elections
give the citizens a chance to elect a leader of their choice as opposed to rigging elections that
return often unwanted leaders to power. Elections are the main avenue for all citizens to
exercise power by choosing their leaders and giving their vote to the candidate whom they
think will represent them best.

Economic freedom: Economically handicapped citizens according to Christian (1996: 29)
are the ones prone to all types of abuses as they lack the economic base to meet the basic
necessities of life. As a result they are the ones often bribed with the smallest of gifts during
elections, the consequences of which are often adverse, such as returning corrupt and morally
bankrupt leaders to power.
Economic independence creates the foundation on which the citizens become vibrant and
thus able to call their leaders to account for their actions or inaction. In democracies,
economic pluralism needs to go hand in hand with political and social pluralism, that is; the
freedom to choose or select ones political leaders and the freedom to belong to ones social
or cultural associations, respectively, (Grigsby, 2005).

Bill of rights: This imposes controls on government powers in a bid to protect the citizens
from abuse by heavy-handed leaders. As such, the bill of rights seeks to protect the rights and
freedoms of the citizens by way of ensuring that this protection is enshrined in the
constitution of a given country (Ibid).

Human rights: Unlike dictatorships democracies strive to protect the rights and freedoms of
their citizens from abuse, (Howard, 2008). These rights include the right to life, the right to
own property, the freedom of expression, the freedom to associate, and the freedom to
assemble, among others.

Multi-party system: A multiparty system is a set-up where there are more than two political
parties contesting for power. The reasons for having multiple parties in a democracy
according to Friedrich (1968) are: to widen the pool for choice of the best candidate for
political office; to offer alternative views to the government of the day as a result of the
existence of an opposition; and to enable the opposition to act as a check on those in political
office. One-party systems lead to a lack of alternatives for the citizens and concentration of
powers and have often led to dictatorships.

Rule of law: This implies that no one is above the law and requires that all citizens observe
the law and are held accountable if they break it. The due process of law requires that the law
should be equally, fairly and consistently enforced. The rule of law ensures law and order and
the protection of citizens as they enjoy their rights (Christian, 1996).

Principle of hierarchy
The principle of hierarchy acknowledges current abilities, quality and excellence. It
recognizes actualized potential - ability and accomplishment. It values leadership, purpose,
direction, vision, efficiency. Recognizing hierarchy can provide clarity and accountability. It
can encourage and reward initiative. It can provide models of achievement for others to aim
for. Hierarchy can offer mentoring for those who are younger or less experienced (Friedrich,
1968). Each of us must learn to recognize whom we can learn from, because they are more
advanced in certain areas and this offers the opportunity to learn humility. However, we
must also recognize whom we can serve, because they have not yet developed certain
qualities that we might already have, and this then offers the opportunity to learn
responsibility.

In conclusion, it is apparent from the discussion above that Governance, in simple terms, is
the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented or not
implemented. Government accountability requires that public officials, elected or unelected,
have an obligation to explain their decisions and actions to the citizens. Democratic rule
implies a number of principles which include among others Citizen
Participation, Equality, Political tolerance and Accountability. Others are Transparency, free
and fair elections, Economic freedom, Bill of rights and Human rights. Hence, not only is it
recognized, but highly applauded that democracy, good governance, hierarchy and
accountability are priorities that need to be clearly stipulated in National Development Plans
in order to attain economic development in a nation.











REFERENCES
Christian, T., (1996). The Rule of Many; Fundamental Issues in Democratic Theory. Boulder
CO: Westview.
Friedrich, C.J., (1968), Constitutional Government and Democracy: Theory and Practice in
Europe and America, Massachusetts: Blasdell Publishing Company.
Grigsby, E., (2005), Analyzing Politics; An Introduction to Political Science. Belmont:
Thomson Learning Inc.
Howard, C., (2008). What is Democracy? U.S. Department of State: Office of International
Information Programs.
Weiner, M., (1967), Party Building in a New Nation, Chicago: Chicago University Press.














