Report 185 / Africa

布隆迪: 日渐深化的腐败危机

  • Share
  • Save
  • Print
  • Download PDF Full Report

执行摘要

尽管建立了反腐败机构,布隆迪仍面临着日益深化的腐败危机,可能危及其建立在国家支持和外资推动的发展和经济增长为基础的和平。自2005年以来掌权的执政党奉行“新世袭主义者”政策,导致布隆迪在国家治理方面的排名降至国家最低,减弱了其对于外国投资者的吸引力,也破坏了与捐助国的关系,并助长了社会不满情绪。而更令人担忧的是,新世袭主义正逐渐损毁冲突后建立的国家机制的可信度,破坏前图西族和新胡图族的精英之间的关系,削弱执政党内的凝聚力。执政党的领导层经常被卷入腐败丑闻。为改善公共治理,布隆迪当局应该“言行一致”,大刀阔斧地遏制腐败。民间社会应该积极发挥其监督作用,组织动员群众反对腐败,而捐助者应该将良好的治理放在首位。

自1966年布隆迪成为共和国后,主要由图西族精英进行的政府俘获一直是政治的中心问题,而不公平的财富分配则加剧了冲突。虽然1993至2003年的内战没有危及图西族的政治和经济垄断,但却增加了腐败并促进了各民族寡头政治的崛起。

2005年,布隆迪保卫民主力量(CNDD-FDD)开始执掌政权,该党不但希望将政权从图西族转至胡图族手中,而且希望能够改善治理。新当局誓要抗击腐败,并建立相应的国家结构来达到此目的。然而,第一波涉及保卫民主力量要员和政府官员的腐败丑闻冲淡了人们对更公平的财富分配的希望。

除了公务员制度政治化,执政党还控制了公共部门及其资源,并觊觎着私营部门,正试图将其控制延伸至银行业。执政党还干扰私有化进程,阻挠对商业环境的改进。在这样一个小型经济体中,政府始终担当着重要角色,公共和私有资源的垄断使和平建设进程脱离轨道。

总统带头抗击腐败,以改善布隆迪日渐下滑的国际形象,应对无处不在的腐败对于占国家财政预算一半的外国援助的影响。他推出了“零容忍”运动,为良好治理规划了国家战略。然而,由于没有明确核心问题 ,这项运动注定要失败。解决腐败问题的办法不是去“说正确的话”,“成立正确的机构”和“建立正确的法律框架”,而应是变革破坏善治的权力关系。

实施善治的国家战略包括所有抗击腐败所必须的技术要素:改良的法律框架、公民有获取信息的途径、独立的监督和监管机构、非政治化的公务员管理者、透明的招标程序和公务员招聘,以及自然资源行业的改革。

现在缺失的是一个清晰的政治议程。民间社会组织应该组织大规模群众运动抗击腐败,通过反腐论坛的建立,将私营部门、乡村组织和大学召集起来。他们也应该进行独立的公民调查和评估,对政府的反腐表现详加审查。捐助者应该将反腐列为优先事项,如果治理毫无改善就要重新考虑他们对布隆迪的捐助。现在,反腐议程已经纳入进行善治的国家战略并成为了公共政策,剩下的就取决于民间社会和捐助者如何为实施反腐创造条件。

布琼布拉/内罗毕/布鲁塞尔,2012年3月21日

Executive Summary

Despite the establishment of anti-corruption agencies, Burundi is facing a deepening corruption crisis that threatens to jeopardise a peace that is based on development and economic growth bolstered by the state and driven by foreign investment. The “neopatrimonialist” practices of the party in office since 2005 has relegated Burundi to the lowest governance rankings, reduced its appeal to foreign investors, damaged relations with donors; and contributed to social discontent. More worrying still, neopatrimonialism is undermining the credibility of post-conflict institutions, relations between former Tutsi and new Hutu elites and cohesion within the ruling party, whose leaders are regularly involved in corruption scandals. In order to improve public governance, the Burundian authorities should “walk the talk” and take bold steps to curtail corruption. Civil society should actively pursue its watchdog role and organise mass mobilisation against corruption and donors should prioritise good governance.

Since Burundi became a republic in 1966, state capture, mostly by the Tutsi elite, was at the centre of politics, and the unfair wealth distribution fuelled conflict. While the 1993-2003 civil war has not threatened the Tutsi political and economic domination, it has increased corruption and favoured the rise of an ethnically diverse oligarchy.

When the CNDD-FDD (Conseil national pour la défense de la démocratie-Forces de défense de la démocratie) rebellion came to power in 2005, it intended not only to transfer political power from the Tutsi to the Hutu but also to improve governance. The new authorities pledged to fight corruption and created state structures to this effect. However, the first corruption scandals involving the CNDD-FDD dignitaries and state officials watered down the hope of a more equitable wealth distribution.

In addition to the politicisation of the civil service, the ruling party captured the public sector and its resources. It is coveting the private sector by trying to extend its control over the banking sector. It is also interfering in privatisation processes, thwarting efforts to improve the business climate. In such a small economy, where the state maintains a prominent role, the monopolisation of public and private resources risks derailing the peacebuilding process.

The president took the lead in the fight against corruption to improve Burundi’s declining image and address the impact of this pervasive corruption on foreign aid – which amounts to half of the state budget. He launched a “zero tolerance” campaign and designed a national strategy for good governance. However, as the core problem has not been correctly identified, this approach is doomed to fail. The solution is not to “get the talk right”, to “get the institutions right” and to “get the legal framework right”; it is to change the power relations that undermine good governance.

The national strategy for good governance includes all the necessary technical ingredients to fight corruption: improved legal framework, citizens’ access to information, independent monitoring and regulatory organisations, depoliticised civil service managers, transparent tendering processes and public servants recruitments, and reform of the natural resources sector.

What is missing is a clear political agenda. Civil society organisations should create a mass movement against corruption through the establishment of an anti-corruption forum gathering the private sector, rural organisations and universities. They should also conduct independent citizens’ surveys and assessments and scrutinise the government’s anti-corruption performance. Donors should prioritise the fight against corruption and reconsider their engagement if governance does not improve. Now that the anti-corruption agenda has become a public policy through the national strategy for good governance, it is up to civil society and donors to create the conditions for its implementation.

Bujumbura/Nairobi/Brussels, 21 March 2012

Subscribe to Crisis Group’s Email Updates

Receive the best source of conflict analysis right in your inbox.