Two weeks ago, Spencer Mogapi wrote an article in his column, The Watchdog, explaining why Minister Kenneth Matambo must step down from cabinet following the decision by the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to charge him with corruption. Another interesting article, written by Uyapo Ndadi on the same issue, appeared in the SundayStandard newspaper dated 29th May 2011.
Mogapi and Ndadi start from the simple premise that Minister Matambo is the custodian of the nation’s financial resources. He controls the purse of the nation and is one of the most powerful ministers in the country. One can also add that Minister Matambo plays a significant role in determining the development trajectory of the country. He heads a ministry that co-ordinates the national development process.
This compels me to agree with Mogapi and Ndadi that by virtue of his position as the Minister of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP), Matambo has the power to negotiate and even enter into contractual agreements with international financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on issues that have a direct bearing on our economy. This means that as the chief government negotiator on financial matters, his integrity and reputation must be intact.
Public administrators and political leaders (including President Khama), always lecture us on the efforts that they make to promote and nurture good governance within our borders. This is not surprising because good governance has become an issue of global importance and our administrative and political leaders have seized every opportunity to tell us about it. But the question that one can ask is: what is good governance or what does it entail?
Simply put, good governance is all about proper management of the country’s affairs. It is about responsible and accountable leadership. This applies to both public administrators and politicians. It has ingredients such as transparency, public accountability, respect for the rule of law, separation of powers and others.
Public administrators and politicians must be held accountable for their decisions and actions. In other words, they must always be in position to explain or defend their decisions and actions to their superiors, citizens and courts of law. This is mainly because they make decisions on daily basis that can have serious effects on the lives of the citizens.
It is, therefore, my contention that Minister Matambo can properly explain and/or defend his decisions and actions when he is outside cabinet. He cannot defend himself against the decision that he made as the Managing Director of BDC and continue performing his ministerial duties which include providing answers and explanations on the operations of the very same entity that he is accused of “cheating.” It is ethically and morally wrong for him to do that because it simply goes against international best practices and the ideals of good governance.
When asked to explain why Minister Matambo cannot resign from cabinet, Dr Ramsay stated that there is no law that compels him to do so. This is a very disappointing answer coming from someone who was born and grew up in the USA. That something is legal does not necessarily mean that it is ethically and morally right. For example, it is not illegal for a man to sleep with a woman and her daughter, but it is unethical and immoral to do so, given the values that we cherish and uphold as a civilized society.
Our politicians and public administrators must realize that some of the things and problems that we do and encounter as a nation cannot be resolved through the use of certain legal instruments or the country’s constitution. The split of the BDP which resulted in the formation of BMD is a good example of what can happen if people are obsessed with the use of laws to resolve political or ethical problems. The on-going strike by public servants, which has crippled our economy, is another example of what can happen if people believe that they can use the courts to resolve a financial, and by implication, a political issue.
The fact that Minister Matambo is presumed innocent until proven guilty does not mean that he is different or better than other people who resigned from cabinet to clear their names in courts of law. Daniel Kwelagobe and the late Peter Mmusi resigned from cabinet at the beginning of the 1990s after they were implicated in dubious land allocations in peri-urban areas. They took the government to court to clear their name, won and were reappointed ministers.
At one point, Jacob Nkate resigned from cabinet following revelations that he had connections with a man who was accused of doing things in an improper manner. Guma Moyo was also forced to quit cabinet because it was reported that the DPP was preparing a charge sheet for him. The charges were never brought against him. Ndelu Seretse also did the honourable thing last year and resigned from cabinet to fight corruption charges in a court of law.
Now, if someone can be dropped from cabinet on the basis of unsubstantiated reports, how can Matambo, who has a formal charge against him, be allowed to continue holding a ministerial position? Is President Khama applying double standards? Is he trying to tell us that even though all animals are equal, some are more equal than others? How does he expect people to believe him when he talks about the need to promote transparency and the efforts made by his administration to minimize and prevent corruption?
President Khama has already set a precedent of reserving certain cabinet posts for people that he trusts and loves as he did with the Ministry of Defence, Justice and Security. Why can’t he do the same thing with the MFDP if he really needs Matambo and believes that he is indispensable? The president should just allow justice to take its course because he has the power to reappoint Mathambo to cabinet if he wins his court case.
It is important for the president to realize that by keeping Matambo in his post, he (Khama) runs the risk of giving citizens the impression that he deliberately wants to influence the outcome of case. Once such an impression becomes prevalent, people will lose confidence and trust in our legal system, a thing that I believe President Khama would not like to see happening during his tenure.
By resigning from cabinet, Matambo will basically be showing the nation and the international community that his inner moral compass is working well. It will be an indication that he has no intention of deviating from moral rectitude.
The greatest mistake that he can make is that of telling Batswana that his inner moral compass is lacking. People whose inner moral compass is not working are said to be amoral. They can do abundant wrong without feeling no qualm at all.
I honestly do not think that Matambo would like to be viewed as someone who falls within this category. He surely knows the difference between right and wrong. Hence, he should do the right thing and resign from cabinet.
Dr Mothusi teaches Public Administration at the University of Botswana
