ABSTRACT
The prevalence and ubiquity of unethical behaviours
and practices in Nigeria is no longer debatable
considering their obviously insidious plague and a wide range of corrosive effects on the Nigerian state. What is more perplexing, however, is why this problem has defied all attempts at combating it.
Thus, this dissertation is an assessment of the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal in the practice of public ethics in Nigeria’s democratic
governance (1999-2007). In order to
achieve this aim, the constitutional mandates of the Bureau and the Tribunal were used as parameters for assessment. Relying on the survey method
of
research
and documentary
evidence
with
the aid
of
descriptive statistics, the study found out that the
CCB and CCT were established primarily to promote public ethics in public service. Other findings show
that
in terms of Assets Declaration Forms(ADFs) issued to public
officers within the mandate of the Bureau, over 784,000 public officers returned the Completed Assets
Declaration forms(CADFs) representing over 70% rate of return which is a far cry from
an estimation that eligible people for the forms are
over 4,000,000 within the periods
under investigation (1999-2007) Also findings shows that out of the
number of complaints received by
the CCT, only 11,640 were
referred to the
CCT for trials, out of which only 3,304. The rest were either adjourned until it died down or struck out for
lack of merit. With the prevalent nature of this
menace and the number of convicts, it is a clear manifestation of ineffectiveness of the CCB and CCT. On the fourth objective of the study, which
focuses
on
the performance
assessment of
the
CCB and CCT, overwhelming
majority
of
the respondents had indicated that the CCB and CCT had performed below expectation; but considering the efforts made at organizing workshops, retreat and the extent to which public officer on their co me
to fill, complete and submit Assets Declaration Forms today unlike in the past and the fact that some
officers were tried and given a public show
means they deserve a pass mark. The study, in agreement
with
the theoretical postulation of functionalism
identified
institutional
framework, financial,
manpower in terms of quality and quantity, legal and constitutional
set back and lack of political commitment and willingness on the part of political leadership as factors responsible for the ineffective
performance of their functions. This therefore buttressed the postulation of these scholars that
establishing institutions
alone does not solve the problem but providing what they referred to as functional prerequisites are very fundamental to effective performance of these institutions. However, we make the following recommendations for an improved performance. Theoretically, the study recommends that there is a need for the provision of the necessary requirements for the functioning of the institutions such as adequate funding, staffing, independence
of the institutions to enable them
function well. Above all, political leadership
must
display leadership
by example at all levels of governance.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
CONTENT
PAGE
Title………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. i Declaration ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………ii Certification …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..iii Dedication …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… .iv Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………................................v List of Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………...........................vii
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..x
CHAPTER ONE : INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
…………………………………………………………………………1
1.2 Statement of Research Problem …………………………………………………………………
7
1.3 Research Questions ……………………………………………………………………………….8
1.4 Research Objectives……………………………………………………………………………… 9
1.5 Assumptions ……………………………………………………………………………………..10
1.6 Significance of the study…………………………………………………………………………10
1.7 Scope and Limitations of Study………………………………………………………………......12
1.8 Organization of Chapters…………………………………………………………………………13
CHAPTER TWO : Literature Review and Theoretical Framework
2.1 Literature Review …………………………………………………………………………………14
2.2 Public Ethics……………………………………………………………………………………….16
2.3 Traditional Ethical Values in Nigeria……………………………………………………………...19
2.4 Accountability …………………………………………………………………………………......21
2.5:1 Transparency……………………………………………………………………………………..29
2.5:2 Types of Transparency…………………………………………………………………………..31
2.6 Democratic Governance …………………………………………………………………………..33
2.6:1 Governance ……………………………………………………………………………………...34
