Scourge of corruption: Enhancing effectiveness of whistleblowing
RIGOBERTA Menchú, a Nobel prize laureate, once said that without strong watchdog institutions, impunity becomes the very foundation upon which systems of corruption are built. And if impunity is not demolished, all efforts to bring to an end corruption are in vain.
What can Zimbabwe do to decisively deal with corruption and other related ills? Regarding Zimbabwe’s ongoing quest to control corruption, some scholars are of the view that a greater focus needs to be put on strengthening institutions, developing and implementing national anticorruption strategies. Having the necessary political will and leadership as the primary governance elements of future efforts in order to reign in corruption and mitigate its consequences. These are some of the measures at national level which, if applied consistently and held as routine, can raise the cost of kleptocratic behaviour and thereby discourage it.
Transparency International defines whistleblowing as the disclosure of information related to corrupt, illegal, fraudulent or hazardous activities being committed in or by public or private sector organisations, which are of concern to or threaten the public interest to individuals or entities believed to be able to effect action.
Whistle-blowers play a very instrumental role for maintaining an open and transparent society by finding the courage to report wrongdoing.
In December 2021, Finance minister Mthuli Ncube, suspended the whistleblower monetary reward facility, amid allegations of scandals and corruption that cost the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (Zimra) millions of United States dollars.
Whether the minister did the right thing or not is debatable. However, what is the significance of offering rewards to those who speak out?
To begin with, for any initiative to be successful, it is important that the goal is clearly defined. There is also a need to understand the audience and know certain things about them such as their culture and what would incentivise them to participate in these activities.
There is also a need to decide on the theme and format and get buy-in from key stakeholders across the organisation. By nature, most people are reluctant to change.
It is also of paramount importance that participation is encouraged. Whether these fundamentals were addressed prior to the launch of the Zimra whistleblowing incentive scheme, it is unclear.
Someone becomes a whistle-blower when they speak up. It is, of course, acknowledged that some, even with the full knowledge of necessary information, decide to remain bystanders, wilfully blind and for that moment, assume the infamous ostrich posture.
Among the reasons for this choice are beliefs (e.g., religiosity), values, culture, whistle-blower protection mechanisms, and availability or non-availability of rewards among others.
Of all these factors, the rewards can work for either side: those that would speak-up due to what they stand to gain (quid pro quo believers) and those that speak-up by virtue of it being the right thing to do.
This is so as one can still “blow the whistle” and turn down the reward or accept and donate the proceeds. The provision of a reward may well incentivise those who would not normally speak out. However, it may also encourage individuals to raise a concern only when there is concrete proof and monetary reward.
This could reduce the opportunity to detect malpractice early and prevent harm. There is no known reason why whistleblowers should not be recognised and rewarded in the workplace and by society at large. Whistle-blowers unmask corruption and help bring the truth to light, often benefiting society in the process.
It is in the background that the Compliance Society of Zimbabwe (CoSoZ) is against the shelving of the incentive scheme at Zimra. Whether the action taken by the minister is temporary or not remains to be seen.
In Africa whistle-blowers face dismissal, victimisation and violence. Extensive legislation seldom offers real protection. In Zimbabwe, there are no whistle-blower protection laws now although the plans are in motion.
The Whistle-blower Protection Bill has not yet passed the drafting stage and will determine if these issues will be pro-actively addressed once the bill is in place.
In South Africa, there is no provision for any kind of reward or incentive for whistleblowing. However, Section 9 of the Protected Disclosure Act refers to any reward payable in terms of any law.
Transparency International principles support the idea that a system of rewards generally results in more and better-quality disclosures, and this seems to be borne out by experiences in the United States.
The 2021 Annual Report to Congress on Whistle-blower Programme notes that whistleblowers make a tremendous contribution to the agency’s ability to detect securities law violations and protect investors and the marketplace.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SECZim) chair noted that the assistance that whistle-blowers provide is crucial to the SECZim’s ability to enforce the rules of the road for our capital markets.
This is evidenced most clearly by the amount of financial remedies stemming from whistle-blower tips. He noted that since the programme’s inception, enforcement matters brought using information from meritorious whistle-blowers resulted in orders for nearly ZW$5 billion (US$10,8 million) in total monetary sanctions, including more than ZW$3,1 billion (US$6,7 million) in disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and interest, of which more than ZW$1,3 billion (US$2,8 million) had been, or was scheduled to be, returned to harmed investors.
Rewarding whistle-blowers and enactment of whistle-blower protection laws, of course supported by other interventions, can go a long way to fight corruption in Zimbabwe.
The presence of rewards and necessary legal framework effectively communicates and resonates with potential whistleblowers that their information is valued. This also addresses the risks of retaliation.
Whistle-blower rewards and whistleblower protection laws create a safe effective, and highly successful method for people to disclose fraud to the appropriate authorities.
Data shows that incentivising whistleblowers is extremely effective in generating high quality tips that result in successful prosecutions.
For further interrogation is the glaring absurdity of the now removed whistleblower facility itself becoming corrupt, with some individuals allegedly having found a new career as whistle-blowers.
The unspoken undertone is arguably that corruption in Zimbabwe is due to some fundamentals or lack thereof and to combat corruption will require unwavering and selfless political will.
While the reasons for some initiatives to fail in institutions vary from one case to the other, some of the causes are poor internal controls. These internal controls can be preventative, detective and corrective in nature.
Also, in some cases it is to do with failure to clearly define and articulate the goal of the initiative, lack of buy-in by some stakeholders to mention but a few.
It is thus imperative that from idea generation up to post implementation, appropriate measures must be taken to minimise chances of failure.
CoSoZ strongly believes in the use of incentives as a way of encouraging whistleblowing and dealing with corruption and other societal ills such as fraud, forgery, among others.
Whistleblowing incentives are effective measures in cases where other key fundamentals are in place and working, these include appropriate tone from the top, training and awareness program, stakeholder engagement and participation, whistleblowing policy, protection mechanisms for whistle-blowers to deal with fear of retaliation to mention only a few.