|
[
This article does not necessarily reflect
the views of TLC Africa]
The
Transitional Government should be audited
before the inauguration of the next administration.
By Amin
Modad
It
is imperative that the entire Transitional
Government be audited and held accountable
before the inauguration of the next Government.
Pandemic malfeasance and misfeasance within
the government appear to have escalated
in the last year and continues largely unabated,
despite numerous calls for audits and reform.
This administration has received the most
financial, moral, and logistical support
any other has since the inception of the
Liberian crisis. Yet, its short span has
been characterized by rampant corruption,
very inefficient governance, and poor overall
accomplishments.
If
we are to establish a society and foment
a system of good governance based on financial
as well as performance accountability, it
is crucial that this administration be audited.
Audits are important elements of financial
and performance management. An independent
foreign led financial audit will primarily
establish the true financial state in which
the new administration will acquire the
leadership and set the precedence that corruption
and malfeasance will not be addressed with
impunity. This will also give investors
the assurance that the government and people
of Liberia will welcome them without demands
for under the table cutbacks and bribes.
The practice of conducting independent annual
and term audits should be adopted and enacted
into law. To further maintain accountability,
the government should make available to
the public a detailed annual financial and
performance report; every citizen should
be given the right to know how the government
is performing.
From
the performance perspective, the audit should
also aim to address:
-
Internal controls; the influence of legislative
bodies, other branches of government,
and audit committees on the control process;
Scandals
involving the misuse of public funds have
put the efficiency of the entire financial
control system in question. I, like many
other public opinions, criticize the control
mechanisms for not being able to prevent
major corruption in the government. In particular,
I have issues as to why institutions like
the Supreme Court, the Legislature, and
the audit bureau have been unable to prevent
or alarm the political system about corruptive
practices. The Legislative branch, which
should be the voice of the people, has proven
to be no better than the Executive is and
the Judicial branch is weakened by an all
too powerful Executive branch.
- the
integrity and ethical values of those
elected and appointed to government positions;
- the
government structure and methods of appointing/designating
officials and responsibilities;
- the
competence and reliability of people elected
and appointed to government positions;
- the
influence of external entities on the
governing and financial processes, such
as other governments as well as non-governmental
and business institutions.
In
cases where the internal structure fail
to implement efficient control processes,
nongovernmental institutions outside the
political and for-profit systems can play
a pivotal role in strengthening the control
environment by raising the consciousness
of the government regarding their fiduciary
responsibilities to the people, the internal
control system, and the way the system functions.
In
his inauguration speech, Mr. Gyude Bryant
stated that his administration was there
to lay the foundation for a transition from
the practice of pursuing personal interest
in government at the expense of the people
to a new attitude of promoting and seeking
their general welfare and from opportunism
for a few members of the ruling elite, to
equal access to opportunities for all of
our people. Yet, every branch of his government
including the heads has been implicated
in uncontrolled corruption, fiscal unaccountability,
and plain insensitivity to the plight of
the people. His administration comprised
mainly of dysfunctional occupation misfits
who are in positions that they are not qualified
to manage seem to be out to get the most
they can before the elections.
To
name a few:
- The
Speaker of the House and three other colleagues
were accused of embezzling $92,000.
- The
Bureau of Maritime was implicated in a
scandal on the misdirection of US$800,000.00
of an account belonging to the International
Maritime Satellite, Limited (INMARSAT).
- The
U.N. Expert Panel on Liberia reported
that Mr. Bryant is spending 15 percent
of the budget on security (which includes
the purchasing of 2 armored vehicles for
him at US$366,000.00).
- The
Commerce Minister, Samuel Wlue, was accused
of uncontrollably hiking prices of essential
commodities such as rice and fuel for
receiving compensation from the relevant
businesses.
- The
word in some quarters is that Mr. Bryant
himself is a cohort. Whether the situation
was due to corruption or mere incompetence
on the part of Mr. Wlue, the government
did not do enough to address the situation.
Public
contracts and investment opportunities are
being awarded to a selected few. As I had
stated in a previous article "Encouraging
Competitive Bidding For Public Contracts",
corruption comes in many forms. Examples
of the petty bureaucratic variety are corruption
in police and the judiciary, corruption
in the election process, and the appointment
of individuals to key positions without
merit. But probably none is more pervasive
or has higher costs to a nation and people
than corruption related to procurement:
government buying of goods, works, and services.
