Acta Universitatis Danubius. Administratio, Vol 6, No 2 (2014)

The Challenges of Good Governance, Accountability of Governmental Agencies and Development in Nigeria

Daniel E. GBEREVBIE¹_, Adeola I. OYEYEMI², Nchekwube. O. Excellence-Oluye³

Abstract: Some scholars have argued that the enhanced performance of governmental agencies in any nation is a product of good governance, accountability, transparency and trust, which in turn brings about the improvement in the living standard of the people. The implication of this position is that where good governance is absent, accountability of governmental agencies and development in such a society is likely to be affected negatively. With the analysis of secondary data, the paper examines the challenges of good governance, accountability of governmental agencies and development in Nigeria. It observes the manifestation of unethical behaviour amongst public officials as the major challenge hindering development in the country. It therefore recommend among others the need for the government to strengthen the existing anti-corruption agencies to enable them enforce proper ethical standard.

Keywords: transparency; trust; corruption; unethical behavior; public officials

1. Introduction

Researches have shown that for a government of any nation to experience enhanced development in political, economic and social sectors; there are required governmental agencies (different structures setup to perform specific functions in the society to meet the needs of citizens) to be put in place, and rules for these agencies to follow in terms of accountability and transparency; if the people are to trust government actions and benefit in terms of improved standard of living, and Nigeria is not an exception (Levi, 1998; Azeez, 2004; Jimoh, 2007; Henshaw, 2008; Gberevbie, 2011a; Imhonopi & Urim, 2014; Okebukola, 2014).

Nigeria became an independent nation on October 1^st 1960. At independence, the goal of the Nigerian government was to enhance the living standard of the people through the purposeful creation of agencies in the different sectors of the nation’s economy to cater for the specific needs of the people in terms of development. However, these agencies created by the government to facilitate development became patronage for political loyalty and conduit pipes for corruption in the society (Agweda, 2007; Chigbue, 2007; Akintoye & Opeyemi, 2014).

Over the years, the noble goals of development by the Nigerian government through the creation of public agencies have been truncated by the lack of accountability on the part of corrupt public officials entrusted to manage these agencies and lack of trust on the part of citizens about government actions. Henshaw (2008) argues that accountability entails that public officials who manage public organizations are made accountable to the public - both in policies and actions. It has been observed that “Nigeria’s inability to decisively tackle most development challenges such as poverty, unemployment and deplorable state of infrastructure have been largely attributed to bad governance in all its ramification” (TAFGN, 2011-2015, p. 5).

According to Ikotun (2004, p. 81), “one of the reasons usually advanced for corrupt practices in Nigeria is the absence of good and purposeful governance.” In the same vein, Odugbemi (2008) posits that a large body of research shows that in the longer term, good governance is associated with robust economic growth, lower income inequality, lower child mortality rate, political stability and lower illiteracy level. The questions that come to mind are: what is the relationship between good governance, accountability and development in a society? Is the existence of governmental agencies in the different sectors of the society necessary for development? How can transparency on the part of public officials and trust about government actions on the part of the people reduce corruption and enhance the performance of governmental agencies? Therefore, the main argument in this paper is that good governance is more likely to engender accountability and transparency in the workings of governmental agencies for development in Nigeria and hence brings about improvement in the living standard of the people.

1.1. Method and Structure

Secondary data obtained from relevant books, journals, seminar papers, magazines and newspapers were adopted to accomplish the work. The paper is structured into five sections. Section one serves as the introduction. Section two examines the concept of accountability, transparency and trust. Section three looks at the concept of good governance and development. Section four discusses the challenges of good governance, accountability of governmental agencies and development in Nigeria and section five gave suggestions on the way forward.

2. The Concepts Accountability, Transparency and Trust

2.1. Concept of Accountability

The concept of accountability is so crucial to development even at the group level and in the life of any nation to the extent that without it, society would perpetually remain underdeveloped. According to the public administration dictionary, accountability is a condition in which individuals who exercise power are constrained by external means and by internal norms (Chandler and Plano, 1988). The constrains engendered by these external means and internal norms could be seen as a watchdog and protective devise, which helps to guide and modify the behaviour of those saddled with the responsibilities to manage governmental agencies for the good of the people in a society.

On his part, Odugbemi (2008) sees accountability as the ability of citizens, civil society and the private sector to scrutinize public institutions and governments to hold them accountable. The above implies that where the opportunity to scrutinize the activities of public institutions – agencies and government is not available to the people, transparency or openness is more likely to be affected negatively and the citizens are bound to suffer from the inactions of such agencies of government. Therefore accountability and transparency on the part of public officials could be seen as catalyst for the realization of enhanced performance of governmental agencies for development in a society.

