Transparency International - Kenya - TI Kenya

The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20060219102648/http://www.tikenya.org:80/faqs.asp

International Anti-Corruption Conference

Search:

TI Kenya - FAQ's

BUT, ISN'T BRIBERY A CHEAP WAY OF GETTING THINGS DONE?
No, quite the opposite. We have found in the Kenya Urban Bribery Index that, bribery of public officials is estimated to impose a direct financial cost, an additional tax burden in other words, of just under Ksh. 8,000 per respondent per month. The additional tax burden of central government officials is estimated at Ksh. 5,530 (68%), state corporation officials at Ksh. 1,515 (18%) and local government officials at Ksh. 920 (11%). Bribes to private sector and foreign organizations (embassies and international organizations) officials impose a cost of Ksh. 220 per person per month. Since both individuals and businesses pay bribes, how the bribery tax burden is shared between households income and profits will depend on how much businesses are able to pass on to households in higher prices of goods and services. The average income of the survey respondents is Ksh. 26,000 per person per month, and the average turnover of the enterprises represented in the survey is Ksh. 8.2 million. If the burden were to fall entirely on households, it would translate to a cost of living increase of 31% over what it would be in a bribe free society. If it were to be borne entirely by profits, it would translate to an additional tax of 2.8% of turnover, which translates to Ksh. 291,000 on a business with the average Ksh. 8.2 million turnover. However, neither extreme is likely to be the case. Assuming that it falls equally on households and enterprises implies that bribery may be raising the cost of living by up to 15% and the cost of doing business by up to 1.4% of turnover. While 1.4% of turnover may appear small, it is in fact a very significant cost. Assuming for instance that the gross margin of a business is twenty percent, 1.4% of turnover translates to 9% of the gross margin.

CAN'T OUR LEGAL SYSTEM ERADICATE CORRUPTION?
Unfortunately, No. Corruption in Kenya is systemic and buttressed by an elaborate legal and institutional framework that simply doesn't work. How else can you explain the systemic failure of the Auditor-General and Parliament to stem the loss of public money? Our governmental system allows for unfettered discretion in matters of public finance. This promotes extensive corruption and rent-seeking behaviour amongst market participants and government officials. The determinant factor in most corrupt decisions is monopolised discretion that is not accountable . This is true in tendering processes, contract awarding and privatisation processes. The result of misused discretion is the emergence of a restricted private sector market that thrives amidst massive economic waste. The extent of such waste has been quantified at 475 billion shillings in a recent study of the Controller and Auditor General's Report on Government Accounts for the years 1991 through 1997.

DO KENYANS THINK CORRUPTION IS A NATIONAL PROBLEM?
Yes. Corruption in Kenya, which has reached endemic proportions, is now recognised as posing a real threat to democracy, and to economic and social development. A nation-wide opinion poll published in October 2001 by the International Republican Institute found that "24% of respondents say that corruption is the single most important issue facing Kenya now followed by poverty (22%) and unemployment (15%)." Today, corruption is perceived as being a more important issue than Constitutional Review.

DOES CORRUPTION CAUSE POVERTY?
Corruption promotes poverty and inequality which in turn breeds discontent and instability. Statistically, for example, close to 50% percent of the Kenyan population lives in absolute poverty. This figure is concentrated among subsistence farmers, pastoralists, and people without any education and unskilled workers. Corruption is an important cause of poverty because it promotes unfair distribution of income and inefficient use of resources. By the late 1990s, it was estimated that 25 percent of Kenyans cannot meet their minimum daily calorie requirements even if they concentrated all their spending on food and a World Bank report in 1996 indicated that the top 10 percent of Kenya's population earned 47 percent of the national income. According to the same report, these inequalities were second only to those reported for Brazil. The political implications of sharp economic inequalities are sometimes even more potent than those of poverty when considered alone as an issue. Especially vulnerable to ill effects of corruption are women and children.