2.6:2 Democratic Governance …………………………………………………………………………37
2.7 Theoretical Framework …………………………………………………………………………….42
2.7:1 Structural-Functionalism …………………………………………………………………………42
CHAPTER THREE: Research Methodology
3.1 Location of the Study Area ………………………………………………………………...50
3.2 Types and Sources of Data …………………………………………………………………50
3.3 Interview Guide …………………………………………………………………………....52
3.4 Examination of Official Records……………………………………………………………52
3.5 Population Sampling and Sampling Techniques……………………………………………52
3.6 Data Transcription and Analysis Techniques (DTAT)……………………………………...53
3.7 Problems encountered………………………………………………………………………54
CHAPTER FOUR: Overview of Previous Attempts at Promoting Public Ethics in Nigeria
4.1 General Aguiyi Ironsi ……………………………………………………………………….55
4.2 General Yakubu Gowon Regime…………………………………………………………….62
4.3 Murtala/ Obasanjo Regime ………………………………………………………………….64
4.4 Alhaj Shehu Aliyu Shagari Administration………………………………………….. ……68
4.5 General Muhammadu Buhari
………………………………………………………………………71
4.6 General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida Regime……………………………………………………..74
4.7 General Sani Abacha Regime…………………………………………………………..…………...76
4.8 Chief Olusegun Obasanjo Administration 1999-2007……………………………………………...77
4.8:1 Independent Corrupt Practices and other related Offences Commission (ICPC) ……………….78
4.8:2 Budget Monitoring Evaluation and Intelligent Unit (Due Process)…………………………….78
4.8:3 Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)………………………………………79
4.8:4 Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency International (NEITI) …………………………80
CHAPTER FIVE : Evolution and Mandates of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal
5.1 Historical Background…………………………………………………………………….87
5.2 Evolution and Structure of the Bureau …………………………………………………...88
5.3 Mandates and Powers of the Bureau and Tribunal……………………………………….90
5.4 Code of Ethics of Work for Public Officers ……………………………………………...96
CHAPTER SIX :
Assessment of the Function-Performance of the Code of Conduct Bureau
(CCB) and Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT)’s Public Ethics Practices in Nigeria, 1999-2007.
6.1 Functions-Performance Assessment of the Code of Conduct Bureau (1999-2007)………104
6.2:1 The primary purpose for the establishment of the Code of Conduct Bureau…………….105
6.2:2 Total number of
Assets Declarations Forms
received
by
the
CCB
from public
officers
in accordance with the provision of the Act between 1999 and 2007…………………………..108
6.2:3 The extent to which the CCB promote public ethics in Nigeria’s democratic governance (1999-
2007)…………………………………………………………………………………………..112
6.2:4 Factors militating against the effective functions-performance of the CCB (1999-
2007)…………………………………………………………………………………………..115
6.3 Functions-Performance Assessment of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (1999-2007)…….130
6.3:1 The
primary purpose for the establishment of the Code of Conduct Tribunal…………….130
6.3:2 How many complaints did the CCT receive about non-compliance with the provisions of the Act
by public officers within the period under review and how many have been tried and
convicted……………………………………………………………………………………….131
6.3:3 The extent to which the CCT promote public ethics in Nigeria’s democratic governance (1999-
2007)……………………………………………………………………………………………136
6.3:4 Factors militating against the effective functions- performance of the CCT (1999-
2007)...........................................................................................................................................139
6.4
Discussion of Research Findings …………………………………………………………..142
6. 10 Relating Research Assumptions to
Research Findings …………………………………..146
CHAPTER SEVEN: Summary, Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations
7.1 Summary of Major Findings………………………………………………………………150
7.2 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….....154
7.3 Recommendations……………………………………………………………………..........156
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………......161
Appendix 1 List of Officers interviewed with Dates…………………………………………..174
Appendix 2 Interview Guide for Staff of CCB and CCT
……………………………………..175
Appendix 3 Interview Guide
for
Specialized Groups…………………………………………176
Appendix 4 Budget Allocation for CCB 2000-2005…………………………………………………………………………….177
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ADF ASSET DECLARATION
FORM
AGF ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION AU AFRICAN
UNION
BMIU BUDGET MONITORING AND INTELLIGENT UNIT CADFs COMPLETED ASSETS DECLARATION
FORMS
CCB CODE OF CONDUCT BUREAU
CCT CODECONDUCT TRIBUNAL
CDC CONSTITUTION
DRAFTING COMMITTEE
CPIB CORRUPT PRACTICES INVESTIGATION BUREAU
CSO CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS
DFID DEPARTMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
DPU DUE PROCESS UNIT
EFCC ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL CRIMES COMMISSION
EITI EXTRACTIVE NDUSTRIES TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL
EU EUROPEAN
UNION
FCT FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY
FEC FEDREAL EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
FMG FEDERAL MILITARY GOVERNMENT FRN FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA FAQ FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
GDP GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
ICPC INDEPENDENT CORRUPT PRACTICES AND OTHER RELATRED OFFENCES COMMISSION ICAC INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION
IDI INDEPTH INTERVIEW
IMF INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
MAMSER MASS MOBILIZATION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY NEITI NIGERIAN
EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES TRANSPARENCY INTERNATONAL NITEL NIGERIAN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
NLC NIGERAN LABOUR CONGRESS
NJC NATIOANAL JUDICIAL COUNCIL NCS NATIONAL COUNCIL OF STATES
NGO NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
NOA NATIONAL ORIENTATION
AGENCY
NEPAD NEW PARTNERSHIP FOR AFRICA
DEVELOPMENT NPN NATIONAL PARTY OF NIGERIA
OECD ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT
OSA ORGANISATION OF AMERICAN
STATES
PCC PUBLIC COMPLAINTS COMMISSION
PTDF PETROLEUM TRUST DEVELOPMENT FUND
SAP STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PROGRAMME
SRS SMPLE RANDOM SAMPLING
SMC SUPREME MILITARY COUNCIL
SPSS STATISTICAL PROGRAMME FOR SOCIAL SCIENCES
TI TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL
UK UNITED KINGDOM
UN UNITED NATONS
UNDP UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME
UNECA UNITED NATION ECONOMIC COMMSSION
FOR
AFRICA USA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
USAID UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT USSR UNITED SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC
UPGA UNITED PROGRESSIVE GRAND ALLIANCE
VIP VERY IMPORTANT PERSON
WAI WAR AGAINST INDISCIPLINE
WAIC WAR AGAINST INDISCIPLINE AND CORRUPTION
WB WORLD BANK
WTO WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
the essence of holding public office, political decisions and actions is not to satisfy any abstract ideals but to make life better for the citizenry in terms of
shelter, food, good health, education and security of lives and property. This is because modern democratic practice worldwide assumes that governments derive mandate from the people and the major goal of governance is to enhance the
welfare of the entire citizenry. Public service is the machinery through which such goals are met. If governance is about the welfare of the people, its integrity or otherwise depends on the extent to which public officers are faithful to the social contract and the level of honesty and transparency
which they
demonstrate in executing such contract. It is only when the activities of government are transparent that
government is acknowledged as accountable to the governed. The conduct or behaviour of the public officer which is often reflected in official decisions must therefore conform
to the highest ethical
standards if public expectations must be met.
The picture painted above constitutes the essence to which governance defined in terms of accountability and transparency can be made more meaningful to the people. However,
even though no one would doubt the desirability of accountable and transparent government irrespective of the form of
government or political
system, a political system or government that renders full account of its stewardship, including the efficiency and effectiveness with which it has utilized resources entrusted to it in the performance of its duties to the citizens promotes stability, peace and prosperity and inspires
public confidence in the government.
A general look at the Nigerian political landscape in the light of the above after over five
decades of political independence reveals not only a paradox but on the contrary thereby resulting to
what the World Bank (1992) describes as governance crisis. The experience of Nigeria from independence to date with few exceptions has been selfish, personal, unresponsive leadership and irresponsible and unaccountable
government which has resulted in the crisis of development. Political power in Nigeria, like in other sub-Saharan African countries, is seen as an end in itself to be used mainly in the pursuit of the self interest of the political ruling class, a class which claimed rights and
privileges but refused to
recognize that power is entrusted to them to serve the interest of the people.
