EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CAREER OFFICERS AND POLITICAL APPOINTEES IN PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY.
Introduction
In contemporary Nigeria, government has ultimately become inseparable from the day to day life of the citizens. This is because government is now involved in the overall social and economic development as against its traditional role of mere maintaining law and order. To accomplish the above, government requires a bureaucratic system that is designed to implement the decisions of political leaders. Political leaders make policy, the public bureaucracy executes it. If the bureaucracy lacks the capacity to implement the policies of the political leadership, those policies, however well intentioned, will not be implemented effectively.
Thus, this paper is concerned with the Nigerian bureaucratic set up as evinced in the Public Service with emphasis on the working relationship between career Accounting/Financial officers and the influences of political office holders. The paper investigates the linkage between Public and Civil Service on the one hand, and the co-operational, confrontational and conspiratorial associations between career officers and political appointees on the other hand. It also discusses the impact of corruption on Nigeria’s bureaucracy and proffers solutions.
Conceptualizing the Public and Civil Service
The Public Service represents the employees of government. This refers to the set of people responsible for the functioning of government through the implementation of government policies. Often times, the term is used to indicate a scope that is wider than that of the civil service. In this usage, public service means the totality of services that are organised under public authority. The term could also be used in a more fundamental sense to refer to the idea or ideal of rendering service to the public. They are those responsible for the functioning of government through the implementation of government policies.
The Public Service is made up of workers in government ministries, parastatals, specialised agencies and institutions. Suffice to state that all workers in Government establishment will qualify to be personnel of the Nigerian Public Service. By this, Accounting/Financial officers as well as other career officers and the bulk of political appointees are all members of the Public Service. However, within the Public Service, we have the Civil Service, which constitute the inner core, or the heart of the public service.
Four fundamental principles guide the Public Service all over the world. The principles are:
(i) Principle of equality of treatment: This requires all public service to recognize the
equality of citizens before the law. It also demands that persons in comparable situation vis-à-vis the administration shall be treated equally without any distinction whatsoever. It prohibits any discrimination based on place of origin, race, gender, religion, ethnic group, philosophical or political convictions.
(ii) Principle of legality: This stipulates that “public service shall be provided in strict compliance with the law” and that “administrative decisions shall be taken in conformity with existing regulations”.
(iii) Principle of neutrality: This requires the public service as a whole to remain neutral in respect to the government of the day. It also requires all administrations to respect and treat the principle as fundamental.
(iv) Principle of continuity: This provides that “public service shall be provided on an ongoing basis and in all its component parts, in accordance with the rules governing its operation”.
On the other hand, the Civil Service refers to the entire service of government which is divided into departments that caters for one particular subject or programme of Government. According to Adebayo (1999), “a generally accepted definition of the civil Service is that it comprises all servants of the State, other than those holding political appointments, who are employed in civil capacity and whose remuneration is paid out of money voted by the Legislature”. In a similar vein, Adebayo (1992) opined that it refers to “the body of permanent officials appointed to assist the political executive in formulating and implementing governmental policies (civil servants) and the ministries and departments within which specific aspects of government work are carried out”.
Though an integral part of the Public Service, the Civil Service is qualified to be described as the major instrument used by government to manage development. The Civil Service has four main characteristics as presented below:
Expertise – Civil Servant possess expert training for the job they are employed to do. In fact, they are recruited on the basis of their training and special qualifications
Impartiality and Political Neutrality – The civil servant ensures that his own political views do not influence the performance of his duties. He is impartial in his relationship with the political executive.
Anonymity – The Civil Servant does his work quietly behind the scenes. He does not take credit for the success of the ministerial responsibilities or blame for any failure or errors.
Permanence – The Civil Servant has a secure tenure in office until retirement. That is, the job of the civil servant does not depend on any government. He retains his job no matter how many times the government changes. This does not however stop him from being dismissed because of incapacity or misconduct.
In Nigeria as elsewhere, the Public Service and Civil Service are often used as synonyms whereas the two concepts are different in meaning although not much harm is done if the concepts are used interchangeably to reflect the affinity of their bureaucratic mandate.
THE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN CAREEER OFFICERS AND POLITICAL APPOINTEES – CO-OPERATION, CONFRONTATION OR CONSPIRACY.
Recent happenings in the annals of Nigeria shows the possibility that Political office holders and Accounting officers may have relationships that could either be co-operative, confrontational or conspiratorial.
Political office holders and accounting officers can interrelate in organizations so as to bring out the best in such institutions. Credible politicians and state officers can be diligent and sincere enough to an extent that they discharge their duties by putting the National Interest first in all they do. This sort of co-operative relationship will definitely rub off on the overall accomplishment of organizational goals and objectives as well as the welfare of the citizenry. This scenario is ever best for the political system because officers of the state will be dedicated and focused on their jobs. Hardly will any organization that experiences this sort of cordial relationship suffer any hitch in accomplishing set standards.
Nevertheless, there is also the possibility that accounting officers and political appointees could be at loggerheads over pecuniary considerations. This scenario could occur when the political appointee and the accounting officers work at cross purposes over the finance of their organization or parastatal. Often times, political appointees see whatever position they occupy as an avenue to clinch their own share of the national cake while accounting officers think differently. Once this happens, it is either that the political appointee struggles to make the accounting officer heed his directive on siphoning money or that the accounting officer faces threats on his/her job or placement. The above captivates a possible relationship that could best be described as confrontational.
Apart from the above, the relationship between political appointees and accounting officers could be expressly conspiratorial. In this realm, there is flagrant and deliberate abuse of best practices and due process all in a bid to steal public funds. It is possible that either the political appointee or the career civil servant stands as the initiator of the dirty deals or ideas but the long and short of the matter is that both parties conspire against the State and the welfare of her citizens. The history of governance process in Nigeria reflects active connivance between political appointees and career officers at all levels of administration –Federal, State and Local. The situation is such that political appointees and career officers embark on a stealing spree and also use accounting techniques to cover up their tracks.
The truth of the matter is that the entire Nigerian political process is hampered by corruption. Most times, political appointees see public offices as an avenue to siphone public funds for private ends. Since political appointees can not just dip their hands into public treasury, they therefore need the assistance of the accounting officers to accomplish their nefarious activities.
It must be stated that it is only in few instances that political office holders initiate the idea of stealing public funds. In actual fact, most of them are tutored in the act of stealing by accounting officers who possesses the requisite knowledge on where public funds are kept and how public funds can be diverted into private pockets.
Corruption is pandemic in Nigeria and it has certainly emerged as the major impediment to the development of democracy and the national economy. The scourge has grown to become a way of life of both the governor and the governed as it pervades all sectors of the state. In Nigeria, corruption transcends mere pecuniary exchange(s) as conceptualized in this paper as evidences abound on several private and official conduct that depicts glaring departure from honesty. Corruption is a serious problem affecting the whole sphere of Nigeria. While the corruption in the form of distortion of the government expenditures, pillaging of the State assets and bribery is widespread in the higher level of public offices between political office holders and accounting officials; the grand corruption in politics such as sale of party tickets, office posts and public contracts have been on the rise because politics has become the most remunerative career. Thus, a politician that ‘succeeds’ at the polls sees any office he/she occupies as a source of re-cooping his/her electoral expenses. Therefore in all circumstances public officers use their positions for private gains while long-term public interests are sacrificed.