2.2. Concept of Transparency

The concept of transparency on the other hand is seen by Kim et al (2005) as implies that decisions are made and enforced in a manner that follows rules and regulations. They point out transparency means that information is freely available and directly accessible to those who will be affected by the decisions and that enough information is provided in easily understandable forms and media. They argue further that “a high level of transparency stimulates ethical awareness in public service through information sharing, which ultimately ensures accountability for the performance of individuals and organizations handling resources or holding public office.

In the same vein, Ekpe (2008) sees transparency as having to do with openness, truth and straight forwardness in the running of governmental affairs. Transparency or openness therefore enables citizens to be part of the formulation of governmental policies either through their representatives or public opinion expressed in the media and favourably responded to by the government, which in turn enhances the support of the people at implementation of such policies for development. It could be argued that the amount of support given to government policies by the people is a function of the level of trust the citizens have on the government and its policies. This implies that citizens are more likely to trust government and its policies more, where promises are kept by the government and its agencies, than where such promises are never fulfilled.

2.3. Concept of Trust

Rousseau et al (1998) see trust as a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behaviour of another. Levi (1998) points out perception that government is untrustworthy is a function not only of its failure to fulfill promises but also of evidence that government agents distrust those from whom they are demanding cooperation and compliance. According to Yang (2005), in order to improve citizens’ trust in government, one has to improve government’s trust in citizens. He argues further that trust is not a piece of knowledge that can be imparted, but it has something to do with habit, mind set and rooted beliefs.

The foregoing implies that government agencies are more likely to achieve their goals of enhanced performance for the improvement in the living standard of the people where accountability and transparency on the part of public officials, and trust about government agencies and their policies on the part of the people are the norms. Also, where the perception of citizens is favourably disposed towards a positive mind set and rooted beliefs about government and its actions; development is more likely to be the outcome. Therefore, it could be concluded that there is a relationship between accountability, transparency, trust and enhanced performance of governmental agencies for development in a society or nation.

3. The Concepts of Good Governance and Development

3.1. Concept of Good Governance

The concept of good’ in ‘governance’ is an appendage to the word ‘governance’ and it is seen as the process and institutions by which authority in a country is exercised (World Bank, 2004). Furthermore, governance includes how governments are selected, held accountable, monitored and replaced with an emphasis on the capacity of government to manage resources and respect the rule of law (World Bank, 2004; Boyte, 2005). Therefore, the word ‘good’ in governance connotes the proper exercise of authority, management of resources and respect for the rule of law in accordance to laid-down principles for the benefit of all in a society.

In this regard, Babawale (2007) sees good governance as the exercise of political power to promote the public good and the welfare of the people. He argues that good governance is the absence of lack of accountability in government, corruption, and political repression, suffocation of civil society and denial of fundamental human rights. He points out the attribute of good governance in any society to include: accountability, transparency in government procedures, high expectation of rational decisions, predictability in government behaviour, openness in government transactions, free flow of information, respect for the rule of law and protection of civil liberties, and press freedom.

Also, Brinkerhoff (2005) argues that governance extends beyond government action to address the role of citizens and the way groups and communities within society organize to make and implement decisions on matters of general concern. He observes that promoting good governance includes: reforms to increase accountability, transparency and responsiveness. Furthermore, good governance seeks to improve the capacity of the state, encompassing a variety of strategies to increase efficiency and effectiveness of government performance (Omona, 2010). This implies that accountability, transparency and responsiveness on the part of government and its officials are the hallmark of good governance in any society.

Ikotun (2004) argues that the concept of good governance characterize issues of performance in the management of a nation’s political, economic and social resources to enhance human capacity, social well-being and sustainable development in the society. In the same vein, Kofi Annan observes that good governance is vital for the protection of rights and the advancement of economic and social development (cited in Kim et al, 2005). Also, Ekpe (2008) argues that the purpose of good governance is to create a conducive climate for political and socioeconomic development and to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of development programmes in a society. He points out that the concept of good governance is used to characterize the interplay of the best practices in the administration of a state or nation for sustainable development. The foregoing shows the importance of good governance to development in a society. If that is the case, what then is development?

