Tanzania: Anti Corruption Survey Volume 1

The United Republic of Tanzania
THE PREVENTION AND COMBATING

OF CORRUPTION BUREAU
NATIONAL GOVERNANCE AND

CORRUPTION SURVEY
2009 REPORT
Volume 1: ANALYSIS OF MAIN FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
DAR/MCC
Dar Management and
FACEIT in Association with
Computing Centre
and
21st November 2009

CONTENTS
CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................ ii

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... iv
ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................ v
PREFACE .......................................................................................................................... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................. viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... ix
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1
I.1 Background and Purpose of the Survey ............................................................... 1
I.2 Objectives and Scope of the Survey ..................................................................... 3
I.3 Survey Methodology and Sample ........................................................................ 4
I.4 Profile of Survey Respondents ............................................................................. 5
I.5 Limitation of the Survey ...................................................................................... 6
SECTION II: MAIN FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY........................................................ 7
Chapter 1: RESPONDENTS UNDERSTANDING OF CORRUPTION ................... 7
Chapter 2: PREVALENCE, SERIOUSNESS AND TRENDS .................................. 9
2.1 Experience of Corruption ..................................................................................... 9
2.2 Causes of Corruption .......................................................................................... 12
2.3 Perpetrators of Corruption .................................................................................. 13
2.4 Seriousness of Corruption .................................................................................. 15
2.5 Trends in Corruption .......................................................................................... 17
Chapter 3: QUALITY OF SERVICE DELIVERY, HONESTY AND INTEGRITY . 19
3.1 Quality and Efficiency of Public Service Delivery ............................................ 19
3.2 Honesty and Integrity of Public Institutions ...................................................... 22
3.3 Honesty and Integrity of Private Sector ............................................................. 23
3.4 Perception of the Private sector on Policies, Laws and...................................... 24
Regulations ................................................................................................................... 24
3.5 Public Service working environment and administration .................................. 25
Chapter 4: GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION IN KEY SECTORS .................... 29
4.1 Judiciary System and Legal Sector .................................................................... 29
4.2 Police Force ........................................................................................................ 30
4.3 Education Sector ................................................................................................ 32
4.4 Health Sector ...................................................................................................... 34
4.5 Public Utilities .................................................................................................... 35
4.6 Other Governance Indicators ................................................................................ 36
Chapter 5: FIGHTING CORRUPTION ....................................................................... 39
5.1 Political Will ...................................................................................................... 39
5.2 Public Agencies in the Fight Against Corruption .............................................. 40
5.3 Corruption Reporting System............................................................................. 40
5.4 Sources of Information ....................................................................................... 43
SECTION III: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................. 45
Chapter 6: CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................... 45
Chapter 7: RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................ 48
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 50
ii
National Governance and Corruption Survey – 2009 Report: Volume 1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Survey Sample and Response Rate………………………….. 3
Table 2: Percentage distribution of respondents

associating corruption to various definitions …………………. 5
Table 3: Forms of gratification given ………….………….………………… 7
Table 4: Key Problems in Tanzania

(As reported by households, public officials and enterprises) ……… 13
Table 5: Percentage distribution of enterprises reporting ………….…………. 18
Table 6: Households Perception on Obstacles to Quality ……………… 26

Health Services
Table 7: Respect for Women Rights ………….………….………….……… 33
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Distribution of Households by Level of Incidence of …………. 8

Making Unofficial Payments (Percent)
Figure 2: Relationship between Grand and Petty Corruption …………. 10
Figure 3: Percentage distribution of enterprises indicating the …………. 11

initiators of bribery
Figure 4: Percentage distribution enterprise reporting frequency of ……. 17

Government procurement tenders being awarded in a
clear and efficient manner
Figure 5: Percentage distribution of firms reporting the availability …….. 21

of rules and regulations affecting firms
Figure 6: Households’ Perception on Obstacles to Using Courts …..…… 26

in Tanzania
Figure 7: Households' Perception of Quality of Education Services …………. 28
Figure 8: Households’ Perception of Quality of Health Services …………. 29
Figure 9: Distribution of Households with Indication where …………. 36

to Report a Corrupt Act
Figure 10: Distribution of Households by Reasons for not …………. 37

Reporting a Corrupt Act
iv
ABBREVIATIONS
CPI Corruption Perception Index as developed by Transparency
International
ESRF Economic and Social Research Foundation
FACEIT Front Against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania
ICP International Cooperating Partners
LA Local Authorities
MDAs Ministries, Departments and Agencies
MKUKUTA Mkakati wa Kuondoa Umaskini Tanzania (Poverty Reduction)
MP Member of Parliament
NACSAP National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan
NAO National Audit Office
NFGG National Framework for Good Governance
NGACS National Governance And Corruption Survey
NGOs Non Governmental Organizations
NSSF National Social Security Fund
PCCB Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau

PPA Public Procurement Act
PPRA Public Procurement Regulatory Authority
TANESCO Tanzania Electricity Supply Company
TNBS Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics
TPC Tanzania Postal Corporation
TRA Tanzania Revenue Authority
TTCL Tanzania Telecommunications Company Limited
URT United Republic of Tanzania
TRANSLATIONS
“TAKRIMA” Kiswahili word for payment or material items (including food &
drinks) given ostensibly as an unsolicited “goodwill” gesture but
in reality, for a favour.
“BAKSHISH” Kiswahili word for payment or an article given as a gift after

receiving good service from someone.
v
PREFACE
The problem of corruption in our country is not new and certainly it did not start with my
Government i.e. the Fourth Phase Government of The United Republic of Tanzania. Past
Governments have dealt with it in various ways, although corruption remains a problem
in our country, as it is in the whole world, albeit in varying degrees. To tackle corruption,
the country should generally be well governed – that is to have good governance in the
country. This study, National Governance and Corruption Survey is very appropriate in
that sense.
To understand the problem of good governance in general and corruption in particular, it
is important to conduct studies, which will generate facts and indicate appropriate way
forward in the fight against the vice. Without appropriate studies, the fight against
corruption cannot be scientific. The National Governance and Corruption Survey is an
effort towards that end.
In my inaugural speech to Parliament in 2005, I said the following and I quote: we will
accelerate the war on corruption in a more scientific way and by addressing its root
courses …. But all this will not account much if the public is not cooperative. I ask the
full cooperation of citizens in the war on corruption. This report is part of implementation
of that speech, to fight corruption in a more scientific way. The public have indeed
cooperated in giving information to the consultants, who covered all the regions of
Tanzania Mainland in this study.
In 1996, a study similar to this was undertaken by the Third Phase Government. A
Presidential Commission of Inquiry Against Corruption was appointed to carry out a
study on the status of corruption in the country as part of a strategy of the government to
enhance integrity and accountability. The commission released its report one year later
and recommended a number of things as a way of tackling the vice. In 1999 the
government formulated a National Framework on Good Governance (NFGG) to facilitate
the coordination of reforms designed to foster Good Governance and improve public
service delivery. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (NACSAP) was
formulated as a component of the NFGG to increase efforts in corruption prevention. In
2002, the Annual State of Corruption in Tanzania Report was published as part of the
vi
follow-up of the 1996 report. However, this report was less detailed and hence the need
for more detailed and thorough baseline report on the problem of corruption in the
country. The National Governance and Corruption Survey is broad, detailed and captures
important parameters which gives an insight into the problem of corruption in the country
to date.
The National Governance and Corruption Survey add to our understanding of the vice in
the country and offers opportunities for tackling the same. Three surveys, i.e. household,
public servants and enterprises were carried out and some of the main findings are that:
despite the efforts enumerated above, corruption is widespread and a major impediment
to development efforts; the leading cause of corruption is greed among public servants
and business people; in some sectors of public service, corruption has become a way of
life; the institutions which are central in safeguarding good governance like the police
and the judiciary are ranked highest in perpetrating corruption. The indication one gets is
that: my Government have still a long way to go in eradicating this vice and I want to
assure the public that we are equal to the task.
Some of the recommendations are that: more research be carried out on those institutions
which ranked highest and determine the root causes of corruption; the PCCB be
strengthened to be equal to the increasing tasks and increase public awareness on the vice
and elicit their support.
We will take the results of the survey seriously and implement the recommendations
therein to contain corruption in our country.
I would like to thank the Government of Denmark, for providing financial support, which
made this study possible. I would like also to commend the consultants who did a good
job in research and compilation of the report. Last but not least I would like to recognize
the contribution of the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau, who on behalf
of the Government commissioned and supervised the survey.
Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete

President of the United Republic of Tanzania
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report has been prepared by many individuals under the general supervision of Mr.
Enock L. Kamuzora, Chairman of FACEIT, the lead consultant, and Cletus P.B. Mkai
who led the project team. Other members of the project team were: Professor A.S.
Mawenya, D. Ntukamazina, B.S. Sreekumar, Dr. V.E. Muba, S. Ngallaba, R.
Rutabingwa, Dr. M.M.P. Bundara, M.R. Lugongo and S.J. Chavda.
The consultants benefited from contributions made by the Technical Committee

especially set up for this assignment by the Prevention and Combating of Corruption
Bureau (PCCB): Dr. Vincent Kihiyo (Chairman), Abdallah Mlangwa, Oscar Hosea,
Sabina Seja, Doto Nkonga, Stephen Ndaki, Ahmed Makbel, Mary Rusimbi, Dr. Flora
Kessy, Daniel Kobb, Tim Harris, Emily Poskett and Jack Titsworth.
During fieldwork stage, Grace Morgan, a World Bank consultant, gave valuable insights
during her visit.
Christian Karstensen, First Secretary (Governance and Political Issues) at the Royal
Danish Embassy, provided helpful comments throughout.
Dr. Edward Hoseah, the Director General of PCCB, actively participated to discuss the
draft Report during the first of the five zonal workshops staged in Dar es Salaam, thereby
generating a constructive debate moderated by FACEIT’s Vice-Chairman, E.N.
OleKambainei.
PCCB’s three counter-part staff, Sada Mzimba, Benno Shunda and Abdallah Kitwana
worked long hours throughout the assignment.
We acknowledge with thanks the involvement of the 12 field supervisors and 37 field
interviewers who were employed by FACEIT to carry out the actual fieldwork.
viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
[A] BACKGROUND
Current government initiatives to promote good governance and to fight

corruption in Tanzania can be traced back to April 1995 when retired President
Nyerere held a press conference in Dar es Salaam during which he pointed out
the evil of corruption impacting Tanzania. Corruption became the ruling part
manifesto for elections in November 1995. Thereafter, in January 1996, following
the establishment of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry Against Corruption.
Ten months later the Commission published its Report, popularly known as the
Warioba Report, which is hailed as one of the most respected and commended
analysis of corruption by any African state. The Warioba Report marked the
opening up of public discussion on corruption in Tanzania and paved the way for
extensive public sector reforms intended to enhance good governance and
combat corruption.
Since 1996 significant improvements have been achieved within good

governance in Tanzania. A sound regulatory framework has been established,
increased political freedoms are present and the Government is to a large extent
held accountable by the opposition, civil society, media and the Parliament. In
particular, the Parliament and media outlets have played a much more active role
in domestic politics during recent years leading to increased scrutiny of the
Government.
Tanzania’s performance in recent international corruption surveys shows a mixed

picture. In international ratings, Tanzania has experienced recent set-backs as
regards the supply side of good governance, but this is coming from a high level
of earlier performance.
For eight consecutive years since 1999, the country’s Corruption Perception
Index (CPI) of Transparency International registered a steady increase from a
score of 1.9 in 1999, on a scale of 10 with 10 designating total absence of
corruption, to a score of 3.2 in 2007, ranking 94th (out of 180 countries).
However, following the much hyped media reporting in 2007 of acts of grand
corruption in 2000 – 2005 (which resulted in resignations or prosecutions of very
senior public officials) it dropped to a ranking of 102 in 2008 and of 126 in 2009
with corresponding CPI scores of 3.0 and 2.6 respectively. Nevertheless,
Tanzania was recently ranked best in the East Africa Bribery Index with a 17
percent bribery incidence vis-à-vis Kenya (45 percent) and Uganda (35 percent).
Again, as regards the rating of World Bank’s IDA, under its Country Policy and
Institutional Assessment (CPIA) there was a dip in 2008 to 3.8 from 3.9 the
previous year; the average rating among all IDA borrowers being 3.3; thus
ix
Tanzania remained above average and its performance relating to property rights
and rule-based governance, quality of budgetary and financial management,
efficiency of revenue mobilization and quality of public administration remained
relatively good. In Doing Business, Tanzania dropped from overall 124 in 2008 to
127 in 2009, mainly caused by a dramatic drop in the ease of starting up a
business.
Tanzania recently scored 59.2 out of 100 in the Ibrahim Index of African
Governance (which correlates well with corruption index), and was ranked 12th
out of 53 African countries. Within the East African region, Tanzania was ranked
second, and scored well above the East African regional average, which was
46.9, as well as above the overall continental average at 51.2. At category level,
Tanzania scored well above the continental average in the categories of Safety
and Rule of Law, Participation and Human Rights, Sustainable Economic
Opportunity, and below the continental average for Human Development.
Information on governance issues and corruption in Tanzania has not been

adequately collected to inform policy and decision making by the Government.
Earlier attempts through the Presidential Commission of Inquiry Against
Corruption and the State of Corruption in Tanzania 2002 Report, while
addressing specific questions on corruption, do not provide a comprehensive
analysis of the state of corruption in Tanzania and do not establish a baseline
that is needed for policy reform.
This report presents the findings of the first ever composite baseline survey of
governance and corruption in Tanzania.
The survey was conducted between February and June 2009 and covered
households, public officials and enterprises. The purpose of the survey was to
provide national and regional perspectives of governance and corruption in
Tanzania as perceived by ordinary citizens and by officials in the public and
private sectors.
[B] KEY MESSAGES
The information collected from the survey offers a set of key messages that
complements and reinforces the government’s current stand on the fight against
corruption.
• Corruption in Tanzania is a serious governance and developmental

challenge. It is a major problem affecting all sectors of the national economy
from service delivery to natural resources exploitation, industrial production,
environmental protection, business and commerce.
x
• Service delivery is crippled by corruption and institutional inefficiency. Both
households and enterprises rate the quality of services provided by key public
institutions, notably the police force and judiciary as poor. They are also
particularly concerned about the low levels of integrity in these institutions.
• Tackling greed and poverty, the root causes of corruption, is paramount in the
fight against corruption. Poorly remunerated public servants who need to
make ends meet in an environment of rising cost of living and high inflation
resort to petty corruption in order to supplement their incomes. On the other
hand, greed to amass wealth illegally by corrupt bureaucratic elite and
politicians diverts, through grand corruption, substantial public resources into
private possessions, thereby depleting the government’s ability to deliver
basic public services or to pay decent wages to public servants.
• The business environment is undermined by corruption and excessive

