ABSTRACT

This study investigated corruption and public accountability in Abia state civil service. Some causes of corruption include; weak government institution, poor pay incentives, poverty, etc. in an attempt to look into the problems, several literatures, studies and works where reviewed. A sample of 400 staff was selected from the population using simple random sampling. Data was collected from both primary and secondary sources presented in tables and analyzed using percentages and frequencies. Hypotheses were formulated and tested using Chi square analysis method. It was observed that poor accountability is as a result of corruption in Abia state civil service, It was also observed that there is was also observed that there is misappropriation of funds by Abia state civil service due to unplanned and careless purchases. Following the above findings, the researcher has recommended that efforts should be made to ensure the establishment of independent anticorruption departments in all government establishments and institutions, and there annual report must also be published. Also stiff law should be enacted to deal appropriately with culprits caught in corrupt practices

CLICK HERE TO GET SIMILAR RESEARCH MATERIAL

CHAPTER ONE

1.0     Introduction

1.1     Background of the Study

Throughout Nigeria, there is now wide spread awareness that enhanced civil service delivery as the feature or quality of a responsive governance. Equally important, is the recognition that the level and quality of civil service is as important as the level of corruption and accountability of public institutions that delivers those services.

Corruption is a global issue, but it varies in intensity, sophistication and forms country to country. The deduction or inference from extant literature, public commentaries, analysis, media (prints and broadcast) including social networks seem to suggest that corruption is the largest industry with many practitioners in Nigeria.

This has a lot of implication for development generally in the country. It is therefore not surprising that Adegbite (2009:33) averred that “where there is no accountability, development will inevitably be stunted”.

How do we account for the origin of corruption in Nigeria? Ikejiani – Clark (2001:114) argued that “corruption was more or less introduced in Nigeria by colonialism. Corruption in politics, administration and business has its counterpart in similar tendency by the clerk to extract bribe for a file to be moved through the process to the administration.

The concept public accountability, in the common or ordinary sense, accountability presupposes that an official or person who has been assigned duties should be held responsible for his/her action and consequences emanating from them. Adebite (2009:33) conceptualized accountability as “the obligation to demonstrate that work has been conducted in accordance with agreed rules and standards and the office reports fairly and accurately on performance results”. Implied in the above definition are the indispensable roles of due process, transparency and feedback in achieving accountability. Also Ujah (2010:78) operationalised it as “a system whereby public officers are made to give account of their stewardship to members of the public”. He progressed to explain the term “public” as referring to the generality of the populace, the people or segment of the society particularly touched by the subject matter on which an account is demanded. It is important to note that public interest is supposed to be crucial to public accountability. If this is so, why do public office holders and civil/public servants work against public interest? In other words, public bureaucracy and policy making are expected to reinforce public administration and then galvanize service delivery but this rarely happens in Nigeria due to the character of the actors and leading elite in the public bureaucracy process.

This paper will access the level of corruption and accountability to enhance civil service delivery in Nigeria. Its main objective is to identify ways and means of enhancing accountability, transparency and a stop to corruption in Nigeria civil services.

1.2. Statement of Problem

Nigeria has gone through all the phases of business cycle – decline, depression recovery and boom, yet none of these booms as Ekpo (2004) noted has resulted in any significant restructuring and transportation of economy since each boom came and disappeared without being linked to real sector and none of the benefits associated with the boom was maximized. This was as a result, of corruption, as Obasanjo (2004) rightly observed, “until 1999, Nigeria had practically institutionalized corruption as the foundation of governance.

Corruption has eaten deep into the heart of the nation and it seems that it is prevalent in government organizations than in private sectors, (Anazodo 2014:99). She further identified this corruption as; misappropriation of public funds by making unplanned and careless purchases. Using public funds for personal purpose, demanding bribe, kolanuts etc before normal duties like awarding of contracts, employment, budget approvals are done.

The greatest amount of financial corruption resides in national procurement system. Generally, as much as 20 – 60 percent of public spending or procurement is lost due to leakages and malpractices in developing countries, (Odida 2001:30). In Nigeria, in spite of the huge government budget over the years for the provision of goods, and services, there has been a discernibly wide exception gap. According to the World Bank’s Country Procurement Assessment Report (CPAR) elaborated in 1999, out of every 1.00 Naira (N1.00) spent by government, 60 kobo were being lost to corrupt practices.

Nigeria has lost several hundred billion naira over the last decade due to flagrant abuse of procedures for the award of public contracts, inflations of contracts, lack of transparency, lack of competence based evaluation and lack of merit which is the fundamental criteria for the awarding of public contracts.

To check the widespread corruption, gross incompetence and related vices in the Nigeria public procurement and service delivery, the Obasanjo’s administration formulated the Due Process to ensure transparency and accountability. These initiatives generated mixed feelings and diverse reactions amongst stake holders. While many have voiced out queries on the length of time involved in the life cycle of the process on a project, others describe the bureaucracies involved, as simply too cumbersome, yet others wonder about the quality and value for money in service delivery.