3.2. Concept of Development

The concept of development has been seen by different scholars as synonymous with improvement in the living standard of the people in any society. According to Oni & Bello (1987), development is a continuous process of positive change in the quality of span of life of a person or group of persons by the reason of access to better living condition. They went further to identify indicators of development to include: ability to feed, clothe and shelter oneself resulting from more income in one’s occupation or means of livelihood; ability to live much longer life as a result of the provision of health and medical facilities, prevention of diseases through better sanitation; ability to read, write and understand forces surrounding one through the provision of formal and informal education; and ability to participate meaningfully in political activities and in the policy making process at the governmental level.

On his part, Ireogbu (1996) sees development as a progressive realization of the fullest possible and balanced flourishing of both human and natural resources, the latter in view of the former. Oghator and Okoobo (2000) argue that development does not just involve increase in per-capita income or economic growth, but also includes sustainable improvements in the living standard of the people, which is ensured through the provision of gainful employment, coupled with the availability of social and economic infrastructures.

According to Ahmed (2007), development is a concept, which explains the general upliftment in the material, social and psychological conditions of a given human society. The above means that for development or improvement in the living standard of the people in a society to materialize, there is the need for good governance particularly in the area of proper management of resources for the benefit of all. Emphasizing the positive relationship between good governance and development, Zouheir M’Dhaffar – Tunisian Minister of Civil Service and Administrative Development affirms that good governance, efficient and effective public administration are necessary conditions to achieve sustainable development (cited in Kim et al, 2005).

4. Challenges of Governance, Governmental Agencies and Development in Nigeria

Scholars have argued that good governance in any nation is the relative absence of corrupt practices in all its ramifications (Ikotun, 2004; Babawale, 2007; TAFGN, 2011-2015). The implication of this position is that in a nation where corruption has almost become the norm, such a nation cannot claim to experience good governance. One of the reasons attributable to the unethical practice of corruption in a nation is that of weak leadership and lack of accountability of public officials. Commenting on the state of corruption in Nigeria, Ikotun (2004), points out that corruption has been converted into statecraft in Nigeria because there has been a failure of leadership and accountability in government. In this regard, Cohen (2008) argues that:

To create the conditions for good governance and fight corruption…a whole array of institutions has to be strengthened within each country…that core strategy is the one that requires much more than declarative intent. It requires a major shift that recognizes as necessary stakeholders in the efforts to achieve good governance and to win the fight against institutionally embedded corruption.

Also, Didia (2007) argues that corruption undermines quality of governance…and fundamentally runs contrary to accountability. Research has shown that corruption in the activities of public managers of governmental agencies, made it possible for Nigeria to suffer the theft of USD500 billion from her coffers within a space of 40 years of the nation’s 53 years of independence from Britain in 1960 by managers of governmental agencies (Falola, 1999; Amalu, 2006; Oke, 2010; Gberevbie, 2011b). No doubt, this is a huge amount of funds that could have gone into infrastructural development in a developing nation like Nigeria and provide essential services for the improvement in the living standard of the people.

Emphasizing the negative implication of corruption such as poverty and underdevelopment in the society, Salihu (2012, p. 60) posits that “when your neighbour’s stomach is filled, you are safer than when it is empty. Someday, the poor in Nigeria will have nothing to eat but the rich.” The above goes to support the argument that corruption is a catalyst for underdevelopment in any society. The following are some examples of governmental agencies where corruption - lack of accountability and transparency are manifested either in structure, composition or function, arising from the challenge of governance in Nigeria:

4.1. Independent Electoral Commission: Good governance is predicated on proper conduct of election as means of enthroning political leaders in a democratic society. To achieve this noble goal, agency of government is setup to carryout the proper conduct of elections. In Nigeria, the Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) was setup in 1998 by the Military Government of General Abdulsami Abubakar to conduct elections that should transfer power to a democratically elected government. The assignment of INEC eventually came to a reality with the handing over of political power to an elected government under the leadership of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo on 29^th May, 1999.

INEC was set-up according to the provision in section 153 (1) f (1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, with the sole power to conduct all elections to public offices in the country. One of the weaknesses of INEC is in its composition and structure. For instance, the structure of INEC is made-up of the Chairman, 12 Commissioners at the federal level and 36 Resident Commissioners with each one presiding over a state of the Nigerian Federation of 36 states. The 1999 Federal Republic of Nigeria Constitution (FGNC) gave the President of the federation the powers to appoint the chairman, 12 Commissioners at the federal level and the 36 Resident Commissioners at the state level, although such appointments must be rectified by the Nigerian House of Senate (FGNC, 1999).

