Survey responses suggest that Nigerians still have faith in the ability of institutions to hold people accountable for corruption.
Alongside all of the scenarios it presented (judicial bribery, contract inflation and theft of contract funds), the Chatham House survey also asked respondents about their understanding of the legal status of such behaviours. Respondents showed a high level of knowledge in all three scenarios. In all, 90.1 per cent of people surveyed knew it was illegal for a judge to collect money for a judgment in a court case, 88.9 per cent answered that contract inflation was illegal, and over 87.2 per cent said it was illegal for the fictional contractor in the given scenario to take road contract funds for personal use. Only a small number believed that such actions were legal or did not know.
Reform efforts that focus simply on increasing the legal knowledge of Nigerians regarding corruption will not be sufficient to shift expectations. Indeed, high levels of legal knowledge among the public may reinforce the view of many that those in the judicial and procurement sectors are lawbreakers. This negative perception would continue to undermine the role of judges as enforcers of laws, and that of procurement officials and contractors as providers of efficient services.
Which institutions are people most likely to report to?
Survey questions:
The survey uncovered some evidence that Nigerians retain considerable faith in the official accountability mechanisms set up to combat corruption, particularly those institutions involved in investigating and reporting alleged corruption before cases reach the courts. When asked which organization a colleague would be likely to report to regarding contract-cost inflation or the personal use of road-building funds, respondents most commonly selected an anti-corruption agency such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) or the ICPC (32.2 per cent for the procurement fraud case, and 42.9 per cent for the road contract scenario). These answers suggest a significant degree of awareness of the role of anti-corruption institutions as official checks on corrupt practices and behaviours. A smaller number of respondents, averaging 14.5 per cent across the two scenarios, selected ‘none of the above’ – indicating either a low awareness or opinion of these institutions or a degree of fatalism about the persistence of corruption.
The survey uncovered some evidence that Nigerians retain considerable faith in the official accountability mechanisms set up to combat corruption, particularly those institutions involved in investigating and reporting alleged corruption before cases reach the courts.
A degree of variation at state level was also notable. In FCT-Abuja, for example, the share of respondents who said that a report would be made to an anti-corruption agency was extremely high across both scenarios (see Figure 7), likely reflecting the relatively stronger presence and visibility of these agencies in the federal capital. In Adamawa, the largest selection of respondents picked the media, signalling the likelihood of a more prominent role not just for informing the public but as a deterrent and check on corrupt leaders. In Benue state, meanwhile, over 25 per cent of respondents for both scenarios (25.7 per cent for contract inflation, and 29.4 per cent for road contract fraud) selected traditional institutions such as a chief or district head, signalling the ongoing significance of those roles and their holders in Nigerian society. Expectations of reporting to a traditional leader were found to be consistently higher in rural areas than in urban areas. It is also noteworthy that the police and community policing units were among the least frequently selected organizations in both scenarios for most states (see Figure 7), despite the police being the statutory body for enforcing the criminal and penal code. (Respondents in FCT-Abuja and Sokoto were significantly more likely to select the police than the country-wide average.)