Question 2
Corruption in developing countries continues to be one of the greatest factors of poverty,
development and internecine conflicts. Although many developing nations especially in
Africa are endowed with priced natural resources, yet they continue to struggle and scramble
for position in the lower rungs of the United Nations Development Index. Most developing
countries continue to grapple with the ever changing trends in global politics, economic and
technological advancements having little or nothing to do due to the debilitating effects of
corruption on their very existence. Corruption continues to have an adverse effect on the lives
of the vast majority of the population. Henceforth, this essay attempts to explain the
detrimental role of corruption for development.
Understanding the concept of corruption presupposes that one should have a clear dichotomy
of what it entails and what constitutes it in the simplest term. There is no single accepted
definition for the term corruption because what may seem corrupt in one society may not
necessarily be perceived as such in another. Though there have been different attempts to
define it, there is no precise, clear definition that can be applied to all forms, types and
degrees. According to Friedrich (1972), Corruption is a kind of behaviour which deviates
from the norm actually prevalent or behaved to prevail in a given context, such as the
political. It is deviant behaviour associated with a particular motivation, namely that of
private gain at public expense. The most commonly used and popular definition is the one
given by Palmier (1983).

According to this definition, corruption is seen as the use of public
office for private advantage.
In addition, corruption can take many forms that vary in degree from the minor use of
influence to institutionalized bribery. Transparency Internationals definition of corruption is:
the abuse of entrusted power for private gain, (Transparency International, 2011). This can
mean not only financial gain but also non-financial advantages.
Before turning to the detrimental role of corruption for development, it is important that we
understand the causes of corruption. Developing economies are predominantly buffeted with
barrages of corrupt practices that have deep anchorage in the socio-political and cultural
psyche and existence in such nations. This is particularly so in Sub Saharan Africa where
majority of the populations, especially in the rural areas, suffer untold hardship as a result of
what can be termed as organised or systematised corruption. The causes of corruption are
numerous and the situation is often similar in many ways among developing countries
especially so among African countries as are discussed below.
Patronage ties between political elites and those they represent often place heavy informal
obligations and demands on the former, (Williams, 2000). Typically, such elected
representatives are not only overwhelmed with financial pressure from their family, but also
from kin, clan, hometown and tribal or ethnic constituents. Such obligations are almost
always fulfilled through corrupt means. Thus the participants in corruption are many besides
the politician or elite who actually engages in the act. Because of the absence of state welfare
institutions in much of Africa, political constituents expect politicians representing them to
cater to their quotidian and small scale infrastructural needs. In other words neo-patrimonial
regimes become the rule, and the state emerges as an extension of the rulers household,
patronage, ethnic and kinship ties and bribes become major modes for governance, (Ibid).
Corruption funded patronage to kinsman and crimes have exacerbated regional, tribal,
religious and ethnic divisions.
Another cause of corruption is psychological. There are numerous psychological factors that
can help to explain some types of corruption, (Opcit). Internally, some people are naturally
evil and will commit criminal acts, including corrupt ones in any type of system. Pressure
and peer comparison can contribute greatly to acts of corruption especially so where the
socially revered are the corrupt ones. This presupposes that in an environment where an
individual sees others around them benefiting from corruption, they may well choose to
indulge too. Nepotism, that is, helping others because they are closely related to you, can also
be related in psychological term. The clich blood is thicker than water is common parlance
in many developing countries. This can also be explained in terms of people wanting to
entrench themselves or maximise their hold on power, (Williams, 2000).
Moreover, monopoly of power can also be a cause of corruption in Africa and other
developing regions, (Ibid). This could often apply or exist for the simple reason that people in
power are the ones mainly charged with the responsibility of governing. Thus, out of
discretion they can expend such powers to perform acts of corruption as maybe dictated by
their circumstances.
Furthermore, weak judicial system is also a serious cause of corruption. Most often, judicial
systems are weak as a result of poor conditions of service. In such situations, it is the poor
people that suffer the brunt of injustices as the rich always stand a better chance of getting
justice over the poor, (Opcit). Furthermore, the absence of clear-cut separation of powers