The danger in this arrangement is that where a ruling political party secures majority of seats at the House of Senate (as it is currently in Nigeria); the President’s choice of nominees into INEC could easily be approved to support the course of the ruling party at subsequent elections. This constitutional provision has created serious doubt about INEC’s function at conducting free and fair elections in Nigeria. Furthermore, Justice Uais’ Report on Electoral Reforms (2008) points out that the classification of INEC as a federal executive body in section 153 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria brings it under the oversight of the executive arm of government, which makes it improper to conduct free and fair elections.

Also, the Justice Uwais’ (2008) report on the electoral reforms observed that the funding of INEC through the executive arm of government renders it vulnerable to manipulation and undue influence by the executive to the detriment of the ‘opposition’ during elections. According to Saliu & Lipede (2008), for democracy to thrive in Nigeria, the independence of INEC is a desirable requirement. They argue that the agency must not only profess to be independent; its transparency must be very clear to all politicians and the citizens to avoid crisis of confidence in its actions before, during and after elections.

In addition, there is the issue of corrupt practices amongst INEC officials that have continued to create doubt in Nigerians as to the ability of INEC to conduct free and fair elections in the country. Commenting on this negative development, the Chairman of INEC, Professor Atahiru Jega in an address to staff, said: “many of us have not discharged our responsibilities with integrity, honesty and efficiency as required of us” (Abubakar, 2011, p. 1-2). Also, an INEC National Commissioner and Chairman of INEC Electoral Institute, Professor Lai Olurode, said: “Nigeria’s moral threshold has been weakened. Though Nigeria is rich in a material sense, it is poor in ethical sense. With such a profile, the prospect of free, fair and credible elections is ominous” (Abubakar, 2011, pp. 1-2). The foregoing implies that a society with an electoral body that is properly constituted, organized and able to conduct elections in a free and fair manner is more likely to experience a proper democratic ethos required for the enthronement of credible and accepted leaders capable of bringing about good governance and development than a society without it. This means that there is a relationship between the functions of the governmental agency of INEC, election of credible leaders, good governance and development in Nigeria.

4.2. Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation: The petroleum sector – oil and gas is so vital to the nation’s economy to the extent that it currently accounts for 95 percent of Nigeria's foreign exchange earnings and about 65 percent of its budgetary revenues (Nigeria-Overview of economy online, 2012; Soyinka, 2012). The figure stated above makes the petroleum sector to be a lifeline of Nigeria’s economy. As a result, the Federal Government of Nigeria established the Nigerian National Petroluem Corporation (NNPC) as a governmental agency to cater for all matters relating to the petroluem sector in the country with a view to promoting development.

Due to the unethical behaviour of corrupt practices in the nation’s petroleum sector as it relates to payment of subsidy on petroleum products in Nigeria, the Federal Government through the Nigerian Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources ordered an audit investigation into the activities of NNPC. This was carried out by an internationally recognized audit firm – KPMG, which revealed that the cost of subsidy payment on petroleum products not consumed by end users due to loses from theft and even those not supplied for use in Nigeria between 2007 and 2009 amounted to NGN11.8 billion or USD76.13 million (Agbo, 2012). This huge sum could have gone into the development of infrastructure and improve the living standard of the people.

4.3. Independent Corrupt Practices Commission: Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) was an agency established by Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s democratic government in 2000. The body was established to enforce ethical standards in the financial sector (public and private) of the Nigerian economy. ICPC was put in place and empowered by the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act of 2000. Section 3(14) of the Act ensures the independence of the commission as a legal entity, not subject to any other authority (ICPORO, 2000). However, there is a major defect in the law establishing the body. The defect has to do with the role of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) in the enforcement and prosecution of offenders.

Sections 26 and 61 (3) of the Act establishing ICPC vested the powers to initiate prosecution for an offence on the Attorney-General of the Federation or any other person or authority to whom he may delegate his authority against the offender, which must be in any High Court so designated by the Chief Judge of a State or Chief Judge of the Nigerian Federation (ICPORO, 2000). This clause has made it almost impossible for ICPC to successful prosecute the public officials found to indulge in corrupt practices, because different AGF for the reasons best known them would prefer not to pursue corrupt charges against public officials seen to have committed financial crime against the country and the people (Ali, 2007). This situation has brought about hindrances in the ability of governmental agencies to achieve their goals of development in terms of improving the living standard of people through proper management of public resources.

4.4. Delta State of Nigeria Anti-kidnapping Squad: This is an agency of government put in place by the Delta State Government of Nigeria to solve the problem of kidnapping, that has created so much fear in the minds of the people over the years. Unfortunately the body has failed to live up to expectations of the government and the people in overcoming the challenge of kidnapping. On the 4^th April, 2012, the Governor of state, Dr. Emmanuel Udughan, after the weekly State Security Council meeting at Asaba, the state capital, announced to newsmen, the arrest of the Chairman of the Delta State Anti-kidnapping Squad, Chief Superintendent of Police, Dickson Adeyemi and four other members of the squad.

They were arrested because it was discovered and confirmed that the squad members that supposed to prevent kidnapping of people in the state actually aided kidnapping and demanded ransom from the family members of the victims. Consequently, the anti-kidnapping squad members were arrested and transferred to Abuja, Nigeria’s administrative capital for interrogation and prosecution (Odueme, Adeleye & Emmanuel, 2012). There is no doubt, that this is another clear case of unethical behaviour of public officials, which is capable of discouraging genuine investors from coming to do business in Nigeria.

4.5. Nigerian Police Pension Fund: This is another governmental agency put in place by the Federal Government to oversee the successful implementation of Police pension. However, in the month of March 2012, the Nigerian House of Senate – Upper Chamber of the Nigeria’s National Assembly, setup an Adhoc Committee to investigate corruption in the Nigerian Police Pension Fund Administration. While testifying about the pension fund mismanagement to the Senate Adhoc Committee, the former Head of Service of the Nigerian Civil Service, Stephen Oronsaye revealed that “top government officials were known to have falsified documents in order to siphon money from the pension fund.” He disclosed that during his tenure as Head of the Nigerian Civil Service, it was discovered that the fraud was perpetrated right from the office of the Accountant-General of the Nigerian Federation. According to him, “The Federal Government of Nigeria spent NGN5 billion or USD32.26 million monthly as pension when in the actual sense, pension expenses ought to be NGN1 billion or USD6.5 million only (Onwukwe, 2012).

The outcome of the Nigerian Senate Adhoc Committee on the probe of corruption in the management of Police Pension Fund in Nigeria led to the arrest of the Director, Pension Administration in the Office of the Head of Service of the Nigerian Federation, Dr. Sani Shuaibu and 31 other top officials by the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) for the theft of NGN4.5 billion or USD29.03 million belonging to the Nigerian Police Pension Fund. As a result, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, Nigeria’s capital city ordered the EFCC on the 26^th March, 2012 to seize 13 properties belonging to Dr. Shuaibu that were illegally acquired by him from the proceed of the illegally acquired wealth from the pension fund. The trial revealed that Dr. Shuaibu and 31 others abused their position as public officials to use ‘ghost’ pensioners to pay NGN2 million and NGN3 million or USD12, 903 and USD19, 354 into their private accounts monthly and diversion of same amount through award of fictitious contracts to companies which they secretly owned and managed (Abuh, & Musari, 2012; Adewole, 2012).

The painful aspect of this whole scenario is that these people that stole the pension funds are the same people put in-charge to administer the funds for the benefit of all Police retirees in Nigeria, only for them to turn around and be the very people to undermine the process due to personal greed.

4.6. Federal Capital Territory Administration: Even the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) Abuja; Nigeria’s Administrative Headquarter is not spared of unethical behaviour amongst its staff. In 2009, 519 cases of forged land documents were reported by the Federal Minister in-charge of FCTA (Daka, 2009). The forged land documents were carried out by the staff of FCTA who supposed to administer the land on behalf of the Federal Government. This situation is even more than enough to discourage genuine investors and thereby hinder development in the country.

4.7. Bureau of Public Enterprise: In a bid to transfer the burden of subvention and poor performance of Public Enterprises (PEs) off the shoulder of government to private sector management, the Bureau of Public Enterprise (BPE) was established to handle the privatization of government owned companies in Nigeria. Just before leaving office on 29^th May, 2007, former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s government sold 51 percent of government shares in Port-Harcourt refineries (two of the four government refineries) managed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), to Bluestar Oil Consortium Limited owned by some Nigerian businessmen. The sale was however truncated by the late President Umar Musa Yar’Adua’s government in June 2007 following a week long agitation in a general strike called by the labour movement and the Nigerian Civil Society groups. The reason for the agitation was that the sale of the refineries did not follow proper procedure. It was discovered that the process of privatization of the 51 percent of government shares in the refineries by BPE was doubtful, lacked transparency and the amount paid by Bluestar Consortium Limited was below the market value (Ezeobi & Onwue-Menyi, 2007).