In Nigeria, an understanding of what constitutes corruption transcends officialdom and discussing corruption broadly as a perversion or a change from good to bad will not be inappropriate. According to Lipset (2000) corruption is "efforts to secure wealth or power through illegal means – private gain at public expense; or a misuse of public power for private benefit. In addition, corruption is a behavior, which deviates from the formal duties of a public role, because of private [gains] - regarding (personal, close family, private clique, pecuniary or status gains. It is a behavior, which violates rules against the exercise of certain types of [duties] for private [gains] - regarding influence (Nye,1967). This definition includes such behavior as bribery (use of a reward to pervert the judgment of a person in a position of trust); nepotism (bestowal of patronage by reason of ascribed relationship rather than merit); and misappropriation (illegal appropriation of public resources for private uses). Also, corruption is an "anti-social behaviour conferring improper benefits contrary to legal and moral norms, and which undermine the authorities" to improve the living conditions of the people.
Although corruption exists in every society, it is entrenched and systemic in Nigeria. Corrupt practices are so common and pervading in the Nigeria’s public service to an extent that citizens find it difficult to develop an alternative to deal with it. Corruption is probably the main means to accumulate quick wealth in Nigeria. Corruption occurs in many forms, and it has contributed immensely to the poverty and misery of a large segment of the Nigerian population.
REMEDYING THE CHALLENGE(S)
The problems associated with the interactions of Accounting officers and Political Appointees are not insurmountable. For the purpose of this gathering, I will advocate (i) Administrative Reform and (ii) Good Governance.
i) Administrative Reform
According to Caiden (1960:65) administrative reform is the “artificial inducement of administrative need to improve on the status), artificial transformation (departure from existing arrangements and natural change processes), and administrative resistance (opposition is assumed). Administrative reform is political rather than merely organizational. It is “a political process designed to adjust the relationship between a bureaucracy and other elements in society or within the bureaucracy itself” (Montgomery, 1967:17). Succinctly put, administrative reform is:
Power politics in action; it contains ideological rationalization, fights for
control of areas, services, and people, political participants and
institutions… (Caiden, 1969:9).
Administrative reform has a “moral content” in that it seeks to create a
“better” system by removing faults and imperfections. It is usually
undertaken to change the status quo for the better. It aims at making the
administrative and political structures and procedures compatible with
broader goals. Administrative reform sets additional political values to be
used as yardsticks against which administrative performance may be
judged.
Administrative reform involves system diagnosis, that is, examination of
administrative systems to detect what is wrong and what can be improved.
Given that all systems are imperfect, system diagnosis is not difficult.
Getting the right solution is something else. As in medicine, the same
symptoms may have several possible causes, some of little consequence,
others serious.
From the foregoing, it becomes imperative that the Audit department of every government office must be strengthened to do its duty without fear or favour. This will discourage undue abuse of public privileges on the part of Political Appointees. Apart from the above, the career of accounting officers should not be at the mercy of Political Appointees. In other words, the Public/Civil Service should be strengthened to defend and protect officers from undue victimization in the course of discharging their duties.
Also, External Auditors should be opportune to peruse the account books of government agencies and parastatals. This will go a long way in corroborating and safeguarding the judgements and actions of accounting officers and Internal Auditors. Thus, the fear that a Politician could sack an un-cooperative accounting officer will be limited because sooner or later, the account profile will reveal the real facts behind the actions of the Accounting officers and the Political Appointees.
ii) GOOD GOVERNANCE
According to the World Bank, good governance is “… the exercise of political power to manage a nation’s affairs”. It is also regarded as synonymous with sound development (World Bank, 1992-1). Good governance could engender the functional and institutional prerequisites as well as the building
blocks of a good society. These include an efficient public service; an
independent judicial system and legal framework to enforce contracts; the
accountable administration of public funds ; an independent public auditor,
representative legislature; respect for the rule of law and human rights at all levels of government; a pluralistic institutional structure; and a free press. According to Leftwich (1993) the concept of “democratic good governance” has the three main levels of meaning which can be classified into systemic, political and administrative.
First, from a systematic angle, good governance is government that
embraces the formed institutional structure location of authoritarian
decision making in the modern state power. In this sense, good
governance denotes the structures of political and crucially, economic
relationships and rules by which the productive and distributive life of a
society is governed (Leftwich, 1993). In short, good governance means a “democratic capitalist” regime presided over by a minimal state which forms part of the wider governance of the New World Order.
Second, from a political sense, good governance presupposes a regime or
state which enjoys legitimacy and authority, derived from a democratic
mandate and built on the traditional liberal notion of a clear separation of
legislative, executive and judicial powers. Whether in a presidential or
parliamentary system, this presupposes a pluralist polity with a freely and
regularly elected representative legislature, with the capacity at least to
influence and check executive power (Leftwich, 1993)
Third, from an administrative point of view, good governance means an
efficient, independent, accountable and open audited public service which
has the bureaucratic competence to help design and implement
appropriate policies and manage whatever public sector there is. It also entails an independent judicial system to uphold the law and resolve
disputes arising in a largely free market economy. The administrative
aspect of good governance focuses on four main areas of public
administration in general and public sector management in particular. They
are:
- accountability, which in essence means holding officials responsible for
their actions;
- a legal framework for development, which means a structure of rules
and laws which provide clarity, predictability and stability for the private
sector, which are impartially and fairly applied to all, and which provide
the basis for conflict resolution through an independent judicial system;
- information, by which is meant that information about economic
conditions, budgets, markets and government intentions is reliable and
accessible to all, something which is crucial for private sector
calculations;
- insistence on transparency, which is basically a call for open
government, to enhance accountability, limit corruption and stimulate
consultative processes between government and private interests over
policy development (World Bank, 1992; Leftwich, 1993; Leftwich, 1993).
Viewed from the foregoing connotations of good governance, it is no
wonder that the concept is inseparable from the process of democratization.
CONCLUSION
The relationship between Accounting officers and Political Appointees goes a long way in determining the success or failure of government policies and projects. The most desirable is a cooperative relationship as it enhances efficient service delivery. Apart from the above, a conspiratorial or confrontational relationship is usually not in the best interest of the Public/Civil service. As much as possible, accounting officers should do their job to the best of their ability while political appointees should concentrate on their responsibilities rather than agitating to steal Public funds.
This conclusion is drawn from the fact that corruption is profoundly damaging to the national development whilst mal-governance can increase substantially the incidences of corruption. This latter possibility impacts a debilitating and reductionistic tendency on efforts at national development. It is difficult to overemphasize the damage done to democracy by corruption. Corruption can destroy a State, its political establishment as well as development advances built up over generations thereby retarding economic and social progress for decades to come. As argued above, it is almost impossible not to be corrupt in Nigeria as both the leaders and the citizens find it absolutely impossible to restrain from cutting corners. The situation was worsened by successive military regimes that institutionalize corruption. Nigeria is no doubt at a crossroad as domestic and external realities depict the country as very corrupt and poorly governed. Redressing this posture is a must and good governance remains the only enduring scaffold that can guarantee the demise of corruption in order to enhance an efficient public service delivery.
REFERENCES
Adebayo, A (1999) Power in Politics, Ibadan: Spectrum Books Limited
Adebayo, A (1992) Principles and Practice of Public Administration in Nigeria,
Ibadan: Spectrum Books
Caiden, G. (1969), Administrative Reform, Chicago, Aldine
Leftwich, A. (1993) “Governance, Democracy and Development in the Third
World”, Third world Quarterly, Vol. 14 (3): 605-624.
Lipset, Martin Seymour & Gabriel Lenz (2000) “Corruption, Culture and
Markets” in Culture matters, Lawrence E Harrisson and S.P
Huntington (eds) New York, Basic Books.
Montgomery, J.D. (1967), “Sources of Bureaucratic Reform: Problems of
Power, Purpose and Politics”, Bloomington, Indiana, Comparative
Administrative Group Occasional Paper
Nye, J. S, "Corruption and Political Development: A Case-Benefit Analysis," in
The American Political Science Review, Vol.3 No.1, 1967.
World Bank, (1992), Governance and Development, Washington, DC;
World Bank.
In contemporary Nigeria, government has ultimately become inseparable from the day to day life of the citizens. This is because government is now involved in the overall social and economic development as against its traditional role of mere maintaining law and order. To accomplish the above, government requires a bureaucratic system that is designed to implement the decisions of political leaders. Political leaders make policy, the public bureaucracy executes it. If the bureaucracy lacks the capacity to implement the policies of the political leadership, those policies, however well intentioned, will not be implemented effectively.
Thus, this paper is concerned with the Nigerian bureaucratic set up as evinced in the Public Service with emphasis on the working relationship between career Accounting/Financial officers and the influences of political office holders. The paper investigates the linkage between Public and Civil Service on the one hand, and the co-operational, confrontational and conspiratorial associations between career officers and political appointees on the other hand. It also discusses the impact of corruption on Nigeria’s bureaucracy and proffers solutions.
Conceptualizing the Public and Civil Service
The Public Service represents the employees of government. This refers to the set of people responsible for the functioning of government through the implementation of government policies. Often times, the term is used to indicate a scope that is wider than that of the civil service. In this usage, public service means the totality of services that are organised under public authority. The term could also be used in a more fundamental sense to refer to the idea or ideal of rendering service to the public. They are those responsible for the functioning of government through the implementation of government policies.
The Public Service is made up of workers in government ministries, parastatals, specialised agencies and institutions. Suffice to state that all workers in Government establishment will qualify to be personnel of the Nigerian Public Service. By this, Accounting/Financial officers as well as other career officers and the bulk of political appointees are all members of the Public Service. However, within the Public Service, we have the Civil Service, which constitute the inner core, or the heart of the public service.
Four fundamental principles guide the Public Service all over the world. The principles are:
(i) Principle of equality of treatment: This requires all public service to recognize the
equality of citizens before the law. It also demands that persons in comparable situation vis-à-vis the administration shall be treated equally without any distinction whatsoever. It prohibits any discrimination based on place of origin, race, gender, religion, ethnic group, philosophical or political convictions.
(ii) Principle of legality: This stipulates that “public service shall be provided in strict compliance with the law” and that “administrative decisions shall be taken in conformity with existing regulations”.
(iii) Principle of neutrality: This requires the public service as a whole to remain neutral in respect to the government of the day. It also requires all administrations to respect and treat the principle as fundamental.
(iv) Principle of continuity: This provides that “public service shall be provided on an ongoing basis and in all its component parts, in accordance with the rules governing its operation”.
On the other hand, the Civil Service refers to the entire service of government which is divided into departments that caters for one particular subject or programme of Government. According to Adebayo (1999), “a generally accepted definition of the civil Service is that it comprises all servants of the State, other than those holding political appointments, who are employed in civil capacity and whose remuneration is paid out of money voted by the Legislature”. In a similar vein, Adebayo (1992) opined that it refers to “the body of permanent officials appointed to assist the political executive in formulating and implementing governmental policies (civil servants) and the ministries and departments within which specific aspects of government work are carried out”.
Though an integral part of the Public Service, the Civil Service is qualified to be described as the major instrument used by government to manage development. The Civil Service has four main characteristics as presented below:
Expertise – Civil Servant possess expert training for the job they are employed to do. In fact, they are recruited on the basis of their training and special qualifications
Impartiality and Political Neutrality – The civil servant ensures that his own political views do not influence the performance of his duties. He is impartial in his relationship with the political executive.
Anonymity – The Civil Servant does his work quietly behind the scenes. He does not take credit for the success of the ministerial responsibilities or blame for any failure or errors.
Permanence – The Civil Servant has a secure tenure in office until retirement. That is, the job of the civil servant does not depend on any government. He retains his job no matter how many times the government changes. This does not however stop him from being dismissed because of incapacity or misconduct.