The reasons are simple. If one sets aside
government salaries and social benefits,
procurement typically accounts for the largest
share of public expenditures at all levels
of government. Members of this administration
have been accused of receiving bribes and
cutbacks for the allotment of public contracts
with out implementing proper bidding processes.
In most cases, we see conflict of interest
between the roles these individuals in the
government and with business institutions.
Examples
are the purchase of 76 Cherokee jeeps through
Mr. George Haddad for the outrageous cost
of US$2,649,243.70. That averaged down to
approximately USD $ 34,850 per vehicle.
That was an extreme overprice because at
that time the invoice price for a (full
optioned) 2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo was
US $25,820 fob. That amounted to almost
$ 10,000 in excess per vehicle and approximately
$760,000 in total.
The
government also awarded what it called a
10-year de-facto monopoly in Liberia's diamond
producing regions to the West African Mining
Corporation, (WAMCO). Doesn't it make you
wonder about the competence of our so-called
leaders?
These arbitrary allotments of deals and
contracts are indicative of possible common
interests between the business entities
and some members of the government showing
that the purchase acquisition methods provide
a profit bonanza to these individuals rather
than benefiting the country.
In
his inaugural speech, he also stated that
his administration would lay the foundation
for a transition from a centralized, Monrovia-centered
government, to a decentralized government
wherein the people are empowered to assume
responsibility for the transformation of
their communities. What has the administration
done relevant to this commitment? Other
than the little activities generated in
collaboration with and by the presence of
local and international Non-governmental
Institutions in the rural areas, the government
has not implemented any sustainable community
development project. Monrovia itself is
in the filthiest state since the crisis;
it has become more like a large ghetto or
slum. Though transportation is an essential
part of socio-economic development, roads
are yet to be cleaned let alone renovated.
Farmers and traders from the rural areas
are unable to transport their goods and
produce efficiently. Public schools are
still substandard; this is not because the
teachers are not making the effort but because
the educational system lacks the support
and resources from the government.
At
the 59th Session of the United Nations General
Assembly in September of 2004, Chairman
Gyude Bryant mentioned that his administration's
recovery agenda has as its focus the improvement
of the wellbeing of the people by the creation
of employment opportunities to put returnees
and ex-combatants to work. What have they
done?
The
World Bank and other donors rightfully want
to see improved accountability and governance
by the government before putting in more
funds. In addition to the foreign funds,
the Government also stands accused of misappropriating
the national revenue. Trades have increased
substantially since hostility had ended.
In fact, import and export revenues are
at their highest since the war; some manufacturing
sectors have also been reactivated. Yet,
the roads in central Monrovia are still
dilapidated while some major arteries (like
the Jallah Town road) are inaccessible.
The utility infrastructures are still inactive;
there are no electricity, water, and effective
sewage & waste disposal systems. In
his one of his addresses to the nation,
he boasted that the government for the first
time since the war shows a positive revenue.
Considering the economic and social inputs
being made by the presence of UNMIL and
other foreign institutions it makes me wonder
what is the government doing with the revenue?
Mind you, government salaries are still
in arrears and both the health delivery
and educational systems are not being appropriately
subsidized by the government.
Another
issue to be discussed in my next article
has to do with how the US $350 million dollars
provided by donors have been spent. Though
we are grateful for the presence of UNMIL
and other International NGO's, we are concerned
that these institutions did not adequately
address the challenges of globalization
and the human resource & reintegration
aspects of the development process. We do
not see enough community and socio-economic
development to commensurate the exhaustion
of $ 350M. This boils down to perspective
and priorities. Most of the moneys have
been exhausted on supporting a huge foreign
workforce and unnecessary bureaucracies
while skilled and educated Liberians remain
left out. Many of the key positions with
the international organizations charged
with the responsibility of implementing
the funds are being occupied by foreign
expatriates. Are there no educated or experienced
Liberians?
One
would have assumed that in order to promote
the repatriation & reintegration process,
develop the human resource environment,
and foster socio-economic activities, the
international community would have encouraged
competent Liberians to key positions within
the non-governmental sector. It can also
be noticed that other than drivers, even
lower skilled positions such as cooks and
maintenance personnel are occupied by imported
staff. With the presence of such adequate
military force, it would also have been
prudent to invest less in a huge police
force; they should have brought in a smaller
efficient one to form and train an effective
Liberian force. Wouldn't that have given
more to the people? A key factor in community
development and the empowerment of the people
is their participation in the process. I
guess scrutiny and investigation should
be done on the subject.
|