Alarmed, by the poor performance of BPE in its responsibilities as government agency; the Nigerian House of Senate set up an Adhoc Committee to probe the activities of the privatization implementing agency between 1999 and 2011. The committee discovered that the Aluminium Smelter Company of Nigeria, located at Ikot Abasi, Akwa Ibom State, whose construction was completed by the Federal Government in 1997 with a 540 Megawatts capacity electricity power plant for the sum of USD3.2 billion was valued by BPE in-house consultants for USD250 million, but was eventually sold by BPE to a Russian company for only USD130 million (Philips, 2011).

Based on the report of the Senate Adhoc Committee, the house subsequently approved among others that: (a) Former Director-Generals of BPE, including Nasir El Rufai, Dr Julius Bala and Mrs Irene Chigbue should be reprimanded by the National Council on Privatization headed by the Vice-President, Namadi Sambo for the negative roles they played while they took charge of BPE as Director-Generals; (b) The present Director-General, Ms. Bolanle Onagoruwa should be removed from office for gross incompetence in the management of the BPE and illegal, and fraudulent sale of the five percent Federal Government’s share in the Eleme Petro-Chemical Company Limited, Port-Harcourt – Rivers State worth NGN4.3 billion or USD27 million without approval by the National Council on Privatization.

5. The Way Forward

Governmental agencies no doubt are the bedrock for development in the different sector of a nation’s economy. So, their existence ought to serve as catalyst for development in the society. However, the Nigerian situation is quite different because of unethical behaviour of corruption amongst public officials engaged to manage these agencies of government. To achieve the benefits derivable from the embellishment of governmental agencies for development, the following are suggested:

First, the laws establishing the various anti-corruption agencies in Nigeria should be reviewed and amended to make these bodies truly independent of the Attorney-General of the Nigerian Federation and other similar bodies. This will enable the anti-corruption agencies effectively carry out their assigned task of the fight against corruption and hence make funds available for development in Nigeria.

Second, the Federal Government of Nigeria should avoid a situation whereby governmental agencies are seen as platform for rewarding political loyalist in terms of appointment. Competent people with proven integrity should be appointed to manage these governmental agencies with a view to achieving their goals for development in the country.

Third, the process of appointing people into public offices should be made transparent. Transparencies in governmental activities promote trust in the minds of the people about government and its actions, which in turn brings about the people’s support of government policies at implementation.

Fourth, INEC as an independent body setup to conduct elections in Nigeria as a means of enthroning political leaders should be made to be truly independent in structures, appointments and functions. This could be done through the amendment of the relevant sections of the Nigerian constitution. The powers to appoint INEC officials should be removed from the President of the federation and its funding committed to the nation’s consolidated funds as it is with the Nigerian Judiciary to guarantee its independence for performance.

Finally, penalties for the perpetrators of unethical behaviour of corrupt practices should be made much more severe to serve as deterrent against future occurrence. The government should summon the courage and political will to punish offenders without fear or favour, if the fight against corruption in Nigeria is to yield its desired result of corrupt-free society.

6. References

Abubakar, M. (2011, March 8). Jega to INEC Officials: No more Room for Misconduct. Guardian Newspaper, pp. 1-2.

Abuh, A. & Musari, A. (2012, March 27). EFCC Seizes Pensions Ex-Boss Properties over NGN4.5 billion Scam. The Guardian Newspaper, pp. 1-2 &4.

Adewole, L. (2012, March 27). NGN4.5 Billion Person Scam: Court Orders Seizure of Director’s Properties.” The Nigerian Tribune Newspaper, pp. 1&4.

Agbo, A. (2012, January 30). The Rot in NNPC. Tell Magazine, pp. 56-58.

Agweda, T. O. (2007). The Imperative of Leadership in Governance: The Nigerian Experience. In A. S. Akpotor, Afolabi, A. O., Aigbokhaevbolo, M. O., Iganiga, B. O. and Odiagbe, O. S. (Eds.) Cost of Governance in Nigeria: An Evaluative Analysis. Ekpoma: Faculty of Social Sciences, Ambrose Alli University Publishing House. pp. 175-187.

Ahmed, H. (2007, July). Strategies for Accelerated Rural and Community Development at Local Government Level. The Nigerian Journal of Administrative Studies, 5(3). pp. 64-77.

Akintoye, V. A. & Opeyemi, O. A. (2014). Prospects for Achieving Sustainable Development through the Millennium Development Goals in Nigeria. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 3(1), 33-46.