between the judiciary and executive arms often results in the latter exercising undue influence
over the former. Such undue influence is most pervasive in situations where there is no
guarantee of security of tenure for the judicial officers. In some developing countries such as
Sierra Leone, for example, the President has the power to appoint judges on contractual basis
after their retirement without security of tenure of office.
The impact of corruption on developing countries cannot be overemphasized. The results
are often disastrous. The eleven year civil conflict in Sierra Leone, for instance was largely
attributed to pervasive corruption in all spheres of governance, (Mauro, 1999). The
occurrence of corruption in large scale reflects in many areas of development and is
intrinsically linked with under development. Poor conditions of service as is the case in many
developing countries open the door to bribery. Corrupt officials often accept substandard
quality of service because of kickbacks thus depriving the country of value added service
from contractors and consequently resulting to the implementation of water washed roads or
schools, (Ibid). Health care facilities remain inadequate and inaccessible because most times,
drugs meant for especially children and women particularly in provincial clinics and hospitals
could be easily seen on the shelves of private pharmacies, (Opcit).
One of the greatest impacts of corruption normally arises out of the choices and priorities of
governments. This occurs when the real development priorities of a country are often
neglected in favour of those that generate the greatest personal gains for the decision makers,
(Mauro, 2002). Here, it is clearly evident that many projects have become white elephants
and easy route for personal enrichment. When loans taken by governments on the pretext of
undertaking some projects are diverted to private accounts and coffers, the attendant effect is
that such loans would have to be paid with interest and at the same time increasing the debt
burden of the country, (Ibid).
In a corrupt system, the sale of government contracts or policy through bribery means that the
highest bidder always wins: The allocation of public procurement contracts through a corrupt
system may lead to a lower quality of public infrastructure and services, (Palmier, 1983).
Rather than choosing contractors by merit and the best potential outcome, corrupt bureaucrats
could harm development by awarding contracts which result in substandard outcomes. In this
instance the impact of corruption is a clear failure to achieve government objectives; instead
producing inefficiency and waste. With bureaucrats being buyable, they are most likely to
seek out the highest rent-seeking opportunities; Corrupt government officials may be more
likely to choose to undertake types of government expenditure that allow them to collect
bribes and to maintain them a secret. Rather than seeking projects which would genuinely
contribute to development, bureaucrats will look to find large projects where money can
easily be siphoned off, (Ibid).
Similarly, when public resources meant for building productivity-enhancing infrastructure are
diverted for politicians private consumption, for example cement for public roads or dams
used for luxury homes, growth rates obviously will be affected adversely. Another growth
effect follows from the fact that higher bribes imply declining profitability on productive
investments relative to rent-seeking investments, thus tending to crowd out the former. In
addition, high levels of corruption are associated with lower levels of investment and GDP. In
a corrupt environment, entrepreneurs are aware that bribes are required to ensure the release
of required documentation needed to begin business and are consequently discouraged from
investing. Additionally, a percentage of returns on the new enterprise may be claimed. It is
for this reason that Mauro (2002) suggests that corruption may be interpreted to act as a tax,
which correspondingly reduces incentives to invest.
In conclusion, many developing countries, such as those in Africa and Latin America, are
miles away in achieving corruption free societies and as stated earlier, the political will and
financial support from central governments has to be sacrosanct for the fight against
corruption to succeed. It is therefore recommended that a clear dichotomy be made between
these two provisions so as to prevent future clash on the basis of interpretation as to which
one gains ascendancy in an Anti-corruption matter.








REFERENCES
Fredrich, J. C., (1972). The Pathology of Politics; Violence, Betrayal, Corruption, Secrecy
and Propaganda. New York: Harper & Row.
Mauro, P., (1999). Corruption and Growth: The Quarterly Journal of Economics.
Mauro, P., (2002). The Effects of Corruption on Growth and Public Expenditure; Political
Corruption: Concepts and Contexts. Cornell University Press: Ithaca.
Palmier, L., (1983). Bureaucratic Corruption and its Remedies. Princeton: Princeton U. Press.
Transparency International Defence & Security Programme (2011) Building Integrity and
Countering Corruption in Defence and Security: 20 Practical Reforms.
Williams, R., (2000). Explaining Corruption. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham.