In contemporary Africa, the basis and legitimacy of ‘traditional’ leadership may not strictly be the tradition. In most states, the government officially confirms traditional leaders, not the ‘gods’. Also, the tradition relied upon has continued to change and accommodate newer development contrary to what tradition used to be. Traditional rulers are seen proclaiming other religions which is a total paradigm shift from tradition. They also rely on interpreters while communicating with their subjects. Rates are also collected from taxi drivers under the pretext of maintaining roads leading to the palace. Most traditional rulers now openly engage in partisan politics.
In no time, all these seemingly abhorrent practices would be transmitted as revered traditions that the next generation will defend as authentic. What is therefore referred to as traditional leadership in contemporary Africa cannot be so defined in the context of pre-colonial Africa. Rather, it would be better to call them customary leaders because customs are derived from tradition but respond more quickly to emerging challenges than tradition. Irrespective of the nomenclature ascribed to this institution, one is also taken aback by the sudden increase in corrupt practices.
Certain arguments opine that with the centralization of government in the pre-colonial era, the incidence of bribes was under the control of the headship of the kingdom. However, in a decentralized structure, each district set and collected bribes. Thus, by the time all of those were aggregated, what the decentralized government would have robbed from the citizens, would now at least have doubled what it would have been in a centralized system.
In a centralized system, what was taken from the people could be ploughed back into the system in the form of provision for education, health, and other infrastructure. On the other hand, the fear of migration and its consequence might have cautioned a decentralized system in exerting bribes or fostering corruption.
Some Afrocentric views argue that using a post-colonial definition of corruption to evaluate the activities of the pre-colonial era would mean that such actions as giving fabulous gifts would mean corruption. Furthermore, the indigenous African religion played a critical role in ensuring that there was social sanity.
Some scholars conclude that in post-colonial Africa, there is a need to revisit and adopt the centralized form of government that had been practiced in pre-colonial Africa if there is a wish that corruption can be frontally addressed. In their words; “being so weak, the African national governments are unable to penalize provincial authorities running their expropriation rackets. As a result, centralized pre-colonial institutions may have helped to reduce expropriation and improve institutional quality by enforcing collusion among multiple authorities.”
In conclusion, since the ancestors were believed to be very active in the administration of community life, the fear of repercussions for doing evil was strong enough to prevent occurrences of corrupt practices. As Africans, there is an urgent need for our traditional institution to purge itself of every form of corruption.
ThankGod E. Airiohuodion (Awake Nigeria)
