Integrity disintegrates

GIVEN the nature of its functions, one would expect the Integrity Commission always to be subject to some degree of conflict.

The commission was established under the Constitution to discourage corruption among public officials through a process of disclosure and investigation. Therefore, you would expect such a body routinely to be in the crosshairs of politicians.

The high standards with which the commission must operate also mean it is also regularly itself subject to intense outside scrutiny.

What is not to be expected is that the commission would come apart at the seams because of conflict within itself.

But that is exactly the picture painted by the commission’s latest annual report, made public last week. The report begins with an epigraph from Chinua Achebe’s famous novel, Things Fall Apart. The title of that book might as well be a summary of the report itself.

The document discloses: sharp disagreement between the commission and its staff over basic laws, insubordination, breakdowns in communication, a reduction in compliance officers, the flourishing of short-term contracts in what appears to be “a revolving-door workplace,” internal resistance to change and crippling budgetary constraints.

In 2021, the office of the Solicitor General had to be called in to deal with some of these issues; a Cabinet note was also prepared seeking legislative reform.

“The year 2021 has undoubtedly been a tumultuous one,” the commission’s chairman, Prof Rajendra Ramlogan concludes in his report.

Striking a decidedly optimistic note, he adds, “as a single united body, the commission stands firmly behind its decisions.”

What is most striking about these developments is their timing.

It was only last year the commission seemed outwardly to adopt a strong stance, moving to clamp down on public officials who had failed to file declarations of assets and income.

As many as 150 ex-parte applications were lodged in September at the High Court seeking to compel compliance.

Also striking is just how much the picture painted resonates with the public’s perception of the Public Service more generally.

It is worth considering the extent to which hidden staffing problems have been an albatross around the commission’s neck over the decades.

But the main question we are left with is this: Which watchdog body or entity in this country is functioning as it should to hold people in public life to account?

The public procurement regime remains toothless. There are question marks over police regulation and leadership.

Financial watchdogs are routinely subject to unflattering headlines. Even the judiciary, that most basic check against an executive, complains about resource constraints.

Mr Ramlogan’s disclosures suggest he hopes the public might place pressure on leaders to fix these hindrances. But no one should have to convince leaders to do the right thing.