Following the General Elections of 1994 Malawi adopted a new Constitution which came into effect on 17th May, 1995. The Constitution expressed the State's commitment to public trust and good governance under section 13 (o) of the Constitution.

The above section committed the State to "introduce measures which will guarantee accountability, transparency, personal integrity and financial probity and which by virtue of their effectiveness and transparency will strengthen confidence in public institutions."

Pursuant to the above commitment, the Government presented before Parliament the Corrupt Practices Bill which became the Corrupt Practices Act No. 18 of l99S. The Act received Presidential assent on the 1st December, l99S, and became effective on 15th February 1996, upon publication in the Government Gazette of that date.

The Act established the Anti-Corruption Bureau as an independent and autonomous government body comprising a Director, a Deputy Director and such other officers of the Bureau as may be appointed 'for the effective performance of the functions of the Act.

The State President appointed the Director and the Deputy on the 15th of February 1996. In accordance with Section S (1) of the Corrupt Practices Act, the appointments of the Director and the Deputy Director were confirmed by the Public Appointments Committee of Parliament in March, 1996.

On all matters of policy the Director is subject to the direction or control of the Minister of Justice, but otherwise the Director shall not be subject to the control or direction of any other person in the performance of his professional duties.

The functions of the Bureau are defined in Section 10 (1) of the Corrupt Practices Act, 1995 and are to—

1. Take necessary measures for the prevention of corruption in public and private bodies, including in particular measures for—

1. examining the practices and procedures of public bodies and private bodies in order to facilitate the discovery of corrupt practices and secure the revision of methods of work or procedures which in the opinion of the Bureau may be prone or conducive to corrupt practices;

2. advising public bodies and private bodies on ways and means of preventing corrupt practices and on changes in methods of work and procedures of such public bodies and private bodies compatible with the effective performance of their duties, which the Bureau considers necessary to reduce the likelihood of the occurrence of corrupt practices;

3. Disseminating information on the evil and dangerous effects of corrupt practices on society;

4. Enlisting and fostering public support against corrupt practices;

2. Receive and investigate complaints of alleged or suspected corrupt practices and, subject to the directions of the Director of Public Prosecutions, prosecute offences under the Act;

3. Investigate any conduct of any public officer which, in the opinion of the Bureau, may be connected with or conducive to corrupt practices, and to report thereon to the Minister.

Under Section 10 (2) the Bureau may decline to conduct an investigation into any complaint alleging an offence under the Act or to proceed further with any investigation if the Bureau is satisfied that—

1. the complaint is trivial, frivolous or not made in good faith; or

2. the investigation would be unnecessary, improper or futile.

In accordance with Section 10 (3), in any case in which the Bureau declines to conduct an

investigation, or to proceed with any investigation, the Bureau shall inform the complainant in writing of its decision.

Following their appointments, and whilst waiting to officially take up their positions, the

Director and Deputy Director, with British Technical Assistance, developed a Strategic Plan for the formation of the Bureau which covered—

1. The examination of the critical issues that the Bureau needed to address in order to be effective in combating corruption in Malawi;

2. A "MISSION STATEMENT";

3. Objectives—these being all the necessary tasks that the Bureau should undertake in order to achieve its mission together with related activities;

4. Output indicators against which the achievements and objectives would be measured,

5. Necessary conditions which needed to be in place for the successful achievements of the objectives;

6. The implications of the Strategic Plan on the structure of the Bureau. This related to the structural design and its effects on staffing levels;

7. General assumptions regarding the effective implications of the Strategic Plan. This related to what needed to be in place, both on the organisational level and in the environment for the Strategic Plan to be successfully implemented;

8. The various resources, in general terms, that would be needed for the Strategic Plan to be implemented.

The formulation of the objectives was done against the background that the Bureau would be expected to fulfil the needs of the people of Malawi. Key issues therefore were—

1. An adequate staff establishment. In the early stages it was not possible to accurately determine the number of cases which were likely to be handled by the Bureau so a final staff establishment was not known. However the Bureau did propose a core "start-up" staff establishment which would reflect the pro-active stance to be adopted. This meant that the staff establishment should include provision for investigators and prosecutors, corruption prevention officers, research officers and officers who would be engaged in discharging the educational functions of the Bureau. Administrative staff would need to be included. It was decided too and was formally approved in line with the Act that everyone employed in the Bureau should receive salaries and have conditions of service which would reflect their education and professionalism and which would be sufficient to retain their services, and also avoid their being tempted. Without adequate financial compensations it was felt that officers would look for greener pastures;

2. Feedback by the Bureau. In order for the general public to appreciate and support the role of the Bureau there would be need for adequate feedback from the Bureau to the public;

3. Sufficient funding to the Bureau. Government funding to the Bureau would need to be sufficient to ensure that all its intended projects could be completed. Insufficient funding and the subsequent incompletion of projects would have the likely effect of diminishing the public's confidence in the Bureau and would give the impression that Government was not sincere in its commitment to curbing corrupt practices;

4. Involvement of the general public. The general public would need to be involved in the fight against corruption and the Bureau would therefore need to adopt a strategy of working in partnership with the community, private institutions, schools, religious institutions and universities in the prevention and control of corruption. Information would be disseminated aimed at creating awareness on the evils of corruption;

5. Co-ordination with other law enforcement agencies. The Bureau would need to adopt cordial relationships with other law enforcement agencies, both internally and externally, and with other line Ministries and stakeholders. Such co-operation would ensure that the Bureau could operate and perform its role in harmony with other agencies and in an effective and efficient manner. Any hostility by any stakeholder would only adversely affect the performance of the Bureau;

6. Decentralization. It would be necessary in due course for the Bureau to decentralize in order to provide adequate services, especially at grass-root level.

With the adoption of the Strategic Plan, and the completion of all administrative and logistical assignments, the Director and Deputy Director officially took up their respective positions on 1st March, 1997.

The formation of the Anti-Corruption Bureau attracted donor interest as a result of which the Bureau received financial support from the Japanese Government who kindly provided equipment and motor vehicles. The Danish government offered assistance in the funding of the civic educational aspects of Bureau. The British Government provided technical assistance in the form of a Technical Co-operation Officer, Mr. Paul Russell, OBE, who is Advisor to the Director, on contract.

Before the Bureau came into being, it was allocated seven million Kwacha (K7,000,000) by Parliament. It was necessary that the budget be activated through normal government channels. Housing and office needed to be identified. This process was time consuming and contributed to a delay in the start up of the Bureau.

In the budget year 1997/98 the Bureau was allocated ten million, seven hundred ninety-five thousand, six hundred.Kwacha (Kl0,795,600) by Parliament.

Although office accommodation was swiftly found in Blantyre, there were delays in occupying the premises in Lilongwe allocated to it. These had to be rehabilitated prior to occupation. The Director finally was able to take occupation of the Lilongwe premises in June 1997.

The recruiting of personnel to the Bureau began in June 1997 with print media advertisements up to August 1997 for the various posts which attracted over 2,O00 applications. Short listing was done in August 1997. Interviews for the posts commenced in September and were completed by November 1997. It was necessary for all the successful applicants to be vetted thoroughly to test their integrity. Many had to give notice to their previous employers. It was not therefore until 9th February, 1998, that the first officers, Investigations and Civic Education Officers, joined the Bureau. On that date the Anti-Corruption Bureau became truly operational.

THE ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU
P.O. BOX 2437
LILONGWE