Ali, Y. O. (2007) “The Anti-graft war.” In H. Saliu, E. Amali & R. Olawepo (eds) Nigeria’s reform programme: Issues and challenges. Ibadan: Vantage Publishers. pp. 511-540.

Amalu, C. (2006, October 17). Over NGN60 Trillion was Stolen by Nigerian Past Leaders – EFCC. The Vanguard Newspaper, p. 1.

Azeez, A. (2004). Economic Development and Democratic Sustenance. In H. A. Saliu (Ed.) Nigeria Under Democratic Rule (1999-2003). Ibadan: University Press, 1. pp. 32-44.

Babawale, T. (2007). Good Governance, Democracy and Democratic Best Practices: Prescriptions for Nigeria. Lagos: Centre for Black and African Arts and Civilization Publications Monograph Series. pp. 7-16.

Boyte, H. C. (2005, September/October). Reframing Democracy: Governance, Civil Agency and Politics.” Public Administration Review. 65(5). pp. 536-546.

Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2005, August). Digital Diasporas and Governance in Semi-Authoritarian States: The Case of the Egyptian Copts. Public Administration and Development. 25(3), pp. 193-204.

Chandler, R. C. & J. C. Plano (1988). The Public Administration Dictionary. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.

Chigbue, I. N. (2007). Privatizing the National Economy: The Journey so Far. In H. Saliu, E. Amali & R. Olawepo (Eds.) Nigeria’s Reform Programme: Issues and Challenges. Ibadan: Vantage Publishers. pp. 419-444.

Cohen, D. (2008). The Power of Organized Citizens: Fighting for Public Integrity. In S. Odugbemi & T. Jacobson (Eds.) Governance Reforms: Under Real-World Conditions – Citizens, Stakeholders, and Voice. Washington DC: The World Bank. pp. 287-301.

Daka, T. (2009, April 28). Federal Capital Government Hands over Land Fraud to EFCC. The Guardian Newspaper, p.96.

Didia, P. O. (2007). Theoretical Perspective to Understanding Corruption in Nigerian Economy. In A. D. Aina (Ed.) Corruption and the Challenge of Human Development. Ilesa-Remo: Babcock University Press.

EFCC (2004). Commission Fact Sheet: Information Handbook 1, Economic and Financial Crime Commission. Abuja, Nigeria.

Ekpe, A. N. (2008, July-December). Effective Management of Socio-political Conflicts in Akwa-Ibom State: Chief Godswill Akpabio’s Effort. The Public Administration, 2(2). pp. 63-70.

Ezeobi, O. & O. Onwue-Menyi (2007, June 24). Why We Called off Strike – Labour. Sunday Punch Newspaper, pp. 1&13.

Falola, T. (1999). The History of Nigeria. London: Greenwood Press.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (FGNC) (1999). Constitution. Abuja: Government Press.

Gberevbie, D. E. (2011a). Leadership, the Financial Sector and Development in Nigeria. Inkanyiso: Journal of Humanity and Social Sciences, 3(2). pp. 149-158.

Gberevbie, D. E. (2011b). An Appraisal of Staff Recruitment and Retention Policies of Delta State Civil Service in Nigeria. Bulletin: Petroleum-Gas University of Ploiesti, Economic Series, LXIII (1). pp. 16-28.

Henshaw, M. (2008, July/December). Understanding the Roles of Elected and Career Officers for Effective Local Government Administration. The Public Administrator, 2(2). pp. 8-20.

Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPORO) Act (2000). Independent Corrupt Practices Commission. Abuja, Nigeria.

Ikotun, A. (2004). Ethics in the Nigerian Public Service: An Analytical Perspective. Lagos: Nugalitho Productions.

Imhonopi, D. O. & Urim, U. M. (2014). Industrial Development in Nigeria: Achieving the Brass Tacks. In D. O. Imhonopi & U. M. Urim (Eds.) Trajectory to Industrial Development in Nigeria. Ibadan: Cardinal Prints. pp. 1-12.

Ireogbu, P. (1996). The Kpim of Politics, Communalism; Towards Justice in Africa. Owerri: International University Press.

Jimoh, A. (2007). Introducing Nigeria’s Reform Programme. In H. Saliu, E. Amali & R. Olawepo (Eds.) Nigeria’s Reform Programme: Issues and Challenges. Ibadan: Vantage Publishers. pp. 3-14.

Justice Muhammadu, L. Uwais (2008, September). Report on Electoral Reforms in Nigeria. The Constitution: A Journal of Constitutional Development, 9(3), 50-153.