In Nigeria as elsewhere, the Public Service and Civil Service are often used as synonyms whereas the two concepts are different in meaning although not much harm is done if the concepts are used interchangeably to reflect the affinity of their bureaucratic mandate.
THE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN CAREEER OFFICERS AND POLITICAL APPOINTEES – CO-OPERATION, CONFRONTATION OR CONSPIRACY.
Recent happenings in the annals of Nigeria shows the possibility that Political office holders and Accounting officers may have relationships that could either be co-operative, confrontational or conspiratorial.
Political office holders and accounting officers can interrelate in organizations so as to bring out the best in such institutions. Credible politicians and state officers can be diligent and sincere enough to an extent that they discharge their duties by putting the National Interest first in all they do. This sort of co-operative relationship will definitely rub off on the overall accomplishment of organizational goals and objectives as well as the welfare of the citizenry. This scenario is ever best for the political system because officers of the state will be dedicated and focused on their jobs. Hardly will any organization that experiences this sort of cordial relationship suffer any hitch in accomplishing set standards.
Nevertheless, there is also the possibility that accounting officers and political appointees could be at loggerheads over pecuniary considerations. This scenario could occur when the political appointee and the accounting officers work at cross purposes over the finance of their organization or parastatal. Often times, political appointees see whatever position they occupy as an avenue to clinch their own share of the national cake while accounting officers think differently. Once this happens, it is either that the political appointee struggles to make the accounting officer heed his directive on siphoning money or that the accounting officer faces threats on his/her job or placement. The above captivates a possible relationship that could best be described as confrontational.
Apart from the above, the relationship between political appointees and accounting officers could be expressly conspiratorial. In this realm, there is flagrant and deliberate abuse of best practices and due process all in a bid to steal public funds. It is possible that either the political appointee or the career civil servant stands as the initiator of the dirty deals or ideas but the long and short of the matter is that both parties conspire against the State and the welfare of her citizens. The history of governance process in Nigeria reflects active connivance between political appointees and career officers at all levels of administration –Federal, State and Local. The situation is such that political appointees and career officers embark on a stealing spree and also use accounting techniques to cover up their tracks.
The truth of the matter is that the entire Nigerian political process is hampered by corruption. Most times, political appointees see public offices as an avenue to siphone public funds for private ends. Since political appointees can not just dip their hands into public treasury, they therefore need the assistance of the accounting officers to accomplish their nefarious activities.
It must be stated that it is only in few instances that political office holders initiate the idea of stealing public funds. In actual fact, most of them are tutored in the act of stealing by accounting officers who possesses the requisite knowledge on where public funds are kept and how public funds can be diverted into private pockets.
Corruption is pandemic in Nigeria and it has certainly emerged as the major impediment to the development of democracy and the national economy. The scourge has grown to become a way of life of both the governor and the governed as it pervades all sectors of the state. In Nigeria, corruption transcends mere pecuniary exchange(s) as conceptualized in this paper as evidences abound on several private and official conduct that depicts glaring departure from honesty. Corruption is a serious problem affecting the whole sphere of Nigeria. While the corruption in the form of distortion of the government expenditures, pillaging of the State assets and bribery is widespread in the higher level of public offices between political office holders and accounting officials; the grand corruption in politics such as sale of party tickets, office posts and public contracts have been on the rise because politics has become the most remunerative career. Thus, a politician that ‘succeeds’ at the polls sees any office he/she occupies as a source of re-cooping his/her electoral expenses. Therefore in all circumstances public officers use their positions for private gains while long-term public interests are sacrificed.