It is also believed that, there is transparent and macro corruption in Nigeria public service procurement process. And that lack of competition and transparency in project procurement leads to high cost of project in the states.

Finally, the Nigeria Civil Service still have the problem of corruption disregarding the efforts made by the federal government to ensure efficient financial management on the civil service system.

1.3. Objectives of the Study

The broad objective of this work is to investigate corruption and public accountability in Abia State Civil Service. The specific objectives are:

1. To identify the causes of corruption in the state civil service.
2. To examine the measures/efforts taken to tackle corruption in the state civil service.
3. To determine the effect corruption has on public accountability.

1.4. Research Questions

1. What are the causes of corruption in Abia State Civil Service?
2. What are the measures that have been taken to tackle corruption in the State civil service?
3. What effect does corruption have on public accountability?

1.5. Research Hypotheses

1. H₀: Poor accountability is not as a result of corruption in Abia State civil service.

H₁: Poor accountability is as a result of corruption       in Abia State civil

service.

2. H₀: The uses of special anti-corruption agencies have not reduced the level of corruption in the state civil service.

H₁: Some measures like special anti-corruption agencies have been instituted to tackle corruption in Abia State.

3. H₀: Corruption has no effect on public accountability in the state civil service.

H₁: Corruption has effect on public accountability in the state civil service.

1.6. Significance of the Study

The significance of the study is both empirical and theoretical. Empirically, this study will be used by the governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, students of public administration and political science; it will also be useful to policy makers in particular and Nigeria in general.

Theoretically, the outcome of this study will contribute immensely to the already existing body of knowledge in the field. Specifically, this project work is expected to create awareness of the importance of public accountability and transparency to national economic development.

This study will help to ameliorate the levels of poor accountability in the civil service; hence the factors that also contributed to low level of accountability will be identified by determining the necessary factors that contribute to the low level of poor accountability in Abia State civil service and also correcting the anomalies.

The society at large will also gain from the study because when good accountability becomes the order of the day, this will lead to developmental process which up till now remains a mirage in our civil service system.

Finally, the research work is expected to furnish the policy makers the suggested practical ways of curbing corruption in Nigeria civil service and also in the administrative system of Nigeria in general.

1.7. Scope of the Study

The main focus of this study is to critically examine the implications of corruption and poor accountability in Abia State Civil Service. The data used is from the information gotten from both the staff and officers of the ministry as well information gotten from related textbooks, journals and magazines.

1.8. Limitations of the Study

In the course of carrying out this research work, the researcher was confronted with some limitations that affect the work positively or negatively.

The researcher discovered that the resources needed to carry out this research were limited, moving from one library to another, from one department to another in a ministry under study.

Determining the accurate response is impossible because civil servants in Abia State civil service see corruption in different perspectives. Also some of the civil servants were reluctant to give relevant information as a result of wrong assumption that the research will be use to victimize them.

Another big constraint to the research during the cause of writing this project is that many questionnaires were distributed to the respondents; it is feared that some respondents may have been influenced by one thing/person or another while answering the questions. Again not all questionnaires distributed to the respondents were returned.

However, despite these limitations, the researcher was able to come up with a good work.

1.9. Definition of Terms/Acronyms

Accountability: This is the obligation of official client, ministries, parastatals and agencies etc. charged with an action or responsibility to give a transparent account of his/her action to the stakeholders as prescribed by laws, regulation and tradition.

Corruption: This can be view as unwarranted exercise of power, with the motive of gaining some advantages more or less directly personal. It is an illegal activity, behavior, especially of people in authority; allegations of bribery and corruption. For instance when it comes to gift-giving and bureaucratic integrity.

Public: This refers to the generality of the populace, the people or segment of the society particularly touched by the subject matter on which an account is demanded.

Transparency: This is an obligation to take action or discharge responsibilities with openness, truthfulness, fairness, honesty and clarity.

The Civil Service: This refers to the ministries and departments within which specific aspect of governmental works are carried out. It also refers to the body of permanent officials appointed to assist the political executive in formulating and implementing government policies.

Public Administration: This refers to the activities of bureaucracy concerned with the management or administration of government organization and the study of these activities.

Administration: The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 6^th edition defines administration as the activities that are done in order to plan, organize and run a business, school or other institutions. It can also be seen as the process of act of organizing the part of government which manages the public.

Government: This is seen as the group of people who are responsible for controlling the country or a state. It is also the method or system of controlling or directing the public affairs of an area.

Bureaucracy: This is seen as a system of official rules and ways of doing things that a government or an organization has, especially when these seem to be too complicated.

Procurement: This applies to all kinds of acquisition of public goods and services. Procurement also means to obtain something with financial backing.

Public Procurement: This means the acquisition by any means of goods, works, or services by the government.