The challenges
of development and democratic stability in developing countries depends to a
large extent on the efficient, effective, responsible, accountable and transparent public service. This
realization is predicated on the assumption
that good governance defined in terms of ethics or ethical
behaviour, accountability and transparency are very fundamental to sustainable development. To corroborate this assertion,
UNDP (2001) observes that there is greater awareness of the need for ethics,
accountability and transparency in the public
service today, given its pivotal role in the governance and development of the nation. However, in spite of this awareness, ethics, accountability and transparency
in governance, the main thrusts for social and political cohesion, development and economic progress,
are
still
very elusive in
Nigeria.
The
elusiveness of this
important vehicle
for
development
is responsible for the decline in good governance in most developing countries
(World Bank, 2007). The growing absence
of accountability,
transparency
and
ethics
in
public service badly
pushes infrastructural decay, poverty escalation, inequality and political incohesion to an unacceptable
dimension. Furthermore, the impact of unethical and corrupt practices in the public service is overwhelming and consequently resulting to loss of confidence in public institutions and the erosion of
the rule of law. Nigeria is, of course, rated low in terms of the quantum
level of low transparency and
accountability in governance.
As a matter of fact, public ethics, accountability and transparency
constitute the ethical
foundation for the quest for a better society
and as such, offer best explanation for why countries that embraced it excel in all spheres of human development.
This implies, therefore, that accountability and transparency are ground norms of ethics upon which democracy and development thrive. However, in contemporary Nigeria, good governance, based on ethics, accountability and transparency have practically been relegated
to the background, while questionable dealings, large scale political ineptitude, squandermania, corruption, favouritism, nepotism and other forms of unethical behaviours that run contrary to good governance remain a bourgeoning problem. This issue has been a challenge in Nigeria since independence and has undermined all her development plans.
Interestingly,
military regimes
after long
years
of dominance
in the political
governance
returned the country to civil rule in 1999. It is in consonance with this that Babawale (2007) noted that democracy has emerged as the most sought political system across the planet. With democracy now in place, comes the euphoria and enthusiasm
that things will turn out better for accountability and
transparency
in governance in Nigeria. Since then, the general expectation has been high because, to many, democracy presupposes the exercise of political power for the promotion of public good.
This is
because public servants entrusted with guarding public resources and executing decisio ns on behalf of the people play an indispensable role in the development and democratic
governance
of the nation. As
such, state or nation must have in place a system
or measures to create an environment for promoting
public ethics, accountability and transparency in governance. Ironically, public service and position of
authority in Nigeria, whether elected or appointed has become a key to unlock the national treasury unto self. This altogether depicts that our development failure is a function of bad governance defined in terms of unethical practices.
However, against all perceivable expectations, accountability and transparency, as an envisaged advantage of democratic governance still remains a hoax in the country. Things in Nigeria have not really changed from
the status-quo. On the contrary, what obtain as the prevalent tendencies are bad,
irresponsive and irresponsible and unethical modes of governance. A situation like this generates intense public apprehension
and cynicism as to why governance based on ethics, accountability and
transparency still remain serious issues in Nigeria. This is predicated on the fact that the task of building good and legitimate governance in a state that is accessible, efficient, ethical, accountable,
transparent and equitable delivery of goods and services has been one of the most critical problems
facing many African countries including Nigeria. One of the many challenges of development in
Nigeria is not premeditated on its lack of resources to forge a common national political and economic
development, but the blatant abuse of office and large scale unethical practices manifested in lack of
transparency and non-accountability in governance. Virtually in all spheres of governance in Nigeria,
there is absence of these essential elements (accountability and transparency) for good governance.
