Lesotho says No to corporate corruption!
As we publish this edition of ANC TODAY, the 2006 annual Southern African Development Community (SADC) Summit will be taking place in the Kingdom of Lesotho. Hopefully, as planned, the delegates will have an opportunity to visit the Lesotho Highland Water Project and gain the necessary insight about this enormous and awe-inspiring engineering construct, with all its positives and negatives.
If time allows, hopefully the delegates would also be exposed to the instructive story of the corruption that is now part of the history of this major project, and the extraordinary story of what the Government of Lesotho has done to confront this curse. This is a story that should be of interest to the rest of Africa as well.
The 2003 2nd African Union Assembly of Heads of State and Government, held in Maputo, Mozambique, adopted the African Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (ACPCC). The Convention provides that it would come into force once it is ratified by 15 African States Parties, and the instruments of ratification deposited with the AU at its Headquarters in Addis Ababa.
Algeria deposited these instruments at the AU Headquarters in Addis Ababa a little more than a month ago, on 6 July this year. Because it was the 15th African Member State to do so, this means that the ACPCC has now come into force, binding all Member States of the AU to take the necessary steps to accede to it, and ensure its implementation.
For its part, Lesotho ratified the Convention on 26 October 2004 and deposited the ratification instruments in Addis Ababa on 5 November 2004. This was a full year ahead of our own processes as the Republic of South Africa. We ratified the Convention on 11 November 2005, and deposited the ratification instruments on 7 December 2005.
The day after the ACPCC came into force, on 7 July this year, the website "Onlinenigeria: Daily News" said: "The Convention requires African government officials to declare their assets, adhere to ethical codes of conduct, provide citizens' access to government information about budget spending and to protect those who blow the whistle on state fraud...The convention establishes procurement standards, accounting standards, transparency in the funding of political parties and recognises the need for civil society participation. It also requires African countries to establish as criminal offences, bribery, diversion of property, trading in influence, illicit enrichment, money laundering and concealment of property."
The Government of Lesotho had to deal with the challenges posed by these requirements of the ACPCC long before this Convention was adopted by the AU. This was occasioned by corrupt activities initiated by some of the construction companies involved in the Highland Water Project. Put simply, some of these companies took the decision that they would offer bribes at least to the CEO of the Project, a citizen of Lesotho, to ensure their participation in this multi-billion-dollar Project.
In a speech at the South African Institute of International Affairs on 19 July 2004, the Attorney General of Lesotho, Mr Fine Maema, said: "An audit by the accountants Ernst & Young in the early 1990s uncovered irregularities in the LHDA, (Lesotho Highlands Development Authority), the parastatal charged with administering the LHWP (Lesotho Highlands Water) Project, and more particularly the Chief Executive, Mr M E Sole. This in turn led to disciplinary hearings against Mr Sole and, after his dismissal, civil proceedings against him. During these latter proceedings bank records were discovered in Lesotho and South Africa which in turn pointed to Mr Sole having bank records in Switzerland.
"The (Lesotho) law office then...appl(ied) for the release of Mr Sole's bank records in Switzerland. This application was later expanded to cover other bank accounts, i.e. those of various contractors and consultants engaged on the water project and also three middlemen through whom the funds were channelled. These applications were all granted by the local examining magistrate in Zurich. All those holding bank accounts then appealed her decision firstly to the High Court in Zurich and thereafter to the Swiss Federal Court. Our lawyers were successful in these appeals and in June 1999 the bank records were delivered in Maseru.
"The picture that then emerged was of corruption quite unprecedented in the history not only of Lesotho but, at that time, also of Southern Africa. Over a number of years and in fact since shortly after the inception of this project overseas contractors and consultants had been paying enormous amounts of money to Mr Sole through intermediaries in Switzerland. These payments coincided with these contractors/consultants seeking contracts on the water project. The contractors/consultants include those engaged on all the major phases of the water project, including the building of the Katse Dam, the transfer tunnels taking the water to South Africa, the hydro-power station, and so on.
"Prosecutions then followed, firstly against Mr Sole in July 1999 and thereafter against the others involved, that is the contractors/consultants paying either Sole directly or through intermediaries as well as the intermediaries themselves. In December 1999 the accused were all served with a High Court indictment, the joint trial being set down before Mr Acting Justice Cullinan, a former Chief Justice of Lesotho...Every legal stratagem was employed on behalf of the contractors/consultants, as well as Mr Sole, to derail these prosecutions."
Despite these legal stratagems, and in spite of the severely limited resources of the Kingdom of Lesotho, the Lesotho law-enforcement authorities managed to secure convictions against the wrong-doers. The Attorney General quoted the Chief Justice of Lesotho as having said: "Thus having cast caution to the winds and shown reckless disregard for the peace of mind enjoyed from turning an honest penny, world renowned companies were put to shame when they were caught with their hand in the cookie jar. The lead companies in the who's who of the corporate brotherhood of the world found themselves in the seething quagmire of shame and scandal - naked without a fig leaf to hide their glaring nudity."
Attorney General Maema also said: "The first prosecution was against the recipient of the bribes, Mr M E Sole. This trial was concluded in 2003 with Mr Sole being convicted on a number of counts of bribery and sentenced to an effective 18 years imprisonment, (which was reduced on appeal to 15 years)...The second case involved the international engineering consultancy from Canada, Acres International where Acres was convicted of bribing Mr Sole and sentenced to a fine of some...R15 million...The third case is that against the largest engineering consultancy in Germany, Lahmeyer International. The trial Court convicted Lahmeyer on 7 counts of bribery and sentenced it to a fine of R10.6 million...which on appeal was increased to R12 million...The Court of Appeal in its judgment addressed specific comments to the International Community and particularly the funding agencies."
