Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
activities that may foment confl ict with and among local populations or
degrade all or portions of the nation's environment. Thus, if such toler-
ance is occurring and has transpired, it demands explanation. Such a
situation could arise from corruption, from a dearth of qualifi ed person-
nel, or as a result of too few resources overall dedicated to regulation.
The state of affairs might also be tolerated as a result of discrimination
against the peoples who live in the region. Indeed, all of these factors
have been offered as potential explanations for government behavior. But
the heart of the matter appears to be a culture of corruption that began
in earnest during the nation's three decades of military rule and that has
persisted and become institutionalized at all levels of governance to such
a degree as to be labeled by one U.S. government announcement as a
“kleptocracy” (“Fact Sheet” 2006). A sketch of the scale and institution-
alization of corruption in government will suffi ce to illustrate its reach
and portent.
Institutionalized Corruption
The World Bank and Transparency International defi ne corruption as
“the abuse of public offi ce for private gain.” The World Bank includes
a range of practices under this rubric: extortion, bribes, patronage, nepo-
tism, and theft of state assets and diversion of public revenues for private
gain (World Bank 1997). The World Bank also distinguishes between
state capture and administrative corruption. The fi rst involves altering
law and rules to favor specifi c groups or outcomes by illicit means, while
the second involves illicitly directing public processes to ensure private
gain to public offi cials. Nigeria has suffered from both forms of corrup-
tion. Nigeria's Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has esti-
mated that more than $380 billion was stolen or squandered by public
offi cials during the period of military rule from 1966 to 1999. General
Ibrahim Babangida, who ruled from 1985 to 1993, allegedly stole some
$12.2 billion of oil revenues for his personal use. The general was widely
accused of systematically seeking to institutionalize corruption as a tool
of political control and to have largely succeeded in doing so. Similarly,
General Sani Abacha is believed to have stolen between $1 and $3 billion
for his personal use during his four-year rule.
Even now, under a democratic national regime, local government
budgets are not published routinely and it is diffi cult to gain an account-
ing of their revenues and expenditures. Elected offi cials often treat state
government budgets as secret documents. Human Rights Watch and