DOES CORRUPTION DAMAGE SOCIETAL NORMS?
Corruption eats at the moral fibre of a nation. Norms and traditions once appropriated by the corrupt instantly transform themselves into curses. Harambee for example is today not the culture of philanthropy and community service we once knew. Rather it is a political tool highly concentrated amongst political rent-seekers that fails to deliver what it promises. How else can you explain that whereas 60% of all harambee proceeds are ostensibly for education related projects, the fact remains that our children's' future has been stolen from them by consistently low-levels of educational achievement . The Ministry of Education heavily mismanages its vote through uncollected and unsurrendered funds each year and yet teachers go unpaid. A society that it not educating its youth and glories in vanity harambee projects turns those youth into a future criminal and dysfunctional class.

HOW DOES CORRUPTION HURT THE KENYAN ECONOMY?
Corruption leads to distortions and undermines development in immediate and serious ways. Corruption distorts the economic liberalisation process by for example in privatisation transferring state assets into private hands at the expense of the public interest and public purse. Corruption has negatively affected perceptions of Kenya as a destination for financial and social investment. High-levels of corruption have poisoned our relations with development partners as witnessed in the stop-and-go aid freeze by the IMF, World Bank and bi-laterals. Corruption means that economic malfeasance and crimes go unpunished e.g. Goldenberg with grievous effect on the national economic health

HOW DOES KENYA RANK INTERNATIONALLY VIS-A-VIS CORRUPTION?
According to the annual Corruption Perceptions Index, Kenya is perceived as having among the most corrupt government and public officials. Since its first CPI ranking Kenya's record has deteriorated steadily. 1996 - 3rd from the bottom of all countries surveyed with only Pakistan and Nigeria performing worse; 1998 - 73rd out of 85 countries surveyed in an expanded index; 1999 - 90th of the 99 countries surveyed; 2000 - 82nd out of 90 countries surveyed; 2001 - 84th out of 91 countries surveyed with only Indonesia, Uganda, Nigeria and Bangladesh ranking lower on the list. A dismal performance year after year!

HOW EXTENSIVE IS BRIBE-TAKING IN KENYAN INSTITUTIONS?
According to Transparency International Kenya's 2001 Kenya Urban Bribery Index, 67% of the respondents’ interaction with public institutions, about two out of three, involve bribes or costly negative consequences if one declines to bribe. The bribery incidence is highest in law enforcement and regulatory functions, where 78% of interactions with public officials require bribes, in other words, only two out of 10 interactions do not require paying bribes. Employment related matters follow, with a bribery incidence of 63%, followed by provision of services (59%) and business (55%). Those likely to be poor (i.e. low income or unemployed and low education) are significantly more vulnerable to corruption than the better off socio-economic groups. Respondents with primary education and below encounter bribery in 75% of their interactions with public organizations, as compared to 67% for those with secondary school education and 63% for those with tertiary education. The unemployed encounter bribery in 71% of their interactions, self or family employees 68% of the time and private sector (both business & non-profit) 61% of the time. Public sector employees report encountering bribery in just over half (52%) of their interactions, significantly lower than all the other groups. Men are more susceptible than women, encountering bribery in 67% of their interactions as compared to 62% for women.

HOW LARGE ARE THE BRIBES PAID IN KENYA?
Most bribes involve relatively small sums paid very frequently. The Kenya Urban Bribery Index found that bribes of Ksh. 200 and below, paid every day, account for 41% of the transactions, daily bribes of Ksh. 500 and below for 63%, and daily bribes of Ksh. 1000 and below for 75% of the transactions. However, transactions involving big amounts account for most of the proceeds from bribery. Bribes of Ksh. 50,000 and over account for 41% of the value, and bribes exceeding Ksh. 5,000 for just over 75%. It is estimated the average urban Kenyan pays 16 bribes to both public and private institutions in a month. Public servants, that is, employees of central government ministries, local authorities and state corporations are by far the most bribed, accounting for 99 percent of the bribery transactions, and 97% of the value.