bureaucracy. Responses from enterprises indicate that corruption is a
significant impediment to the general growth and operation of businesses in
Tanzania. In addition to corruption, excessive bureaucracy and complicated
requirements make it difficult to start a business and operate it honestly.
• Improvement in public administration is needed in order to make public

institutions more efficient, transparent and accountable to users of public
services. Public officials’ responses indicate that although a sound public
service management framework is in place, the enforcement of rules and
regulations in most public institutions, particularly those governing personnel
and financial management, is weak.
• Intensive public awareness campaign is needed to make the general public

understand various types of corruption and their consequences to the national
economy; the public also needs to know the corruption reporting system and
safeguards for those who report on corruption.
[C] MAIN FINDINGS AND CHALLENGES
C.1 Prevalence, Severity and Trends in Corruption
• Respondents of the three surveys have a common understanding of

corruption, and overwhelmingly relate the word corruption with
“demand for unofficial payment”, “abuse of power” and “demand for
sex”, in that order. This understanding is consistent with the broad
definition of corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for personal
gain. In general, however, their perception of different types of
corruption is limited. A majority of households, for example, would
tolerate the giving of “bakshish” or “takrima” and even embezzlement
or fraud because they do not perceive them to be corrupt practices.
xi
• Corruption in Tanzania is fairly widespread and serious. Company
executives report to have encountered situations where they had to
bribe public servants in order to obtain services more frequently than
households and public officials have. They rate corruption – both petty
and grand – as a serious problem that tops the list of problems
currently facing the country. Corruption is ranked as the third major
problem by households after inflation and high cost of living, while
public officials rank it as the fourth major problem after high cost of
living, inflation and unemployment.
• The leading cause of corruption is attributed to greed. This is followed,

for households and public officials by moral indecency and poor law
enforcement; and for company executives by lack of control and
accountability of public officials, and moral decay. Other causes of
corruption identified by more than 70 percent of respondents are poor
leadership, high cost of living, poor remuneration, lack of effective
corruption reporting system, lack of independent and effective judiciary
and poverty. Of course, these causes should not be independently
treated, as they are intricately related in a manner that is not easily
discernible.
• Public officials have been singled out by a majority of respondents as

the initiators and perpetrators of corruption, who demand bribes from
their clients before serving them. The main form of gratification given
in exchange for the services is money, but in some cases, respondents
who were obliged to bribe parted with property or sex. Public officials
also identified business people and multinational companies as
prominent entities who, through bribing, influence the decisions made
by top public sector officials.
• Respondents to the survey indicate that corruption is ebbing in some

sectors, but increasing in others. There is a significant improvement in
the education and public health institutions when compared with the
preceding two years, while during the same period corruption has
deteriorated in the police force, judiciary and land office. Public
officials report that the practice of making “under the table payments”
which was widespread two to five years ago has declined and will
continue to decline. Similarly, company executives are optimistic; a
majority of them perceive the current level of corruption to be “better”
or “much better” than in 2005.
C.2 Quality of Service, Integrity and Honesty of Public Institutions
• A central measure of governance is the quality of service delivered,

whether it be in form of law enforcement, regulation of markets or other
xii
social services such as education and health. Both households and
enterprises, the main users of public services, generally rate the quality
of services delivered by key public institutions as low. The data
indicates the majority of public institutions in Tanzania need to focus
on improving their performance in service delivery.
• The institutions ranked as providing very poor services are the police
force, the courts, water and electricity supply agencies and lands
office. Those considered by households to be performing better than
others are the pension funds, insurance companies and tender boards;
while company executives rate the Tanzania Postal Corporation (TPC),
Parliament and Tanzania Telecommunications Company Ltd (TTCL),
in that order, as the best performing institutions.
• Service quality is one measure of the strength of governance. The

second is integrity and honesty. Households rate the police force as
the most corrupt institution, followed by the judiciary and the health
sector. The least corrupt institutions are the National Social Security
Fund (NSSF), Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau
(PCCB) and the banking sector. When comparisons are made across
regions, the findings reveal that the police force as a whole, traffic
police, the judiciary and health sector are considered very corrupt. In
addition, other institutions singled out by the households as being
corrupt are the local government, land tribunals and the education
sector.
• Public officials, on the other hand, consider the services provided by

their institutions to be of high quality. Moreover, they suggest that the
services are offered at relatively low cost and that they fully satisfy the
user’s needs and are accessible to poor citizens. It is not surprising,
therefore, that they appear more generous than households and
company executives in their assessment of integrity and honesty of
public institutions. A majority of public officials also rate the trade
unions, NGOs and the private sectors as “honest” or “completely
honest”
• Enterprises rate their own sector as ranking first in terms of

transparency, honesty and integrity, followed by public corporations
and government departments. However, in contrast with the concept
of honesty, a majority of company executives also indicate that
“corruption is always practiced” in their sector and that nearly all
private companies cheat on taxes. In an assessment of 33 industries,
one third of them was rated by over two thirds of company executives
as having good reputation, led by the telecommunications industry,
food and beverages industry and hotel services industry. The high
competition in these industries could be a contribution factor in this
xiii
high rating. The industry with the worst rating is mining and quarrying,
followed by construction.
C.3 Governance and Corruption in Key Sectors
• Performance of the Judiciary: The administration of justice is

particularly afflicted by poor governance in the judiciary. Households
and enterprises rank the judiciary as the second most corrupt
institution after the police force. Corruption and delayed justice are the
main barriers against households and firms access to courts.
Households and company executives report that they bribe judges,
prosecutors and other court officials in order to speed up legal
proceedings and to influence the course of justice.
• Performance of the police force: Poor governance in the police

force is a major constraint to the administration of justice. Households
and enterprises rank the police force as the most corrupt public
institution. Corrupt officials of the police force extort bribes from
criminals in order to distort the course of justice. They also extort
bribes from suspected criminals in order to bail them out or to release
them from police custody. While the majority of households believe
that the police force “does not deserve” public trust, they favourably
acknowledge the good cooperation that exists between the police force
and the people in tackling crime; they are particularly satisfied with the
timely arrival of the police force at the scene of crime in cases of
emergency.
• Performance of the education sector: Education is a major sector

which impacts nearly every citizen. Over 80 percent of household
respondents rate the education sector services as “good” or “very
good”. This assessment is truly remarkable considering the existing
problems reflected in the survey as impacting households, notably with
respect to high costs of living, inflation and inadequate remuneration
for teachers.
• Performance of the health sector: Like education, the health sector

impacts nearly every citizen. The quality of health services in public
health delivery points is favourably perceived by households, a
majority of whom rate the services as “good” or “very good”, in terms of
staff, facilities and surroundings. Notwithstanding this favourable
assessment, the overwhelming perception is that medical personnel
are corrupt.
• Performance of public utilities: Access to public utilities such as

electricity and piped water supply is limited countrywide, particularly in
the rural areas. Poor governance adversely affects the performance of
xiv
electricity (TANESCO) and water supply agencies. Over a quarter of
households report that it is common to bribe officials of these agencies
in order to secure a connection.
• Public procurement: Public procurement and contracting sectors are

