Detectability and accountability

(5< sensibly, this publication identifies an approximate number of words for my weekly article. I come from a country known as Wales, part of the 8nited .ingdom, where the men are best known for losing at rugby and bombarding their fellow Welsh people with close harmony singing. But, seriously, it was precisely that form of music that first bonded me to my fellow emaSwati.

More people from this kingdom are familiar with the meaning of the word ‘Eisteddford’ – a competitive Welsh music festival – than over there in the 8nited .ingdom. But the Welsh are also known for their garrulity, verbosity or any similar euphemism that allows the Welshman not to worry he’s talking too much; hence the need to limit the writer on words. There you are, you see, 120 words already used up; a feast of garrulity.

It might of course seem somewhat incongruous (another ridiculous word) for me to switch into a very serious mode.

Discreet

But even pallbearers and undertakers are allowed a discreet, Tuiet moment of humour before setting about their tasks.

I’m going to talk a bit more about dishonesty. +onestly, (oops), I will drop it for a while after this week. As a lawyer would say; ‘I will rest my case’ or use some obscure Latin word sthat no one understand. Much of English comes from Latin, so why use the Latin" It’s pomp and goes with the wig. But it being one of the original professions of human civilisation we keep our satire to ourselves. As long as they’re doing a decent job we can put up with the posing.

Which brings me to two words that capture the essence of keeping a country honest – detectability and accountability. In the first instance, a country’s system has to contain techniTues for detecting the incidence of criminal acts, as well as preparing as watertight a case as possible in attaching blame for the acts. It can be CCTV, witness reporting, or transactional analysis and reconciliation as with company fraud. And one other potentially very productive method which I will mention below.

Dishonest

Now what about accountability" That’s simply making sure that a person accused, and even legally indicted to face prosecution, is held accountable; and doesn’t somehow duck and dive the way out of it by dishonest means. I referred, last week, to the possibility of a prevailing delay in the prosecution of many hundreds of serious criminal cases. That’s a serious blot in the copybook. Amnesty International’s reaction to it would be bad enough, but justice for the victims is what really matters.

I’m sorry to say that Eswatini is not doing very well in either detectability or accountability. The segment of the general public in the country that is honest must surely be disheartened by the amount of theft of public funds that is seen to exist and the evident failure to either attach culpability for theft, or bring the perpetrators to book.

The extent of the ongoing corruption, and degree of disappointment with the authorities to effect sufficient controls over public resources, inevitably causes the average individual to think that everyone with a huge house or top-of-the-range BMW is dishonest.

That simply isn’t true. There are many scrupulously honest emaSwati who have gained their riches through the sweat of the brow.

But there are likely to be many who cannot legitimately claim to fit into that category. And the most effective way to stop those people prospering from dishonest behaviour is to pursue lifestyle audits. The country of Georgia (former Soviet state in Asia) some years ago introduced a very simple strategy in the operations of their anti-corruption work.

They knocked on the door of the palatial mansion in the city; ³Good morning sir madam, this is a beautiful house. Could you please show us where you got the money from to purchase or build the property"´

In Georgia it had a hugely beneficial impact.

Entrenched

In Eswatini it was said, some time ago, that the Anti-Corruption Commission, even when functioning properly, was not able to do the knockon-the-door stage of a lifestyle audit, presumably because it was viewed as conflicting with our Constitution, namely Section 25, itself protected under Section 246 as an ‘entrenched provision’.

That’s just slapping the chains on, and not, in my view, morally and practically justified. If someone has obtained a loan from a bank, or other legitimate means, they won’t mind providing the evidence of the transaction.

There are some very lavish properties in Mbabane, Manzini and the Ezulwini Valley that don’t appear to correlate with public sector salary levels, and corporate profits and remuneration.

The average citizen will be far more comfortable with the authorities when knowing that expensive properties and vehicles funded by dishonest means will no longer be able to pass comfortably below the radar.