RICHARD GOLDSTONE: Together against corruption — a unified strategy for SA’s future

SA presents a paradox in its struggle against corruption, characterised by a strong institutional and legal anti-corruption framework juxtaposed against persistent levels of grand and administrative corruption.

Since 2010 the country has not received a score higher than 45 on Transparency International’s corruption perceptions index, indicating a troubling consistency in perceived corruption. The latest index score of 44 reflects ongoing challenges within the public sector and highlights the urgent need for reforms. 

Despite SA’s relatively strong legal framework corruption has become entrenched, particularly in public procurement and state-business relations. This has culminated in a phenomenon known as state capture, where powerful individuals manipulate the political apparatus to further their own interests.

Revelations of close ties between high-ranking officials and a select group of businesspeople have come to light, resulting in favours and contracts that undermine public trust. The Zondo commission of inquiry into allegations of state capture and corruption demonstrated the depth of this issue, with estimates indicating that more than $3.4bn was spent on contracts influenced by corrupt practices. 

The government has taken steps to combat corruption, particularly through the work of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and the Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU). These bodies are central to the country’s asset recovery efforts, focusing on seizing assets derived from criminal activity.

Recent figures indicate that the AFU has successfully seized assets valued at about $38m linked to the Gupta family, a clear indication of the potential for significant recovery of ill-gotten gains. The AFU has been instrumental in recovering funds lost to corruption, employing both conviction-based and non-conviction-based forfeiture mechanisms. The latter allows authorities to confiscate assets even in the absence of a criminal conviction, a tool that has been used in high-profile cases involving individuals such as the Gupta family. 

Civil society organisations are increasingly active in the fight against corruption, advocating for transparency and accountability. Their involvement has become essential, as they monitor government activities and press for effective anti-corruption measures. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy (2020-30) emphasises the role of civil society in enhancing public participation and fostering a culture of accountability. This engagement is vital for raising awareness about the effects of corruption on development and encouraging citizen involvement in governance. 

However, political interference and poor co-ordination within the criminal justice system continue to undermine anti-corruption efforts. The effectiveness of the NPA and the AFU has been called into question, particularly regarding the slow pace of asset recovery. High-profile cases often encounter delays due to inefficiencies of the prosecuting authorities and the complexities of the judicial process, leading to a loss of public trust. The recent history of corruption, particularly involving state capture, has further complicated the landscape as public confidence in institutions is eroded by revelations of complicity among senior officials. 

In this context, SA’s relationship with international bodies becomes important. As a member of various global anti-corruption initiatives, including the G20 Anti-Corruption Working Group, SA is expected to comply with international standards aimed at curbing financial crime and promoting transparency. However, the actual implementation of these commitments has often lagged, raising concerns about the country’s capacity to recover assets lost to corruption effectively. 

The media has played a pivotal role in exposing corruption in SA, particularly through investigative journalism. The “Gupta Leaks” revealed extensive collusion between powerful political figures and business interests, leading to public outcry and contributing to the establishment of the Zondo commission. Such investigations have underscored the importance of a free press in holding power to account, yet journalists often face harassment and threats, complicating their efforts to report on corruption. 

For SA to make meaningful progress in its fight against corruption a comprehensive approach is required. This includes strengthening the capacity and resources of anti-corruption agencies, improving co-ordination among law enforcement bodies and fostering collaboration with civil society. Increasing transparency in government procurement processes and establishing a strong beneficial ownership regulatory framework will also enhance accountability. 

SA’s struggle against corruption will be bolstered by the proposed establishment of the International Anti-Corruption Court (IACC). This court will serve as a complementary mechanism for prosecuting high-level corruption cases, particularly those with transnational elements that frequently evade local judicial systems.

By enforcing universally agreed-upon crimes under the UN Convention Against Corruption — such as bribery of public officials, embezzlement, misappropriation of public resources and money laundering — the IACC will aim to enhance accountability without imposing new legal norms or obligations.

Its establishment will facilitate cross-border co-operation and improve legal frameworks, enabling SA to recover stolen assets more effectively and hold accountable the corrupt officials and those who enable them — the financial providers, bankers and lawyers who are only too willing to facilitate the dishonest movement of ill-gotten gains. 

The IACC will also send a powerful message to both the SA public and the international community regarding the country’s commitment to combating corruption. This initiative is not just about prosecution; it represents a broader effort to foster greater trust in governance.

As SA grapples with the legacy of corruption, the establishment of the IACC could catalyse essential reforms and restore confidence in its institutions. By creating a robust mechanism for international collaboration and asset recovery, the IACC positions SA on a path towards a more transparent and accountable future, crucial for its economic and social wellbeing.

The court would also enable huge funds stolen from African countries to be seized in countries where they have been laundered and, at an appropriate time, repatriated for benefit of the people to whom they belong — the citizens of the nations from whom the monies have been stolen by rapacious and dishonest officials.

Stakes are high, as corruption not only stifles economic growth but also undermines the fundamental rights of citizens. A united front against corruption, supported by both the government and civil society, is essential for building a brighter, more equitable future for SA.

The road ahead may be fraught with challenges, but the potential for transformative change is within reach if the will to act decisively is mustered. The journey towards a transparent and accountable governance system is not merely an option for SA; it is a necessity for its survival and prosperity. 

As the nation grapples with the legacy of corruption it must prioritise reform and accountability at all levels of governance. Only through collective action — integrating civil society, media and international partners — can SA hope to restore public confidence and ensure a sustainable future free from the shackles of corruption.

The time for decisive action is now; the future of the nation depends on it. 

• Goldstone, a former SA Constitutional Court judge and chief prosecutor for the UN international criminal tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, is vice-chair at Integrity Initiatives International, a global anti-corruption NGO.