IS CORRUPTION REALLY A DANGER TO DEMOCRACY?
Yes. Corruption in the electoral and political process has lowered the confidence of wananchi in democratic institutions such as parliament, the executive and the judiciary. A cynical and apathetic culture is pervasive amongst voters and politicians alike. The first queue to sell their votes believing that they have no stake in representative politics. The latter resort to selling their political vote in parliaments to the highest bidder or to ensuring nest eggs for themselves out of the peoples' taxes. Political violence that occurs with impunity in our country is a manifestation of a corrupt political environment where the rule of law has been subverted. The selective application of laws based on political correctness is a corruption of democracy. Non-delivery of services by a government which taxes its citizens is politically risky for a government operating in a democracy - as it results in that government being voted out. This is not an option in a corrupt system. In a democracy, the office of the president would surely be required to explain why its project completion rate is only 3%.

IS THERE A LINK BETWEEN CORRUPTION AND INSECURITY?
According to HABITAT's Crime Victims Survey 2001, nearly 75% of all respondents reported that their business had been involved in bribery in the past year, with almost everybody claiming that an ethos of corruption and bribery prevailed throughout the commercial sector. Over three-quarters of the business people said that it was necessary to bribe public sector officials if they needed something to be done. Three-fifths of the respondents felt that such bribery was the norm and they saw it as part of their business practice, almost as an additional tax that had to be paid to ensure the desired service. Almost all the respondents felt that that bribery has assumed alarming levels of acceptability among residents in Nairobi, with half admitting to having actively participated in some form of behaviour that might be classified under the broad category of bribery. Furthermore, nearly one-quarter of all residents felt that residents of the city are catalysing the culture of bribery among the police force, with just over 25% claiming to have in fact bribed a police officer during the past year. The consequence has been the distancing of the criminal justice system from the citizens. This is shown in respondents' perception on police response to a reported crime in Nairobi. Central to improving levels of reporting to the police will be improving public perceptions of police integrity and accountability. Respondents mentioned that they suspected that police were colluding with criminals, and turned a blind eye to particular crimes Respondents believe that bribery is entrenched in the police force to the extent that one in three crimes was attributed either directly or indirectly to the police. Just over 25% claimed to have bribed a police officer during the past year. Of most concern is respondents say that bribery seems to have become not only part of the crime problem in Nairobi, but also part of "the solution": the commercial crime respondents reported using bribes to reduce the risk of their premises being burgled. The ‘ethos’ of bribery prevails in the commercial sector to the extent that public sector officials need to be bribed in order to get something done. This is regarded as ‘part of their business practice’ – an additional tax required to obtain the desired service. Given both crime rates and perceptions of police, it is not surprising that high levels of insecurity and fear of crime were reported in Nairobi. In this environment, it makes sense that just over 25% of respondents would suggest good governance in the form of tackling corruption as the strategy needed to improve safety in the city. A better-motivated and remunerated police force would go a long way towards achieving this aim as well. Beyond conventional perceptions, corruption has taken on a more dangerous and macabre aspect - it now poses a serious threat to national and regional security. Testimony at the trial of the Nairobi Embassy Bombing Trial recently concluded in New York, and the ongoing investigation into the events of 11th September 2001 clearly make the nexus between terrorism and corruption. The best security structures are rendered impotent if undermined from within by corruption of, for example, registration and immigration officers or customs agents. Corruption may also blight the lives of people to such an extent as to create feelings of helplessness and despair and an environment that can provide a ready recruiting ground for those who seek allies in their murderous causes. Effective anti-money laundering laws and non-corrupt immigration and customs agencies are key to reducing the capacity of terrorists to operate with impunity on a global scale. These should now be special concerns of all Kenyans bearing in mind the terrible experiences of 7th August 1998 in Nairobi.

