NigeriaDownload Full Scorecard
Goal – A popularly elected government free of corruption and functioning efficiently and transparently enough to guarantee economic freedom to individuals and support equitable property markets
Core Question: Does the country have free and open elections for the leadership and can citizens engage in free enterprise? No – Weak, Nigeria continues suffer from poor accountability across all branches of government and civil service.
3.1.1 Voice & Accountability
18.104.22.168 Are citizens able to elect their government and do they enjoy freedom of expression, association and a free media? No – Weak – Percentile Rank – 26.8 Trend↓;
Source: Governance Matters 2011; World Bank, www.govindicators.org
22.214.171.124 Are citizens free to form political and civic organizations free of state interference and surveillance? No – Weak – Score 3.53 out of 10
Overall Ranking – 120th out of 167
Source: The Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index 2012
3.1.2 Public Information
Overall Ranking –Weak; Score 60 out of 100
126.96.36.199 Are there regulations governing conflicts of interest in the executive and legislative branches of government? No – Executive Score 51 out of 100 – Very Weak; Legislative Score 39 out of 100 – Very Weak
188.8.131.52 Can citizens access legislative processes and documents? No – Score 2 out of 100 – Very Weak (2010)
Source: Global Integrity Report 2010– https://www.globalintegrity.org/global/the-global-integrity-report-2008/nigeria/
3.1.3 Market Intervention
Overall Ranking – Weak 120th out of 177 Trend ↓
184.108.40.206 To what extent does the government intervene in the private sector including state owned industries? Score 74.6 out of 100 with a higher score indicating less intervention, government spending accounts for 29.1% of GDP.
220.127.116.11 To what extent does the government control prices? Score 73.3 out of 100 with a higher score indicating less control
Source: 2013 Index of Economic Freedom – Heritage Foundation
Core Question: Is the public sector transparent and free of corruption? No – Weak – Corruption in Nigeria is endemic and pervades every facet of life, as well as every strata of society. The manifestations have become so mutative that it has defied an array of initiatives and strategies aimed at curbing it.
3.2.1 What is the perceived level of corruption in the country? Weak – Ranking – 139th out of 180; Score 2.7 out of 10 Trend ↓
Source: Corruption Perceptions Index 2012 Transparency International, http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2012/results/
3.2.2 A National Integrity System is a framework where the principle institutions that contribute to integrity, transparency and accountability in a society can address corruption in a systematic way. Does a National Integrity System exist? Yes – Weak, there is an absence of political will to tackle corruption.
Source: Transparency International
3.2.3 How often do companies report that officials and/or companies expect additional payments to “expedite” services or gain business? 40.9% of firms say they are expected to make unofficial payments – Weak
Source: Enterprise Surveys, World Bank, 2007
Core Question: Are quality services and qualified civil servants available to the public through the efficient use of public money free of corruption? No –Weak, although government spending is not an overly burdensome percentage of GDP, the quality of civil service is poor and the government far from effective.
Size of Government
3.3.1 What is the size of government relative to GDP? 29.1% – 25 to 30% considered Strong.
Source: 2013 Index of Economic Freedom, Heritage Foundation
3.3.2 What is the quality of the civil service? Very Weak – Score 40 out of 100
Source: 2010 Global Integrity Report – https://www.globalintegrity.org/global/the-global-integrity-report-2008/nigeria/
3.3.3 What is the overall effectiveness of the government? Very Weak – Percentile Ranking – 12.8 Trend↑
Source: 2011 Governance Matters, World Bank, www.govindicators.org
FQ 7. What is the actual experience of practitioners in dealing with the government?
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had been set up by the Obasanjo administration to combat graft and corruption among public officials. Everyone agreed that Nuhu Ribadu, its chair, was the spearhead in the fight against corruption. But the Yar’Adua government instead removed him from office that summer (August 2007) and asked him to take a course at the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies. Outcry against this change included the argument that Ribadu, because of his leadership of the anti-graft agency, had no need for any kind of training that would warrant his unceremonious removal. Others argued that the course could have been delayed until the ended of his tenure in another three years.
The administration’s next moves dealt the deathblow to any government engaged in the fight against corruption. Ribadu’s assistant, Ibrahim Lamorde, was initially asked to act as chair of the anti-graft agency while Ribadu was taking the course, but Lamorde was soon replaced with Farida Waziri, a retired police officer who allegedly had links with one of the governors whom the agency was prosecuting for corruption.
A few months later, the government compounded Ribadu’s problems by demoting him and his colleagues from assistant inspector generals of police to deputy commissioners. Many saw the policy change as directed against Ribadu.
Among those riled by the action was Gani Fawehinmi, chair of the National Conscience Party, who is also a senior advocate of Nigeria and a human rights activist. He described the actions against Ribadu as “absolutely bizarre.” In condemning the government’s decisions, he added, “I want President Umaru Yar’Adua to realize that any government that punishes honesty sows the seed of its own destruction by corruption. The ‘offenses’ that brought these atrocious and oppressive actions of the federal government down on Ribadu’s head are his honest character and his unprecedented arrest, arraignment and trial of some powerful big men for corruption.” Fawehinmi added that the demotion was “ridiculous, vindictive, a dangerous signal, and a serious contradiction on the part of government.”
Source: 2008 Transparency International http://report.globalintegrity.org/Nigeria/2008/notebook
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission www.efccnigeria.org/