Blogs

Can ordinary Africans truly hold their leaders accountable? This question is central to the continent’s ongoing struggle against corruption. As Africa commemorates the African Anti-corruption Day on 11 July each year, marking the 2003 adoption of the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (AUCPCC), there is an opportunity to reflect deeply on whether anticorruption frameworks have led to meaningful outcomes, especially for citizens. The 2025 theme, “Promoting Human Dignity in the Fight Against Corruption,” demands that anticorruption efforts do more than punish wrongdoing. They must also protect and restore the dignity of the most vulnerable across society.

While most African countries have taken steps to domesticate their provisions through national laws and institutions, implementation remains a challenge. This reflection is which facilitates the assessment of whether citizens’ voices are effectively incorporated into anticorruption efforts. this write-up also examines whether the public is empowered to hold officials accountable. We focus on key indicators related to access to public information, complaint mechanisms, and enforcement of sanctions. Despite notable legislative progress across the continent, the gap between what is promised in law and what is delivered in practice remains wide.

Corruption, Dignity, and the Role of Citizens

Corruption is a serious problem bedeviling many countries across the world. It is not only an economic or political problem, but a moral affront that undermines human dignity. It deprives citizens of access to healthcare, quality education, clean water, and justice. For this reason, citizens must be at the heart of anticorruption systems, not only as observers but as active participants with mechanisms to speak out and demand accountability. However, this would require them to manifest strong social bonds, cooperation and patriotism.

Vibrant citizenry requires effective complaint systems, which are fundamental to public participation in anticorruption work. Such systems would include online portals, anonymous reporting hotlines, physical complaint boxes, and designated help desks in public institutions. Such tools provide citizens with platforms to report misconduct without fear of retaliation. Unfortunately, in many African countries, these mechanisms are either non-existent or poorly maintained, rendering them ineffective. Even where they do exist, fear of reprisals, especially in the absence of strong whistleblower protections, often prevents people from speaking out.

What the Africa Integrity Indicators Reveal

The Africa Integrity Indicators, which provide valuable evidence on the accessibility, responsiveness, and credibility of anticorruption institutions across the continent, demonstrate some deficits. In the assessment of how governments perform in ensuring access to complaint mechanisms and public accountability tools, several weaknesses are noted.

A recurring pattern in the data is the prevalence of formal structures without corresponding operational effectiveness. While a majority of countries have assigned telephone lines or email addresses for reporting corruption, very few have user-friendly online platforms. Moreover, a general atmosphere of mistrust, particularly in relation to police and state prosecutors, discourages reporting.

In countries where security agencies are tasked with investigating corruption, citizens often suspect that complaints may be ignored or manipulated, especially when politically connected individuals are involved. The situation is especially bleak in countries such as Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Mauritania, São Tomé and Príncipe, and Somalia. These countries consistently score zero on the effectiveness of national anticorruption authorities in responding to allegations of public sector corruption. In some of these countries, complaints are handled within ministries without any external oversight or transparency. Also, allegations are rarely investigated unless there is direct political interest.

Ranking of African Countries on Indicator 13, measuring effectiveness of the National Anti-Corruption Authorities (2014-2024)[1]

Country Examples: Progress and Persistent Gaps

In contrast, in countries that perform better, such as Mauritius, South Africa, and Sierra Leone, the public has access to dedicated online platforms where corruption complaints can be filed. Authorities in these countries that are better-performing sometimes take the initiative to carry out investigations based on citizen reports. Notwithstanding, there remains a tendency to focus on junior officials rather than those in senior leadership positions who wield political power or are close to political power wielders.

Importantly, high-performing countries also demonstrate greater transparency in their reporting. The above states, which are classified as better-performing, have anticorruption authorities which sometimes publish periodic updates on the number of cases received, investigations initiated, and outcomes achieved. Such feedback loops are essential in building public trust.

There are tangible examples of citizen reports leading to investigations which are highlighted in Round 12 of the Africa Integrity Indicators covering the study period between September 2022 to September 2023. In Mauritius, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) acted on anonymous information about a 2018 fraud involving Kritanand Balaghee, a surveyor accused of accepting bribes linked to the Sugar Insurance Fund Board. Similarly, the Libyan Attorney General’s Office started investigations of allegations of corruption related to scholarships for Libyan students in Turkey, which sparked popular outrage after the names of the scholarships’ beneficiaries, including many relatives of government officials, were published.

Barriers to Citizen Engagement and Whistleblower Protection

Notwithstanding the above mentioned examples of progress, major barriers persist. The critical one among them is the lack of strong whistleblower protection frameworks. Where citizens fear retaliation, whether through job loss, harassment, or arrest, they are unlikely to report corruption, even when they have credible information.

Some countries have taken steps to address this glaring problem. For instance, Botswana and Namibia introduced the Whistleblowing Act in 2016 and the Whistleblower Protection Act in 2017, respectively. However, even in countries with such legislation, implementation remains weak. Many of these frameworks lack dedicated funding, institutional support, and political backing. In effect, citizens are legally protected on paper, but left vulnerable in practice.

This failure in enforcing existing laws significantly discourages engagement and contributes to widespread cynicism. The problem becomes aggravated when authorities ignore reports and take no consequential actions. The failure to enforce the few available laws causes citizens to lose faith not only in anticorruption bodies but in the state itself. The result is a vicious cycle of impunity, weakened public services, and entrenched inequality.

Recommendations: Breaking the Cycle

The Africa Integrity Indicators point to several actionable steps that can be taken to improve citizen engagement in anticorruption

efforts:

Expand and operationalise complaint mechanisms.

Authorities should ensure that digital platforms, toll-free hotlines, and safe complaint boxes are accessible to all citizens, including those in rural areas. These mechanisms must be user-friendly, confidential, and regularly monitored.

Ensure transparency in handling complaints.

Authorities should publish periodic reports showing how many complaints were received, investigated, and resolved in a specific reporting period, along with summaries of findings and sanctions imposed. This transparency builds trust and accountability.

Strengthen whistleblower protection

Legal frameworks must be accompanied by real protections, including confidentiality guarantees, legal aid, and security measures. Where such frameworks do not exist, they should be introduced urgently.

Investigate high-level cases without fear or favour.

Authorities must show that no one is above the law. Investigating only low-level officials creates the perception that anticorruption is selective or politically motivated.

Conclusion: Restoring Dignity Through Action

Citizens must not be treated as passive observers when it comes to the fight against corruption. Anticorruption bodies and governments should recognise citizens as central actors whose voices, experiences, and grievances shape the integrity of public life. If mechanisms for reporting corruption are difficult to access, lack credibility, or place individuals at risk, then those systems fail the very people they are meant to serve. Equally, if there are no real consequences for wrongdoing, then efforts to fight corruption amount to little more than empty performance.

True accountability can only take root when citizens are genuinely empowered, not just permitted, to ask tough questions, report misconduct, and expect justice. Restoring public trust and safeguarding dignity across the continent will depend on more than new laws. It calls for sustained institutional reform, bold political will, and above all, a clear and consistent commitment to putting people first.