WHAT ARE THE KEY FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE BRIBE-TAKING?
The respondents to the 1999 Transparency International Bribe Payers Index (BPI) shared similar views when it came to the issue of why senior public officials and politicians in many countries take bribes. In many instances, the factors that were said to account for corruption are related to each other. Evidently, many officials in the public sector believe that they not only can secure immunity for themselves against prosecution, but that the chances of their criminal activities being discovered are low. These considerations encourage bribe-taking. The fact that many of even the most senior government officials receive low salaries is widely seen as the prime cause of bribe-taking. 33 % of the respondents thought that corruption had actually increased over the past 5 years. They were asked which factors contributed to this increase. A number of political observers have blamed campaign financing as a major cause of high level corruption. While this has been a recurring problem in established democracies, in the emerging countries surveyed, this dimension was ranked last among 9 major factors contributing to an increase in corruption in recent years.

WHICH ARE THE MOST, AND LEAST, BRIBE-PRONE INSTITUTIONS IN KENYA?
The Kenya Urban Bribery Index shows that the The index indicates that overall, bribery is most prevalent in law enforcement and local authorities. Law enforcement institutions (Police, Judiciary, Prisons) and local authorities (Nairobi, Mombasa, “Other LAs”) occupy six of the 10 most corrupt institutions. The Kenya Police tops the national bribery league with an index score of 68.7 out of a maximum score of 100. The Ministry of Public Works follows with a markedly lower score of 41.0, implying in effect, that bribery in the police force is much higher than any other institution. The Immigration department ranks third with a score of 36.1, the Ministry of Lands is fourth (34.8) followed closely by the Nairobi City Council with an index score of 33. The others in the worst 10 are the Judiciary (32.3), the Kenya Ports Authority (29.3), Provincial Administration (29.0), and Mombasa Municipal Council (28.7). The Central Bank of Kenya ranks as the least bribery prone institution with a near perfect score of 0.2, followed by the Kenya Wildlife Service with a substantially higher score of 5.2, the private sector (5.6), the National Bank of Kenya (7.2) and the Commissioner of Insurance (6.7).

WHICH OFFICIALS DEMAND THE LARGEST, AND THE SMALLEST, BRIBES?
Officials of the Ministry of Public Works demand the biggest bribes, averaging Ksh. 37,500 per bribe, closely followed by officials of embassies and international organizations with Ksh. 36,800 per bribe. Immigration officials come third with bribes of Ksh. 12,000 on average, judicial officers fourth with Ksh. 10,000 and the Ports officials fifth with Ksh. 9,700. Organizations that deal primarily or extensively with business predominate the rankings on bribe size, notably the Ministry of Public Works (1st), the Ports Authority (5th), the Kenya Revenue Authority (7th), Kenya Commercial Bank (8th) and the Kenya Bureau of Standards (9th). Immigration services are the most costly as reflected in the ranking of embassies and immigration officials in second and third positions respectively. Officials of the Ministry of Local Government demand the smallest bribes, Ksh. 110 on average followed by those of the National Water & Pipeline Corporation (Ksh. 210), Post Office and Mombasa Municipal Council staff with bribes averaging Ksh. 280. Bribery in the private sector is also dominated by small bribes reflected in average bribes of Ksh. 1,400. Officials of smaller local authorities demand bigger bribes than the big councils, averaging Ksh. 2,200, over Ksh. 300 more than Kisumu at Ksh. 1,880, almost double Nairobi’s Ksh. 1,200 and almost eight times Mombasa at Ksh. 280

Discussion Forums

Participate in our online community as we discuss various issues.

click here to enter forum

Public Notice

Fraudulent Letters Misusing the Name of Transparency International

We wish to alert the public to the scandalous misuse of the good name of two of our Board members, Mr. Harris Mule and Mr. Ahmed Abdalla. Two fraudulent letters ostensibly authored in their names are...

View Details

Poll Question

Is the campaign process free and fair?

Options

	Yes
	No
	No Comment

View Poll Results

Jan	FEB	Apr
	19
2005	2006	2007