prone to grand corruption. Enterprises report that the tendering
process is “rarely” or “never” fair and that, on average, procurement
contracts involve unofficial payments of around 10 percent of the
contract value.
• Other governance indicators: In response to questions concerning

the political environment, rule of law, human rights and women rights,
households indicate that, in general, they are satisfied with the
functioning of the political environment within the current framework of
multiparty system operating in the country since 1992. They also
believe that, in general, the rights of citizens are adequately respected
and that the law is respected and applied equally to all. Over half of
the respondents also believe the government to be transparent and
performing its duties in an accountable manner. However, a majority
of households believe women rights are not respected in property and
land ownership.
C.4 Fighting Corruption
• Political commitment is essential in the fight against corruption. One

very positive finding from all the three surveys is that households,
public officials and company executives believe that the current
Tanzania government is committed to fight corruption. Public officials
also believe that there is a genuine desire to fight corruption within
their own organizations, while most company executives disagree with
statements that condone corruption, such as “corruption is a practical
necessity for getting things done quickly”, Over two thirds of company
executives also confirmed their willingness to provide material support
in government initiatives to combat corruption by way of donating funds
or volunteering staff on company time or resources to participate in
such initiatives.
• Clearly the government is not alone in the fight against corruption.

When asked to rate how some institutions have helped in combating
corruption in Tanzania, respondents give a high rating to the media,
Faith-Based Organizations, PCCB, NGOs, and political parties.
Other highly rated organs are academics and teachers, professional
associations, Members of Parliament, Development Partners and the
Legal and Human Rights Commission. The institutions rated as the
least effective in combating corruption are the police force and the
courts.
xv
• Awareness of the corruption reporting process is very poor among
households. Citizens are not only unaware of the process to follow to
report corruption but they also do not know where to report. Many
households stated that they are not willing to report corruption because
they fear being victimized. Some believe that it is useless to report
because culprits would not be prosecuted, while others do not wish to
betray anyone.
• On sources of information about corruption, households indicated that

the radio is their principal source. Other important sources mentioned
are newspapers, television, public meetings and places of worship.
The majority of respondents confirm that the information received from
these sources during the past twelve months is very reliable,
[D] RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE WAY FORWARD
Results of the survey clearly demonstrate the need and urgency of intensifying
the war against corruption in Tanzania. Based on the findings of the survey,
follow-up actions should focus on achieving two broad objectives, namely: to
consolidate the achievements already made in the fight against corruption and to
strengthen the capacity of various organs involved in this fight. In this respect, a
five-strand approach is recommended involving:
• More research in high risk areas that are prone to corruption, in order to
determine the root causes of corruption in these areas and the most effective
strategies of combating them. Areas identified as falling under this category
in this survey are the police force, courts and local government authorities for
petty corruption; and public procurement, customs, revenue collection and
land allocation for grand corruption.
• Measures for strengthening the capacity of PCCB to tackle high profile grand
corruption cases in order to increase the success rate of prosecuting such
cases;
• Measures to make public institutions improve performance in service delivery;
• Measures for strengthening collaboration between the government and other

organs in the civil society and private sector that are involved in the fight
against corruption, notably the media, faith-based organizations, NGOs and
professional associations; and
• Measures to enhance public awareness of corruption, its causes and

consequences in society and national development, and to improve the
system of reporting corruption.
xvi
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION
I.1 Background and Purpose of the Survey
Governance is the way in which public power and authority is formed and
used to control and manage society’s resources. Good governance rests
on four pillars: transparency, accountability, predictability and participation.
Corruption, commonly defined as the abuse of entrusted power for private

gain, is a key symptom of weak governance. It has a severely debilitating
effect on the economic, social and political environment in which it occurs.
Corruption hampers economic growth, increases poverty among the poor,
and undermines investment and capacity building. Hence, anti-corruption
strategies need to be an integral part of a development strategy designed
to eradicate poverty, stimulate economic growth and enhance capacity
building.
Current government initiatives to promote good governance and to fight

corruption in Tanzania can be traced back to January 1996, following the
establishment of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry Against
Corruption. Ten months later the Commission published its Report,
popularly known as the Warioba Report, which is hailed as one of the
most respected and commended analysis of corruption by any African
state. The Warioba Report marked the opening up of public discussion on
corruption in Tanzania and paved the way for extensive public sector
reforms intended to enhance good governance and combat corruption.
Since 1996 significant improvements have been achieved within good

governance in Tanzania. In 1999 the Government formulated the National
Framework for Good Governance (NFGG) to facilitate the coordination of
reforms designed to foster good governance and improve public service
delivery. The National anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan
(NACSAP) was also formulated in 1999 as a component of the NFGG and
as a Government’s key management instrument to combat corruption.
The second phase of NACSAP (NACSAP II) was launched in 2006.
Tanzania’s performance in recent international corruption surveys shows a

mixed picture. In international ratings, Tanzania has experienced recent
set-backs as regards the supply side of good governance, but this is
coming from a high level of earlier performance.
For eight consecutive years since 1999, the country’s Corruption

Perception Index (CPI) of Transparency International registered a steady
increase from a score of 1.9 in 1999, on a scale of 10 with 10 designating
1
total absence of corruption, to a score of 3.2 in 2007, ranking 94th (out of
180 countries). However, following the much hyped media reporting in
2007 of acts of grand corruption in 2000 – 2005 (which resulted in
resignations or prosecutions of very senior public officials) it dropped to a
ranking of 102 in 2008 and of 126 in 2009 with corresponding CPI scores
of 3.0 and 2.6 respectively. Nevertheless, Tanzania was recently ranked
best in the East Africa Bribery Index with a 17 percent bribery incidence
vis-à-vis Kenya (45 percent) and Uganda (35 percent).
Again, as regards the rating of World Bank’s IDA, under its Country Policy
and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) there was a dip in 2008 to 3.8 from
3.9 the previous year; the average rating among all IDA borrowers being
3.3; thus Tanzania remained above average and its performance relating
to property rights and rule-based governance, quality of budgetary and
financial management, efficiency of revenue mobilization and quality of
public administration remained relatively good. In Doing Business,
Tanzania dropped from overall 124 in 2008 to 127 in 2009, mainly caused
by a dramatic drop in the ease of starting up a business.
Tanzania recently scored 59.2 out of 100 in the Ibrahim Index of African
Governance (which correlates well with corruption index), and was ranked
12th out of 53 African countries. Within the East African region, Tanzania
was ranked second, and scored well above the East African regional
average, which was 46.9, as well as above the overall continental average
at 51.2. At category level, Tanzania scored well above the continental
average in the categories of Safety and Rule of Law, Participation and
Human Rights, Sustainable Economic Opportunity, and below the
continental average for Human Development.
One major activity envisaged in NACSAP II is to carry out a

comprehensive diagnostic National Governance and Corruption Survey
(NGACS), which is the subject of this Report. The concept paper for
NACSAP II states that:
“A comprehensive National Governance and Corruption Survey will be

launched presently, and, in the future it will be conducted every two years.
It will be established as one of NACSAP’s standard instruments for
identifying where corruption occurs and on what scale, conducting
analytical work relating survey results to the delivery of services,
communicating with the public, and helping set priorities for tackling
corruption issues and strengthening corruption-prone ministries,
departments, agencies and local government authorities”.
Information on governance issues and corruption in Tanzania has not

