A Culture of Corruption: Everyday Deception and Popular Discontent in Nigeria (review)

Daniel Smith offers an easy-to-read, engaging, and personal account of corruption in today's Nigeria. While corruption obviously is not limited to Nigeria (witness the Wolfowitz World Bank scandal and the Bush administration's links with Halliburton), it is, according to Smith, all-encompassing there.

This review is a timely one. I began it on the day of Nigeria's April presidential elections, and anyone who has read this book should not have been surprised by the claims of fraud and irregularities. Anyone who has ever received an e-mail from a Nigerian banking official offering millions for a confidential partnership will find illuminating anecdotes about what is termed "419" in Nigeria. Apparently this type of fraud is widespread: in one internet café Smith observed, "of twenty-five terminals, at any one time at least four or five terminals were used to send scam letters" (p. 35).

The 419 scams (named for the number in the Nigerian penal codes for fraud) are not limited to e-mail schemes. In fact, according to Smith, just about any illegal activity can be referred to as 419. Indeed, Nigerians "frequently use the expression '419' to describe the manipulations of the opposite sex" (p. 81). However, I find it somewhat a stretch to conclude that the e-mail authors are "creating understandings of inequality and corruption, not only in Nigeria, but in a larger world system" (p. 29). More likely, those authors are simply trying to make a dishonest buck!

I was particularly interested in learning how the nongovernmental (NGO) sector has been 419'ed. As foreign governments became warier about the integrity of Nigeria's government, "greater amounts of donor resources have been channeled to NGOs. Nigerian elites have responded by creating a plethora of NGOs designed to tap and control these resources" (p. 110). Smith lists GONGOs, government-organized NGOs, to act as fronts for greedy politicians (and especially their wives, who generally establish such entities); BONGOs, bank-organized NGOs, where wealthy individuals can use the banking system to float interest-free loans; PONGOs, whereby the organization exists only with a post-office box; EMGOs, the same, but with e-mail addresses; and TONGOs, which have only telephones (p. 103).

Another interesting and illuminating chapter was on the Bakasi Boys, a form of perverted vigilante justice. Though welcomed initially as an alternative to the corrupt police and a sort of instant adjurator of justice, they soon were viewed as "the criminals they were supposed to fight" (p. 188).

Smith explores the importance of Pentecostal and evangelical Christian movements in southern Nigeria. He claims, correctly in my view, "This is the most significant and potentially explosive trend in contemporary Nigeria" (p. 207). A salient point about this surge in viewing people's individual actions, Smith contends, "deflects attention from questions about political morality . . . and the politicians and cronies who dominate public life" (p. 217).

Smith acknowledges the ambivalence about what is and is not corruption. He notes, "in the struggle to survive and succeed in contemporary Nigeria, the immediate interests of assisting family, friends, and other allies usually trump a more abstract awareness of what might be in the best interests of the larger society" (p. 85). Indeed, he admits that he participated in the corrupt system when he assisted his niece (he is married to a Nigerian) in gaining school admission (p. 92), though, "It is not my intent to provide a confession" (p. 95).

Now to the down side. This book could have used some serious editing. Smith repeats himself many times. For example, he repeats at least five times (I stopped keeping count after page 116) the point about Nigerians being resentful of the fact that while oil-rich, it has to import refined gasoline because of leadership corruption.

Additionally, Smith makes sweeping statements about Nigerians' views. Generally, his conclusions are based on anecdotal evidence only. I saw little sampling or scientific survey results. Again...