MUKOYA: Private sector key in winning war on graft

A country whose private sector is unhappy is most likely victimised by an overbearing monopolistic public service bedevilled with corruption, obsolete technology, lethargy and poor quality products and services.

Cases in other countries show its significance in development. It allows for sharing of benefits by society: services, products and employment to the people; diversified innovations solving persistent socio-economic challenges; and paying taxes.

Its place in economic development cannot be gainsaid — the more reason many global processes such as Sustainable Development Goals have room for private sector involvement, especially to improve living standards.

Evidence shows poverty reduction in countries with a vibrant private sector. Similarly, development experts agree that a bubbly private sector is synonymous with a reliable and rewarding economy.

However, a broader four-dimensional understanding is necessary to disabuse us of the notion that all is well whenever the private sector is active.

The private sector is a voter. It not only casts ballots but funds candidates and political parties with manifestos that prioritise and protect their interests.

This illustrates its close relationship with political houses that guarantee investment opportunities and profits. Given its important place, it should act as a model of acceptable business ethos.

Yet Transparency International, through the business integrity index, often cites the private sector as the supply side of corruption, particularly establishing shady systems to gain business advantage.

Claims cited against firms for roles in defrauding Kenyans of money for the Kimwarer dam attest to this.

In this context, can the private sector be an agent of justice? Its main role is to produce goods and services fit for human consumption, making it live to consumer rights besides being truthful to advance less exploitative practices. Should it negotiate for good governance?

The private sector has vast economic powers, which are often enticing to politicians. It can leverage its influence on law and policy reforms to entrench human rights-sensitive corporate governance.

This background marks the instrumentality of the private sector. Nonetheless, a trend has emerged in which some members of the private sector are roguish.

“Tenderprenuers” are a source of grief and blatant stealing and national infrastructure projects the home of inflated costs, unnecessarily imported labour and channels of foreign and local debts.

It is unacceptable and immoral for the private sector to act in disregard of due process and the rule of law, including obliteration of people’s rights.

To recover public trust in the private sector is difficult if dirty deals continuously implicate its members.

It’s worse when both the private and public sectors deviate from professionalism, efficiency, effectiveness and optimum utilisation of resources and embark on sleaze, money laundering, thievery, fraud, blatant circumvention of due diligence and abuse of procurement procedures.

There is an urgent need to enhance corporate governance for both the private and public sectors lest the country becomes a jungle.