been adequately collected to inform policy and decision making. Earlier
attempts through the Presidential Commission of Inquiry Against
2
Corruption and the State of Corruption in Tanzania 2002 report, while
addressing specific questions on corruption, do not provide a
comprehensive analysis of the state of corruption in Tanzania and do not
establish a baseline that is needed for policy reform. Hence the need for
this survey.
I.2 Objectives and Scope of the Survey
This Report presents the findings of a comprehensive baseline survey

conducted from February to June 2009 on governance and corruption in
Tanzania, whose overall objective is to provide national and regional
perspectives of governance and corruption in Tanzania as perceived by
ordinary citizens and officials in the public and private sectors. The
specific objectives of the survey are:
• To solicit information from citizens and foster public awareness about

national governance and corruption issues;
• To identify areas or issues for further research;
• To provide an empirical basis for strategic planning and programme

planning for NACSAP;
• To provide an empirical and analytical basis to argue for budgetary

resources for NACSAP and related reforms; and
• To provide an empirical benchmark and basis for monitoring and

evaluating the effectiveness of government’s governance and anti-
corruption programmes over time.
The Terms of Reference of the survey are given in the Appendix to this
Report.
The Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) conducted

the survey through the Front Against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania
(FACEIT), a non-governmental organization specialized in analysis and
measurement of corruption in Tanzania, who performed the survey in
association with the Dar Management and Computing Centre and Unique
Financial Services Ltd. The Government of Denmark provided financial
support for the execution of the survey.
As is standard in international practice, the survey was conducted as a

composite survey consisting of three separate surveys of households,
public officials and private enterprises that were carried out
simultaneously. The survey covered all 21 regions of mainland Tanzania
3
and the results provide national and regional perspectives of governance
and corruption.
This document is the first volume of a four-volume Report presenting the
findings of the baseline survey. It presents and analyses the main findings
of the composite survey together with conclusions and recommendations
for the way forward, focusing on corruption and related elements of
governance, notably service delivery and the functioning of core
institutions dealing with the rule of law, public finance, public procurement
and public personnel management. Detailed findings (as well as prima
facie conclusions & recommendations) of each survey are presented
separately as Volume 2: Household Survey, Volume 3: Public Officials
Survey and Volume 4: Enterprises Survey.
The Report provides PCCB with the first-of-its-kind empirical information

which can be used, inter alia, for multiple objectives by multiple
stakeholders, including sectoral ministries, the regional administration and
local governments.
I.3 Survey Methodology and Sample
The survey involved randomly selected households, public officials and

enterprises, who were asked to respond, in a face-to-face interview, to
structured and pre-tested questionnaires. The questionnaires were based
on those prepared by the World Bank and as refined through consultations
with an especially constituted Technical Committee charged with the
overall supervision of the survey. The questionnaires were further refined
and adapted to Tanzanian conditions through a pilot survey conducted
before implementing the full survey.
The diagnostic surveys of households, public officials and business

enterprises adopted different sample designs. Altogether, a total of
14,394 respondents were selected nationwide for interviewing, on the
basis of representative probability samples distributed to the three surveys
as shown in Table 1 below. The survey samples were designed, subject
to important time and financial limitations, to ensure high quality of data,
from both the national and regional perspectives. As Table 1 shows, high
response rates were attained in all the three surveys:
Table 1: Survey Sample and Response Rate

Type of Survey Sample Result Response
(No. of selected (No. of Rate (%)
Respondents) Respondents)
Household Survey 6,804 6,785 99.7
Public Officials 6,900 6,114 88.6

Survey
4
Enterprises Survey 690 627 90.9
Total 14,394 13,526 94.0
I.4 Profile of Survey Respondents
In interpreting the results of the survey, it is important to bear in mind the

profile of the survey respondents. These are briefly summarized below:
Households
The household respondents typically come from a humble background –

only 15 percent of the households have electricity and only 11 percent of
them are connected to public water supply; also, over a third have no
formal education.
Public Officials:
Respondents to the public officials survey come from a wide spectrum of

government and public service employees that is representative of
gender, age, education, seniority and salary levels.
• gender : 58% / 42% (male/female split)
• education : degree or equivalent holders : 45%

secondary school : 52%
• age : 25 – 55 years (even spread)
• terms of service : 91% as permanent, with pension

7% on contract basis
• salary : 50% @ USD 200 per month

: 40% @ USD 600 per month
under ½% @ USD 1000+ per month
• cadre of post : 28% senior professionals

53% selected officers
• previous employer : 64% student (i.e. joined public service on

completing school/university
education)
12% private sector
5
Enterprises:
Of the 627 firms covered by the survey, 549 were in the urban and the
remaining 78 in the rural areas of Tanzania; they included:-
• 384 sole proprietors

• 141 partnerships
• 12 limited liability companies
• 4 publicly listed companies
• 86 others (unclassified)
I.5 Limitation of the Survey
The split of businesses types is skewed in favour of small and medium

enterprises. Bearing in mind that grand corruption involves the larger
business organizations; the extent of grand corruption reflected by the
result of this survey is likely to be limited. Hence there is need to carry
out, at a future date, a separate survey targeted at the larger business
houses operating in Tanzania.
Ultimately, the surveys provide a reliable representation of the views and

opinions of those who responded. However, they cannot possibly assess
the level of knowledge or honesty of each respondent, nor can they
represent vital information withheld from the interviewer. It is important to
bear this in mind when interpreting the findings.
6
SECTION II: MAIN FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY
Chapter 1: RESPONDENTS UNDERSTANDING OF CORRUPTION
In all the three surveys, respondents overwhelmingly relate the

word corruption to “demand for unofficial payment”, “demand for
sex” and “abuse of power”, in that order (Table 2). “Demand for
unofficial payment” dominate the scene by being chosen by 92.5
percent of households, 94.4 percent of public officials and 94.4
percent of company executives. Respondents in the three surveys
also ranked these three types of corruption as the most serious
types of corruption, in the same order. Respondents also
understand that corruption arises in both public and private sectors
and that it can be petty or grand, organized or unorganized.
Table 2: Percentage distribution of respondents

associating corruption to various definitions
Percentage of Respondents
Definition
Households Public Enterprises
Officials
Demand for unofficial 92.5 94.4 94.4
payment
Demand for sex 29.7 57.4 50.9
Abuse of power 25.9 31.1 36.8
Demand for favour 17.3 18.6 27.1
Fraud 18.9 19.2 19.9
Takrima 16.5 18.9 19.8
Embezzlement of public 11.3 12.9 17.2
funds
Baksheesh 6.6 7.7 12.0
Other 6.4 10.6 8.3
This understanding of corruption is consistent with the broad

definition of corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for personal
gain. This broad definition encompasses unilateral abuses by
government officials such as embezzlement and nepotism as well
as abuses linking public and private sectors such as bribery,
extortion, influence peddling and fraud.
7
Across the country, households have rated both petty corruption
(83.7 percent) and grand corruption (85.3 percent) as being very
harmful; this points to the two types of corruption being viewed
interchangeable by households. Public officials also rate both petty
corruption (88.4 percent) and grand corruption (92.8 percent) as
being very harmful, a response that reflects that grand corruption is
viewed by public officials as being more harmful than petty
corruption.
Notwithstanding the above rating, it is significant to note that, in