Kim, P. O., Haligan, J., N. Cho, C. H. Oh & A. M. Eikenberry (2005, November/December). Toward Participatory and Transparent Governance: Report on the Sixth Global Forum on Reinventing Government. Public Administration Review, 65(6), pp. 646-654.

Levi, M. (1998). A State of Trust. In V. Braithwaite and M. Levi (Eds.) Trust and Governance. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. pp. 77-101.

Nigeria-Overview of Economy Online (2012). Retrieved from website - http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Africa/Nigeria-OVERVIEW-OF-ECONOMY.html

Nwankwo, J. (2012, March 30). Perm Sec, Five others Arraigned, Remanded over pension Fund Scam. The Daily Independent Newspaper, pp. 1-2.

Odugbemi, S. (2008). Public Opinion, the Public Sphere, and Quality of Governance. In S. Odugbemi & T. Jacobson (Eds.) Governance Reforms: Under Real-World Conditions – Citizens, Stakeholders, and Voice. Washington DC: The World Bank. pp. 15-37.

Odueme, S., Adeleye, S. & Emmanuel, H. (2012, April 5). Delta State Anti-kidnapping Squad Boss, Four others Arrested. The Daily Independent Newspaper, pp. 1-2.

Oghator, E. & Okoobo, R. (2000, June). Towards Sustainable Development in less Developed Countries: Foreign Assistance Revisited. The Nigerian Journal of Administrative Science, 5(10). pp. 201-208.

Ojiabor, O. (2011, November 24). Senate Panel Seeks Sack of BPE Boss: Recommends Reprimand of EL Rufai, Bala, Chigbue. The Nations Newspaper, p. 11.

Oke, L. (2010). Democracy and Governance in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. In A. A. Agagu, L. A. Afinotan, D. Arowolo &. Lawal, T. (Eds.) Public administration in Nigeria. Akure: Alabi-Eyo and Co. Ltd. pp. 312-322.

Okebukola, P. A. (2014). Human Capital Development and Innovation. In T. Abioye, C. Awonuga & A. Amuwo (Eds.) Leadership and Innovation in Africa’s Development Paradigm. Ota: Covenant University Press. pp. 29-48.

Okereocha, C. (2011, August 29). The Plot Against Privatization. Tell Magazine, pp. 32-37.

Omona, J. (2010). Meeting the Millennium Development Goals’ Targets: Proposed UN Global Government Challenges of the 21^st Century. Journal of Social Development in Africa, 25(1), pp. 129-159.

Oni, S. B. & Bello, I. O. (1987). Community Development: The Backbone for Promoting Socio-economic Growth. Zaria: Gaskiya Corporation.

Onwukwe, D. (2012, March 27). Pension Fraud: The Price of Blood Money. The Daily Sun Newspaper, p. 19.

Philips, A. (2011, August 22). BPE’s Privatization Mess. Tell Magazine, pp. 39-41.

Rousseau, D. M., Sim, B., S. Ronald, S. Burt & Colin, Camerer (1998). Not So Different After All: A Cross-discipline View of Trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), pp. 393-404.

Salihu, A. (2012, March 26). The Corruption of Potbellies. Tell Magazine, p. 60.

Saliu, H. A. & Lipede, A. (2008). Constraints of Democracy in Nigeria. In H. A. Saliu, I. H. Jimoh, N. Yusuf & E. O. Ojo (Eds.), Perspectives on Nation-building and Development in Nigeria: Political and Legal Issues. Lagos: Concept Publications. pp. 120-151.

Soyinka, A. (2012, January 16).Tackling the Subsidy Mess. Tell Magazine, pp. 46-57.

TAFGN - Transformation Agenda of the Federal Government of Nigeria (2011-2012). Summary of Federal Government’s Key Priority Policies, Programmes and Projects. National Planning Commission, Abuja. pp. 5-27.

The Punch Newspaper Editorial (2011, November 29). Reviving Privatization Programme. The Punch Newspaper, p. 18.

Ughegbe, L. and Musari, A. (2012, March 30). Perm Sec, Five others in Custody over NGN32.8 Billion Pension Fund. The Guardian Newspaper, pp. 1&4.

Utomwen, D. (2011, August 22). Bureau of Sleaze. The News Magazine, pp. 46-47.

World Bank (2004). Reforming Public Institutions and Strengthening Governance. Retrieved from www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance

Yang, K. (2005, May/June). Public Administrator’s Trust in Citizens: A Missing Link in Citizen Involvement Efforts. Public Administration Review, 65(3), pp. 273-285.

Refbacks

• There are currently no refbacks.