Corruption does not only weaken our democratic structures but also erodes public sector development.

Corruption in Sierra Leone cannot only be seen as a species of bad governance that has been plaguing the nation over the decades but also as a scourge that has eaten on the developmental aspiration of Sierra Leoneans.

The fact that Sierra Leone is a poor country with wishy-washy institutions paves the way for greater corrupt practices and weak economic performance.

I am of the tangible conviction that in a bid to mitigate or eradicate corruption to the annals of history, it is our responsibility to be able to truly identify it causes, and the degree at which it hampers the development of the country.

It is arguably correct those poor conditions of service characterized by low salaries and wages over the years is a contributing factor that fans corruption in the country. Civil Servants and wage earners do not receive salaries and wages that ensure an average living standard. In as much as successive governments have been making inroads to improve on salaries and wages annually, yet, it has not been substantial enough to create any difference in the improvement of wages and salaries.

The incessant practice of corruption in the country possesses a serious development challenge. In the political realm, it undermines democracy and good governance by flouting or even subverting formal processes;  in elections and legislative bodies, it reduces accountability and distort representation in policy making; in the judiciary, it comprises the Rule of Law and in Public administration, results in the unfair provision of services.

More generally, it erodes the institutional capacity of government as procedures are disregarded, resources are siphoned off and public offices are bought and sold.

This destructive phenomenon has had profound and pervasive effects on the public sector, affecting both the functioning of government institutions and the trust of the citizen in their government.

Practices of corrupt practices such as bribery, embezzlement, favoritism, to mention but a few have created a perception of unfair and injustice and the minds of well-meaning Sierra Leoneans, which has lead to the loss of legitimacy for the government and its institutions. Again, it further distorts the allocation of Public resources, as decisions may be made based on personal gains rather than public interest.

In this scenario however, funds meant for public services such as healthcare, education or infrastructure has been siphoned off through corrupt practices, leading to inadequate provision of essential services.

Corruption in the public sector leads to an ineffective and inefficient governance system. Resources are mismanaged or misallocated, project is delayed or substandard and policies are not implemented effectively. This can in turn hinder economic development and social progress.

It deters investment and economic growth. Businesses face barriers such as bribery demands or unfair treatment, which increase their costs and reduce their competitiveness. It has exacerbated social injustice and inequality. Those with access to power and wealth can use corruption to maintain their privileged position, while marginalized groups suffer from lack of access to basic services and opportunities. It can also seriously undermine the rule of law by eroding the impartiality and integrity of legal and judicial systems. It is ones started by one Sierra Leonean educational pundit that that “when bribery and influence -peddling determine legal outcomes instead of evidence and justice, it undermines the trust of citizens in the legal system and weakens the foundation of democratic governance.

It was the optimism of Sierra Leoneans that the set-up of the Anti-Corruption Commission by an Act of Parliament in 2000 and its subsequent amendment in 2008 which manifested political commitment to minimize the social cost of corruption in Sierra Leone. It is also the realization that corruption incidence is not only limited to to government officials but is also prevalent among members of the private sector.

Nevertheless, in my quiet conclusion, I am of the frantic view that an effective and credible approach to working with developing countries to control corruption which requires that corruption be addressed at all levels of government and businesses, particular the most senior levels.

More effort is needed by the government to be devoted to reducing poverty, income disparities and underpay of Civil Servants; and to changing cultural perceptions, corruption controls also requires effective control procedures in both donors and government to ensure probity in the conduct of business and in the use of aid funds.