general, there is a limited understanding of the different types of
corruption. For instance, only a small number of households (11.2
percent) and public officials (12.9 percent) consider embezzlement,
which is a major type of grand corruption, to be corruption. It is
clearly puzzling to see that a large proportion of household
respondents (88.8 percent) and public officials (87.1 percent) do
not consider embezzlement as corruption! The same applies to
fraud which is considered by an equally small number of
households (18.9 percent), public officials (19.1 percent) and
enterprises (19.4 percent) to be corruption.
It is also significant to note that “takrima”, a common type of

political corruption deployed to influence voters during
parliamentary and local government elections, which was legalized
by Parliament in 2000 and later outlawed following strong
condemnation by anti-corruption activists, is acceptable to many
respondents. Only a relatively small number of households (16.5
percent), public officials (18.9 percent) and company executives
(19.8 percent) consider “takrima” to be corruption.
The survey findings also reflect that, in general, company

executives have a better understanding of different types of
corruption than households and public officials. Indeed, the
understanding of corruption by households is essentially limited to
“demand for unofficial payment”, and more than 70 percent of
households do not understand other types of corruption.
8
Chapter 2: PREVALENCE, SERIOUSNESS AND TRENDS
In order to make sound decisions on the level of effort needed to

fight corruption, one needs to know how prevalent corruption is in
society as well as its seriousness and trends. The survey sought
views of households, enterprises and public officials on their
experience of corruption, causes of corruption, its seriousness and
trends. The findings reflect that corruption is not only widespread,
but also serious. They also reflect the respondents concern that
corruption is unlikely to decline significantly in the near future.
2.1 Experience of Corruption
A significant proportion of households (39 percent), public officials

(32.5 percent) and company executives (49.7 percent) confirmed
having had to bribe a public servant in order to obtain service.
Although this proportion is much lower than the number of
respondents who stated that corruption is very harmful (implying
that the latter say so despite having no direct personal experience
of corruption), it clearly highlights the existence of significant
corrupt practices that affect both citizens and businesses. These
findings also indicate that private business enterprises encounter
more corruption than households and public officials.
When assessed from a regional perspective, the extent of

corruption varies from one region to another. For instance, the
enterprise survey shows that Morogoro region has the highest
percentage of company executives who are frequently obliged to
pay bribes (90 percent) and Rukwa region has the lowest rate of
incidence (30 percent).
The main form of gratification given in exchange for the services

offered is money, as reported by households (86%), public officials
(86.8%) and company executives (91%) who were obliged to bribe.
In some cases respondents who confirmed having bribed public
servants had to part with property, according to seven percent of
households, four percent of company executives and five percent of
public officials; or sex, as reported by about one percent of
respondents of each of the three surveys (see Table 3 below).
Table 3: Forms of gratification given
Form of Households Public Enterprises

Gratification Officials
9
Money 86 86.8 91
Property 7 5 4
Sex 0.8 1.2 0.6
10
Where money changed hands, the amount involved in 80 percent
of the households who confirmed having bribed was less than TZS
50,000 (USD 40); this includes those who parted with less than
TZS 5,000 (19 percent) and those who parted with between TZS
5,000 and TZS 10,000 (21 percent). This indicates that corruption
experienced by households is essentially petty.
Households who paid bribes had different reasons for doing so.
Fifty percent stated that they paid because the bribe was
demanded. Others paid because “they know that they usually have
to pay in order to get service” (21.1 percent), or because “they have
to pay to get service early” (18.4 percent).
Of course there are regional disparities in the reasons that

prompted households to bribe public servants in order to obtain
service. In Arusha region, for example 71 percent of households
who were obliged to bribe did so in order to get service quickly,
despite the fact that no bribe was demanded from them. In all other
regions, the proportion of households who bribe for this reason is
much lower (less than 23 percent). However, the proportion of
households from whom bribes were demanded is very high in Mara
region (90.9 percent) and Morogoro region (72.4 percent).
The frequency of paying bribes varies and depends on the type of

service being sought (see Figure 1 below). To speed up legal
proceedings in court, for example, 22 percent of households report
that they found themselves obliged to pay bribes “always”, “most
times” or “frequently”.
Figure 1: Distribution of Households by Level of Incidence of
Making Unofficial Payments (Percent)
3.1.34: Distribution of Households by Level of incidences of Making Unofficial Payments

(Percent)
10.5
Don't know/Not Stated 19.3
12.2
3.3
4
Always 1
1.9
5
8.7
Most Tmes 2.8
5
7.9
9.3
Frequently 6.1
8
14.6
14.2
Seldom 11.7
17.5
33.7
52.6
Never 58.6
54.9
35.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
To obtain basic public services To obtain licenses or permits

To update/revise tax status To speed up legal proceedings in a court
11
The enterprises report that their community has the highest annual
contact with TANESCO (9 times) out of which bribe was paid (3
times) of about TZS 40,000 Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA)
follows next with 6 contacts per annum in which two such contacts
resulted in bribing transactions of involving TZS 118,685. This, too,
is petty corruption.
Public officials rated “under the table” payments as being “wide

spread” explaining that it was practiced (by companies and
persons) to the extent of 70 percent two to five years ago; it is
currently practiced to an extent of 66 percent.
Regarding grand corruption, enterprises divulged key information

based on public tendering practices and percentages of contract
sum changing hands as bribes paid in order to win government
contracts (section 3.1). Apart from this, almost all other reports on
actual experiences of corruption in this survey relate to petty
corruption, which is significant. This confirms that grand corruption
is also sizeable in Tanzania, which is what enterprises inferred to
when making reference to methodology for winning government
contracts (section 3.1). This is also borne out by the responses of
public officials when asked as to which are the prominent entities
who, through bribing, influence the decisions made by top public
sector officials: they identified business people and multinational
companies as the prominent entities (see section 2.3).
2.2 Causes of Corruption
The leading cause of corruption is attributed to greed/selfishness by

96.2 percent of households, 96.6 percent of public officials and 95.5
percent of company executives. This is followed, for households by
moral indecency (92.5 percent) and absence of punishment (90.3
percent); for public officials by moral indecency (90.9 percent) and
poor law enforcement/absence of punishment (85.2 percent); and
for company executives by lack of control and accountability of
public officials (86.7 percent) and moral decay (84.1 percent).
Other causes of corruption identified by more than 70 percent of
respondents in the three surveys are poor leadership, high cost of
living, poor remuneration, lack of effective corruption reporting
system, lack of independent and effective judiciary and poverty.
Admittedly, the above causes are intricately related, in a manner

that is not manifested by their ranking. For example poverty and
poor remuneration, though rated as less important causes of
12
corruption, are closely related and known to be the leading causes
of petty corruption. Poorly remunerated public servants who need
to make ends meet in an environment of rising costs of living,
inflation and prospects of unemployment almost on a daily basis,
resort to petty corruption in order to supplement their incomes.
Their poverty ensures that petty corruption thrives under this
situation.
Beyond poverty there is greed, particularly by corrupt bureaucratic