In Nigeria, an understanding of what constitutes corruption transcends officialdom and discussing corruption broadly as a perversion or a change from good to bad will not be inappropriate. According to Lipset (2000) corruption is "efforts to secure wealth or power through illegal means – private gain at public expense; or a misuse of public power for private benefit. In addition, corruption is a behavior, which deviates from the formal duties of a public role, because of private [gains] - regarding (personal, close family, private clique, pecuniary or status gains. It is a behavior, which violates rules against the exercise of certain types of [duties] for private [gains] - regarding influence (Nye,1967). This definition includes such behavior as bribery (use of a reward to pervert the judgment of a person in a position of trust); nepotism (bestowal of patronage by reason of ascribed relationship rather than merit); and misappropriation (illegal appropriation of public resources for private uses). Also, corruption is an "anti-social behaviour conferring improper benefits contrary to legal and moral norms, and which undermine the authorities" to improve the living conditions of the people.
Although corruption exists in every society, it is entrenched and systemic in Nigeria. Corrupt practices are so common and pervading in the Nigeria’s public service to an extent that citizens find it difficult to develop an alternative to deal with it. Corruption is probably the main means to accumulate quick wealth in Nigeria. Corruption occurs in many forms, and it has contributed immensely to the poverty and misery of a large segment of the Nigerian population.
REMEDYING THE CHALLENGE(S)
The problems associated with the interactions of Accounting officers and Political Appointees are not insurmountable. For the purpose of this gathering, I will advocate (i) Administrative Reform and (ii) Good Governance.
i) Administrative Reform
According to Caiden (1960:65) administrative reform is the “artificial inducement of administrative need to improve on the status), artificial transformation (departure from existing arrangements and natural change processes), and administrative resistance (opposition is assumed). Administrative reform is political rather than merely organizational. It is “a political process designed to adjust the relationship between a bureaucracy and other elements in society or within the bureaucracy itself” (Montgomery, 1967:17). Succinctly put, administrative reform is:
Power politics in action; it contains ideological rationalization, fights for
control of areas, services, and people, political participants and
institutions… (Caiden, 1969:9).
Administrative reform has a “moral content” in that it seeks to create a
“better” system by removing faults and imperfections. It is usually
undertaken to change the status quo for the better. It aims at making the
administrative and political structures and procedures compatible with
broader goals. Administrative reform sets additional political values to be
used as yardsticks against which administrative performance may be
judged.
Administrative reform involves system diagnosis, that is, examination of
administrative systems to detect what is wrong and what can be improved.
Given that all systems are imperfect, system diagnosis is not difficult.
Getting the right solution is something else. As in medicine, the same
symptoms may have several possible causes, some of little consequence,
others serious.
From the foregoing, it becomes imperative that the Audit department of every government office must be strengthened to do its duty without fear or favour. This will discourage undue abuse of public privileges on the part of Political Appointees. Apart from the above, the career of accounting officers should not be at the mercy of Political Appointees. In other words, the Public/Civil Service should be strengthened to defend and protect officers from undue victimization in the course of discharging their duties.
Also, External Auditors should be opportune to peruse the account books of government agencies and parastatals. This will go a long way in corroborating and safeguarding the judgements and actions of accounting officers and Internal Auditors. Thus, the fear that a Politician could sack an un-cooperative accounting officer will be limited because sooner or later, the account profile will reveal the real facts behind the actions of the Accounting officers and the Political Appointees.
ii) GOOD GOVERNANCE
According to the World Bank, good governance is “… the exercise of political power to manage a nation’s affairs”. It is also regarded as synonymous with sound development (World Bank, 1992-1). Good governance could engender the functional and institutional prerequisites as well as the building
blocks of a good society. These include an efficient public service; an
independent judicial system and legal framework to enforce contracts; the
accountable administration of public funds ; an independent public auditor,
representative legislature; respect for the rule of law and human rights at all levels of government; a pluralistic institutional structure; and a free press. According to Leftwich (1993) the concept of “democratic good governance” has the three main levels of meaning which can be classified into systemic, political and administrative.
First, from a systematic angle, good governance is government that
embraces the formed institutional structure location of authoritarian
decision making in the modern state power. In this sense, good
governance denotes the structures of political and crucially, economic
relationships and rules by which the productive and distributive life of a
society is governed (Leftwich, 1993). In short, good governance means a “democratic capitalist” regime presided over by a minimal state which forms part of the wider governance of the New World Order.