This of course, becomes an empirically
verifiable concern for the study. In other words, the study
provides a platform to assess the performance of one of the institutional mechanisms; “the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal” established under the 1979 Constitution
and
strengthened
under the Obasanjo government
(1999–2007) to
promote
public ethics practices
in Nigeria. The Code of Conduct Bureau
and the Code
of Conduct Tribunal as enshrined in the Act that
established were designed to among other things perform the following functions:
i. To receive declarations by public officers in accordance with the provisions of this Act;
ii. To examine the assets declarations and ensure that they comply with the requirements of this
Act and of any law for the time being in force;
iii. To take and retain custody of such assets declaration and make them available for inspection
by any citizen of Nigeria on such terms and conditions as the National Assembly may prescribe the public
;
iv. To receive complaints about non-compliance with or breach of this Act and where the Bureau considers it necessary to do so, refer such complaints to the Code of Conduct Tribunal
established by section 20
of
this Act in accordance with the provisions of sections 20 to 25 of
this Act (Code of Conduct
Bureau and Tribunal Act CAP,
C 15, 1989).
The
establishment of the Bureau, as Sambo (1992) has observed, is an important instrument for
monitoring the actions and behaviour of public officers to ensure that they
conform to the highest
standard of morality and public accountability.
Part
2 of the Act deals with the establishment of the Code of Conduct Tribunal with section 23
focusing on the powers of the Tribunal to impose punishment on defaulters. The Act specifically states that where the Tribunal finds a public officer guilty of contravening any of the provisions of this Act, it shall impose upon that officer any of the punishments specified under subsection (2) of this section which shall include any of the following:
i. Vacation of office or any elective or nominated office, as the case may be;
ii. Disqualification
from holding any public office(whether elective or not) for a perod not
exceeding ten years; and
v. Seizure and forfeiture to the state of any property acquired in abuse or corruption of office
(Code
of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act CAP, C 15, 1989).
The
rationale for the choice of this problem is predicated on the fact that Nigeria is said to be
one of the richest countries in Africa in terms of natural and human resource endowment. Paradoxically, Nigeria is rated as one of the poorest countries in the world. A further interrogation of the causes reveals a
governance crisis defined in terms of unethical practices, lack of transparency and accountability in
governance at all levels. A 1989 World Bank study of Sub-Saharan Africa has noted that underlying the litany of Africa’s development problems is a crisis of governance (WB,1989).
It is based on the numerous socio-political and economic problems precipitated by unethical practices, that successive post independent Nigerian governments
especially after Balewa government had attempted
to
fight the menace of ethical behaviour and abuse of office by instituting
one
programme, structure, commissions and a lot of legislations ranging from military decrees to Acts
empowering institutions such as the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal, the
Public Complaint Commission, Ethical Revolution programme, War Against Indiscipline(WAI),
War
Against
Indiscipline and Corruption (WAIC); and
many more.
All these were designed to
fight unethical practices thereby promoting public ethics, accountability and transparency in governance. In spite of all these measures, however, unethical practices and flagrant abuse of office are most pronounced to the extent that Nigeria has earned herself one of the most corrupt nation in the world
(TI,2001;2003;2010).
When President Obasanjo assumed office in 1999 with the return to democratic rule, unethical
practices and corruption had reached a fatal stage or what Leo (2000) described as a tidal wave. It is against this backdrop that President Obasanjo in his inaugural speech, among other things, declared and
promised to fight all unethical practices in public service to its logical conclusion and to ensure
transparency and accountability in governance. It is the above philosophical intention that informed the establishment of agencies and institutions such as Budget Monitoring and Intelligent Unit (BMIU); Due
Process Office (DP); Corrupt Practices and other Related
Offences Commission (ICPC), the Economic
and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC); Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiatives
(NEITI) and the strengthening
of
existing ones such as Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal
(CCB and CCT). Despite the establishment of these institutions aimed at combating ethical problem and abuse of office, this problem has persisted to the extent that in 2010, it has been observed by the Transparency International (TI) that Nigeria has slipped from a score of 2.5 in 2009
ranked at 130th position to 2.4 in 2010 taking the 134th spot alongside countries like Sierra Leone, Togo, Ukraine and Zimbabwe (Edet, 2010:9).
The logical question that can be deduced from the above is that why has this ethical
problem
persisted despite these institutions?