elite and politicians bent on amassing wealth illegally, which is cited
by over 95 percent of respondents in the three surveys as the main
cause of corruption. Greed drives grand corruption and the latter
aggravates poverty and subsequently leads to the casual
relationship shown in Figure 2 between greed, corruption and
poverty, as established by FACEIT.
Figure 2: Relationship between Grand and Petty Corruption
Greed Grand
Corruption Poverty Petty Corruption
(+ Capital flight)
The fact that the ranking of causes does not distinguish between
those applying to petty corruption and those attributed to grand
corruption, implies that petty and grand corruptions are treated as
interchangeable by the survey respondents. Hence, acts of petty
corruption (by traffic police, hospital staff, etc) may have been
interpreted as manifestations of greed by some respondents,
pointing to an inadequate understanding as to the underlying
causes of petty corruption and also as to any true comprehension
of the nature of grand corruption. Further research is needed.
2.3 Perpetrators of Corruption
Corruption, like any exchange, requires two actors – a buyer and a

seller. The buyer is an ordinary citizen who bribes a public official
(“seller”) in order to obtain service. The buyer is also a business
person in the private sector who gives gratification to a public
official in order to get service or to secure a procurement contract
with the government. The buyer may pay the bribe for a service
which is perfectly legal, but scarce, or in order to obtain something
13
which he or she does not deserve, such as exemption from a valid
regulation or influencing tender results in his or her favour.
Whatever the case, a corrupt deal cannot go through unless both
parties agree to it and both parties agree to keep quiet about it.
Corruption can be initiated by the service provider (i.e. public

official) or service recipient. It is therefore perpetrated by corrupt
public officials who demand gratification in order to offer services
and by unscrupulous businessmen and citizens who bribe public
officials in order to get services they do not deserve or in order to
accomplish an illegal deal. Ordinary citizens compelled by
desperation to pay bribes in order to obtain legitimate services are
mere victims of corruption.
Survey findings show that the experience of 83 percent of the

enterprises was that bribery was initiated by service providers,
while 11.8 percent indicated that service recipients initiated bribery
(see Figure 3). The survey results confirm that in the majority of
cases where corruption is involved, it is the government officials
who demand bribes from their clients before serving them.
Figure 3: Percentage distribution of enterprises indicating

the initiators of bribery
From a regional perspective, the findings show that Mara, Pwani

and Manyara are the three top regions where government officials
14
initiated bribery as reported by more than 80 percent of enterprises.
Iringa has the lowest rate of 30 percent.
When asked who perpetrates corruption in Tanzania, households

also singled out government officials (reported by 84.1 percent of
respondents), followed by politicians (44.1 percent), local
businessmen (27.5 percent) and foreign businessmen (29.8
percent). Citizens were also identified by 29.8 percent of
respondents as perpetrators of corruption in society.
At the regional level, government officials are perceived by over 60

percent of household respondents to be the leading perpetrators of
corruption in all regions except Iringa. They are particularly
notorious in Mara, Manyara, Kigoma, Lindi, Arusha and Morogoro
regions where they are identified as perpetrators of corruption by
99.1 percent, 96 percent, 92.5 percent, 92 percent, 90.4 percent
and 90.1 percent of household respondents respectively. In Iringa
region, foreign businessmen lead as perpetrators of corruption
according to 48.8 percent of households and government officials
are rated lowest at 4.8 percent.
Households were also asked to assess the extent to which

professionals and other persons in important positions were
involved in corruption. The professionals perceived by over 40
percent of households to be mostly involved in corruption are traffic
police officers, police officers, court clerks, magistrates, doctors and
nurses.
When public officials were asked which prominent entities who,

through bribing, influence the decisions made by top public sector
officials, they identified business people (64.8 percent) and
multinational companies (63.9 percent) as the prominent entities.
2.4 Seriousness of Corruption
Responses show clearly that corruption – both petty and grand –

impacts seriously almost on all citizens and Tanzanian entities.
Results of the survey show that corruption is considered to be a
major problem by 92.3 percent of firms, 88.2 percent of households
and 92.9 percent of public officials. Only 7.2 percent of firms, 11
percent of households and 5.8 percent of public officials consider
corruption to be a moderate problem.
15
Table 4 below highlights key problems currently facing Tanzania as
perceived by households, public officials and enterprises.
Table 4: Key Problems in Tanzania

(As reported by households, public officials and enterprises)
Key Problem Percentage of Respondents
Households Public Enterprises

Officials
Inflation 92.3 89.6 90.6
High cost of living 90.6 90.1 89.9
Corruption in public 86.5 83.2 90.9

services
Unemployment 83.6 86.2 83.7
Cost of health services 75.9 75.5 77.1
When compared with other problems facing the country, corruption

in public sector dominates as the biggest problem reported by 90.9
percent of company executives, followed by inflation reported by
90.6 percent of company executives and high cost of living,
reported by 89.9 percent of company executives, comes third.
When corruption is further examined from the regional dimension;
Arusha, Morogoro, Mara and Iringa lead, with 100 percent of
enterprises identifying corruption in the public sector as a major
problem, followed by Lindi (97percent), Manyara (97 percent and
Dodoma (96 percent).
Similarly, when compared with other problems which the country is

going through, 92.3 percent of households identified inflation as the
most serious problem, followed by cost of living reported by 90.6
percent of households and corruption in the public sector comes
third, as reported by 86.5 percent of household respondents.
Regional comparison shows that Dodoma region leads followed by
Mara and Mtwara regions as regions with high corruption in the
public sector according to 99.7 percent, 97.8 percent and 97.2
percent of household respondents, respectively.
When asked to compare corruption with other problems facing the

country public officials ranked corruption in public services as the
16
fourth biggest problem (according to 83.2 percent of respondents).
According to public officials, high cost of living tops the list of
serious problems followed by inflation and unemployment as
reported by 90.1 percent, 89.6 percent and 86.2 percent of
respondents respectively.
When the respondents cite “inflation” and “high cost of living” as

being more serious a problem than “corruption in public services”
they do so as if the three are unrelated; when enterprises state that
“access to and cost of financing” and “poor infrastructure” impede
their growth and that these are their principal operational problems,
this is in fact a pointer to high cost of borrowing (attributable to
banks’ inability to recover money stolen through fraud or
embezzlement) and to the very high cost of infrastructure incurred
when it is procured by the public sector entities (attributable to
procurement corruption). It is, in the final analysis, grand corruption
which drives the problems faced by enterprises in their day-to-day
operations. These, in turn, translate as inflation and high cost of
living experienced by all who live in Tanzania.
2.5 Trends in Corruption
All respondents are up-beat about the fight against corruption.