Of course what these bribes were about is securing contracts with the aim of making as much profit as possible. What went on suggests that for some business people, this becomes such an overriding preoccupation that all sense of morality, of ethical conduct, is abandoned, deliberately and consciously.
In an article entitled "Enron Ethics", Robert W. Tracinski wrote: "A writer in the New York Times quotes a colleague's summary of the true 'Vision and Values' statement of any big corporation: 'Why not just come right out and say it? 'We will strive to make as much money as we can without going to prison.''
"As philosopher Harry Binswanger points out, the premise behind this statement is that lying, cheating, and stealing is the best way to make money and be selfish - and the fear of prison is the only disincentive for wholesale fraud and looting. Professor Binswanger goes on to point out that this statement reflects a whole approach to morality. To be principled and moral, in this view, means to sacrifice one's interests by, say, going into social work or taking a vow of poverty. The logical flip-side is that to be self-interested, to pursue wealth and happiness - well, that requires no principles or morality at all, just a random, range-of-the-moment grab for whatever one can get one's hands on.
"This is the predominant moral outlook today, especially on the left. Ironically, Enron seems to have implemented this view of morality to a T. To enrich themselves, Enron's executives lied to shareholders and cooked the books to produce fake profits, ignoring the company's long-term financial problems."
The British "Guardian" commented on 30 November 2001 that, "Losers apart, there will be many dancing on Enron's grave. In the US, it had attracted a degree of notoriety for its part in the bungled privatisation of California's electricity, which led to black-outs earlier this year. But it was in the developing world that Enron had a near unparalleled reputation for corporate irresponsibility. It has been the only company to warrant an entire Amnesty International report, a chilling catalogue of human rights abuses from India to Latin America. The anti-corporate movement accused Enron of subverting the political process of virtually every country in which it operated to advance its interests. Enron was in the thick of one of India's biggest corruption scandals in which huge sums were paid to politicians in the privatisation of electricity firms."
In a Commentary in "BusinessWeek" on 11 April 2002, Heesun Wee said: "After the dust from the Enron collapse settles, one positive outcome may arise. CEOs, take note: The energy trader's demise provides an important lesson in the value - the necessity, really - of having a corporate conscience and a culture built around knowing the difference between right and wrong.
"It's tempting to brush aside business ethics as a nebulous, well-intentioned subject suitable for Business School 101 but of little practical value in the real world. Big mistake. A 2000 survey by the Ethics Resource Center found that 43% of respondents believed their supervisors don't set good examples of integrity. The same percentage felt pressured to compromise their organisation's ethics on the job. That's a startling number, two years before Enron imploded."
To come back to our continent, the "Financial Times" of 8 August 2006 reported that, "The investigation by the UK's Serious Fraud Office into an alleged Nigerian bribery scandal involving a Halliburton subsidiary is the latest twist in a case that exemplifies the lucrative, murky and highly political world of western oil interests in Africa...
"The SFO probe comes after criticism that London was doing little on the case even though a British-based company and a British lawyer were allegedly at the centre of a plot to pay more than $170 million of bribes to win $7 billion of building contracts.
"(Commenting on notes taken at a meeting of the companies under investigation), Halliburton itself has admitted that the notes show the building consortium had 'considered payments to Nigerian officials'...The big money, high politics and strategic oil interests involved in the SFO's case could be a quintessential test of the credibility of Britain's anti-corruption pledge."
In the speech to which we have already referred, the Attorney General of Lesotho also said: "Bribery involves two parties, the briber and the bribee. Therefore in a given situation it is normally difficult to establish who initiated the corrupt transaction. There seems to be a perception in the first world, in casu in the context of construction contracts, that in the third world the initiative comes from the bribe taker rather than the bribe giver. In the African context this has been described as 'the Africa problem'. This has however not been the evidence in the present prosecutions in Lesotho. The evidence has shown that Mr Sole's first Swiss accounts were opened for him by the intermediary acting on behalf of French contractors...
"The purpose of these prosecutions has not only been to get convictions. The objective has also been to get to the bottom of this problem and to seek to prevent it from recurring. To this end overtures have been made to various persons or entities involved to rather cooperate with the prosecuting authorities, in return for possible exemption from prosecution. All this has fallen on deaf ears. Even Mr Sole, now languishing in jail, has chosen to remain silent. Perhaps the reason why no-one speaks out is because those that know about the bribery normally have something to hide themselves. It may perhaps not be this particular bribery transaction, but another...Those involved in bribery tend to stick together...
"What needs to be done then is firstly to create an atmosphere in which bribery is not allowed to thrive. One must make it known to the ordinary people that those involved in bribery are not latter day Robin Hoods but are actually stealing mostly from the poor in the country, because the bribes paid out could have been utilised for their benefit. This, I am happy to say, is indeed a perception that is starting to take hold in Lesotho...
"The lesson to be learnt is that international corporations wherever they operate, and particularly in Africa, must make their profits with integrity. If they do not, we will go after them and we will urge the World Bank and others to debar them. A clear message coming from the Mountain Kingdom is that 'the rules of the game have changed; it is no longer business as usual.'"
All of us as Member States of the African Union would do well to draw on Lesotho's example and experience of challenging corporate immorality, as we honour our obligations as spelt out in the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption and the benchmarks set by the African Peer Review Mechanism.
 |