This study therefore primarily examined the performance of these
bodies in promoting unethical official attitude of the political leaders and the officers between 1999-
2007 in order to ascertain what factors best explain why some of these institutions established to promote public ethics are not performing.
The need for assessment has become crucial because, despite the recent diverse governmental
efforts especially under President Obasanjo’s democratic governance aimed at stemming the tide of ethical problem and abuse of office in Nigeria through the establishment of EFCC, ICPC DPU, NEITI, etc, and strengthening of existing institutions such as the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal, the problem has proved recalcitrant, partly because these measures, apart from being
half measures, are legal and institutional
responses. But more crucial is the fact that these institutions directly in charge of the problem have not been thoroughly subjected to any comprehensive assessment.
The first step in dealing
with social phenomenon therefore, is to assess the institution concerned and in this case the CCB and CCT because by definition and statutory powers, there are designed to promote public ethics in governance.
1.2 Statement of Research Problem
The study
assessed the performance of the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct
Tribunal in promoting public ethics in Nigeria’s democratic governance (1999-2007). Hence, the
statutory
functions of the CCB and the CCT as stipulated by the Act establishing them constitute
our parameters for assessment.
The importance
of
establishing the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal
as measures to maintaining high level of morality and accountability
by public officers in the conduct of
government business in Nigeria cannot be over-emphasized
(CCB &CCT, 1991; CCB, 2010). What
appears to be a major lacuna is the extent to which the behaviour of public officers conforms to the set functions of the provisional Acts of the CCB & CCT. Similarly, there seems to be a gap or an apparent failure on the parts of government and even scholars as Rothstein (2005) argues, that there is a lack of research regarding what type of strategies are working and what explains success and failure. It is
therefore, expedient as a matter of responsibility to periodically assess these measures (CCB & CCT) being put in place with a view to determining their performance. This, according to Odekunle (1978),
was
necessary because assess ment has significant value of measuring the efficiency
with which
functions are performed, the suitability of means employed in carrying out the task defined
and the end
sought. Thus, the necessity for a periodical check is to help appraise the institutions by indentifying grey areas for improvement.
The need for assessment of institutions such as the CCB and CCT is particularly crucial in a developing polity such as Nigeria, with high degree of human and economic potentials but ironically experiencing deep poverty and infrastructural decay. Therefore, establishing institutions without corresponding mechanisms to check function-performance especially cultivating an independent culture of research orientation will amount to an exercise in futility. It was against this background that this
research is conceived as a platform to empirically verify the function-performance of the CCB and CCT
within the given periods, 1999-2007.
1.3 Research Questions
This study attempted to provide answers to the following research questions:
i) What is the primary purpose for the establishment of the CCB and the CCT?
ii) How much of the Assets Declarations Forms did the CCB received from public officers in accordance with the provision of the Act between 1999-2007?
iii) How many complaints did the CCT
receive about non-compliance with the provisions of the
Act by public officers
within the period under review and what have they done to ensure compliance?
iv) What is the public perception of the functions- performance of the CCB and CCT from
1999-2007?
v) What are the possible factors militating against the effective performance of the CCB and
CCT?
vi)
In what ways and means can the CCB and CCT be empowered and strengthened to carry out their mandate?
1.4 Research Objectives
The
study was designed to achieve the following objectives.
i) To ascertain the primary purpose for the establishment of the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal.
ii) To ascertain how much of the Assets Declarations Forms did the CCB received from public
officers in accordance with the provision of the Act between 1999-2007.
iii) To
ascertain
how
many complaints the CCT received about
non-compliance with the provisions of the Act by public officers within the period under review and
the number tried
and convicted.
iv) To ascertain what is the public assessment of the functions- performance of the CCB and
CCT
from 1999-2007.
v) To identify the possible factors militating against the effective functions- performance of the
CCB and CCT
between 1999-2007.
vi)
To
ascertain ways
and
means
by which the CCB and
CCT
can be empowered and
strengthened to
carry out their mandate?
1.5 Assumptions
This s