Second, from a political sense, good governance presupposes a regime or
state which enjoys legitimacy and authority, derived from a democratic
mandate and built on the traditional liberal notion of a clear separation of
legislative, executive and judicial powers. Whether in a presidential or
parliamentary system, this presupposes a pluralist polity with a freely and
regularly elected representative legislature, with the capacity at least to
influence and check executive power (Leftwich, 1993)
Third, from an administrative point of view, good governance means an
efficient, independent, accountable and open audited public service which
has the bureaucratic competence to help design and implement
appropriate policies and manage whatever public sector there is. It also entails an independent judicial system to uphold the law and resolve
disputes arising in a largely free market economy. The administrative
aspect of good governance focuses on four main areas of public
administration in general and public sector management in particular. They
are:
- accountability, which in essence means holding officials responsible for
their actions;
- a legal framework for development, which means a structure of rules
and laws which provide clarity, predictability and stability for the private
sector, which are impartially and fairly applied to all, and which provide
the basis for conflict resolution through an independent judicial system;
- information, by which is meant that information about economic
conditions, budgets, markets and government intentions is reliable and
accessible to all, something which is crucial for private sector
calculations;
- insistence on transparency, which is basically a call for open
government, to enhance accountability, limit corruption and stimulate
consultative processes between government and private interests over
policy development (World Bank, 1992; Leftwich, 1993; Leftwich, 1993).
Viewed from the foregoing connotations of good governance, it is no
wonder that the concept is inseparable from the process of democratization.
CONCLUSION
The relationship between Accounting officers and Political Appointees goes a long way in determining the success or failure of government policies and projects. The most desirable is a cooperative relationship as it enhances efficient service delivery. Apart from the above, a conspiratorial or confrontational relationship is usually not in the best interest of the Public/Civil service. As much as possible, accounting officers should do their job to the best of their ability while political appointees should concentrate on their responsibilities rather than agitating to steal Public funds.
This conclusion is drawn from the fact that corruption is profoundly damaging to the national development whilst mal-governance can increase substantially the incidences of corruption. This latter possibility impacts a debilitating and reductionistic tendency on efforts at national development. It is difficult to overemphasize the damage done to democracy by corruption. Corruption can destroy a State, its political establishment as well as development advances built up over generations thereby retarding economic and social progress for decades to come. As argued above, it is almost impossible not to be corrupt in Nigeria as both the leaders and the citizens find it absolutely impossible to restrain from cutting corners. The situation was worsened by successive military regimes that institutionalize corruption. Nigeria is no doubt at a crossroad as domestic and external realities depict the country as very corrupt and poorly governed. Redressing this posture is a must and good governance remains the only enduring scaffold that can guarantee the demise of corruption in order to enhance an efficient public service delivery.
REFERENCES
Adebayo, A (1999) Power in Politics, Ibadan: Spectrum Books Limited
Adebayo, A (1992) Principles and Practice of Public Administration in Nigeria,
Ibadan: Spectrum Books
Caiden, G. (1969), Administrative Reform, Chicago, Aldine
Leftwich, A. (1993) “Governance, Democracy and Development in the Third
World”, Third world Quarterly, Vol. 14 (3): 605-624.
Lipset, Martin Seymour & Gabriel Lenz (2000) “Corruption, Culture and
Markets” in Culture matters, Lawrence E Harrisson and S.P
Huntington (eds) New York, Basic Books.
Montgomery, J.D. (1967), “Sources of Bureaucratic Reform: Problems of
Power, Purpose and Politics”, Bloomington, Indiana, Comparative
Administrative Group Occasional Paper
Nye, J. S, "Corruption and Political Development: A Case-Benefit Analysis," in
The American Political Science Review, Vol.3 No.1, 1967.
World Bank, (1992), Governance and Development, Washington, DC;
World Bank.
Comments
Post a Comment