Households have indicated that the vice is ebbing in some sectors
but increasing in others. They have reported that on basis of
perceived comparison with the preceding two years, the responses
show that (despite a very large proportion who do not know) there
is significant improvement in public health and public school
institutions and likewise in City/Municipal/District/Town Councils
and the Village/Mtaa governments; these are institutions which
impact the respondents directly and possibly on a daily basis.
Also, over 50 percent of the same household respondents consider

the quality of health services to have improved (over the preceding
3 years) and over 50 percent of them expect a further improvement
over the next three years.
However, household respondents also indicate that, compared to

the preceding two years, corruption has deteriorated significantly in
the police force as a whole (according to 63.5 percent of
respondents), traffic police (66.9 percent), the judiciary (58.1
percent) and land office (41.4 percent).
Public officials have responded (as has been stated before) that the
practice of making “under-the-table payments” by companies and
17
persons is widespread; they have also observed that whereas that
practice was to an extent of 70 percent two to five years ago, it is
currently reduced to about 66 percent and that it is expected to
decline further to a level of about 45 percent in the next two years.
Similarly, 52.5 percent of respondents to the enterprises survey

consider that the state of corruption now is “better” or “much better”
than in 2005.
Here, it should be noted that households are referring to petty

corruption, whereas the enterprises (and possibly, public officials)
are having in mind grand corruption; if so, this is exhilarating
because grand corruption, the ultimate driver of petty corruption,
appears to be slowing down.
18
Chapter 3: QUALITY OF SERVICE DELIVERY,
HONESTY AND INTEGRITY
3.1 Quality and Efficiency of Public Service Delivery
A central measure of governance is the quality of service the

government delivers; whether it be in the form of law enforcement,
regulation of markets or other social services such as health and
education. This section presents the evaluation of users
(households and enterprises) of public services with respect to
quality and efficiency.
Respondents of the household and enterprise surveys were asked

to rate a variety of public service institutions in terms of quality and
efficiency of services delivered by these institutions on a scale of
four ranging from very poor to very good. Both households and
enterprises generally rate the quality of services provided by key
public institutions as low. The data indicates that the majority of
public institutions in Tanzania need to focus on improving their
performance in service delivery.
Households rate the traffic police lowest, according to 57.1 percent

of respondents, who rate their services as very poor, and 37.1
percent of respondents who rate the services as poor, making a
total of 94.2 percent of households who are dissatisfied with the
quality of services provided by the traffic police.
Another institution considered by households as providing very

poor services is the police force as a whole according to 94 percent
of respondents. This is closely followed by the courts (91.2
percent), water supply agencies (85.9 percent) and TANESCO
(82.5 percent). Pension funds, insurance and tender boards are
considered to be performing better than other institutions according
to 31.2 percent, 30.7 percent and 28.9 percent of respondents,
respectively, who rate the quality of their services as very good.
Company executives rate the services provided by the police force

as the poorest, according to 73.4 of respondents, followed by the
judiciary (67 percent), TANESCO (63 percent), and Ministry of
Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development (60.0
percent). The best rated institution is the Tanzania Postal
Corporation, whose services are rated as being good to very good
19
by 86.1 percent of company executives, followed by the Parliament
(84.6 percent), Tanzania Telecommunications Company Ltd (82.8
percent) and Central Government (81.5 percent).
In assessing the quality of services provided by the police force by
region, over 50 percent of company executives rate them as very
poor in 18 out of 21 regions. The exceptions are Tanga, Pwani and
Tabora regions which are rated as providing good quality services
by 55.2 percent, 52.2 percent and 50 percent of company
executives respectively.
As in indirect measure of the efficacy of service delivery in public

institutions, the survey attempted to evaluate difficulties
encountered by private sector enterprises in doing business with
the government through public procurement. A large proportion of
the government expenditure budget is expended on public
procurement and contracting, which involves the procurement of
goods, works and services from the private sector. It is an area
that is normally perceived to be prone to corruption. Sixteen
percent of enterprise respondents indicated that they participated in
public tendering. When asked to assess how fairly government
procurement is processed, 68.4 percent of respondents report that
it is “rarely” or “never” fair (see Figure 4).
Figure 4: Percentage distribution enterprise reporting

frequency of government procurement tenders being awarded
in a clear and efficient manner
Enterprises further reported that, in general, public tendering

processes are beset with several malpractices, which are done
frequently, notably:
20
• bid rigging (reported as being frequent by 83.3 percent of
respondents);
• qualified bidder being disqualified at pre-qualification stage

(76.7 percent);
• adjustment of specification in the interest of a favoured
company (68.9 percent);
• leakage of client’s budget at tender stage (67.5 percent); and
• modification of contract terms during implementation stage,
i.e. after award of tender (67.6 percent)
Enterprises further reported that having “connections” and making

of an “unofficial payment” are important factors to win a government
contract, according to 68 percent and 63.7 percent of respondents,
respectively, and that, on average, public procurement contracts
involve unofficial payments amounting to 10.4 percent of the
contract value. Regional comparisons reflect significant differences
in the quantum of bribes paid, which is higher than the national
average in Mara region (25 percent of contract value), Dar es
Salaam (14 percent) and Lindi region (12 percent); while in Tanga,
Ruvuma, Iringa, Tabora, Rukwa and Kigoma regions the bribe paid
is three percent of the contract value or lower.
Apart from corruption, inflation and high costs of accessing finance,

enterprises face various bureaucratic problems in their business
operations as indicated in Table 5, which shows that over 55
percent of enterprises consider government requirements for
operating business in Tanzania as being fairly difficult to very
difficult to meet. In this respect, government requirements on
taxation, tax holidays, reclaiming duty, etc are reported to be the
most difficult to meet. Firms also reported that it takes an average
of 58 days to clear goods through customs instead of the official 15
days.
Table 5: Percentage distribution of enterprises reporting

difficulty of meeting Government Requirements
Government requirements Difficulty of meeting requirements

(% of respondents)
Very/Fairly Fairly/Very
Difficult Easy
Regulations relating to licensing 56.0 44.0
Restrictions on buying and selling assets 56.3 43.6
Ownership regulations 59.7 40.3
Labour market regulations 68.8 31.2
Price control 73.8 26.2
Filing of tax returns 75.5 24.5
21
Taxation, tax holidays, reclaiming duty, etc. 78.0 22.0
In order to overcome bureaucracy, many firms are forced to use

facilitators (private accountants, lawyers and tax advisers) to assist
them in processing documents to meet government requirements.
Results of the survey show that such facilitators cost firms an
average of TZS 1,412,605 per annum. Enterprises also report that
it takes 12 percent of senior management’s time to process
government requirements, with an annual average cost of TZS
1,104,702.
3.2 Honesty and Integrity of Public Institutions
Service quality is one measure of the strength of governance. The

second is integrity and honesty. In the survey, respondents were
asked to rate the honesty and integrity of various public institutions
on a scale of four, ranging from very dishonest to very honest.
Households rate the police force as a whole and the traffic police to
be the most corrupt institutions, according to 88.7 percent and 85.6
percent of respondents, respectively. This is followed by the
judiciary (86.3 percent) and the health sector (84.9 percent). The
least corrupt institutions are the NSSF, PCCB and banking sector;
these institutions are ranked as corrupt by only 28.7 percent, 29.6
percent and 36.7 percent of household respondents, respectively.
When comparisons are made across regions, the findings reveal

that the police force as a whole, traffic police, the judiciary and
health sector are considered very corrupt. In addition, other
institutions singled out by households as being corrupt are the local
government, land tribunals and the education sector.
Public officials, on the other hand, appear to be more generous

than households and company executives in their assessment of
integrity and honesty of public institutions. Two thirds of the
respondents rate the following seven public institutions as being
“honest” or “completely” honest: the Army (81.1 percent of
respondents), Offices of District Commissioners (72.1 percent),
commercial banks (72 percent), the Parliament (69.4 percent),
PCCB (68.7 percent), National Audit Office (66.9 percent) and
social security funds (66.5 percent). Two thirds of respondents also
rate the following seven public institutions as being less honest:
Ministry of Home Affairs (52.8 percent of respondents), High Court
(51.2 percent), Ministry of Finance (50.5 percent), Ministry of
Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development (44.9
22
percent), Bank of Tanzania (41.9 percent), District/Primary Courts
(36.3 percent) and the Police Force (31.1 percent).
A majority of public officials also rate the trade unions, NGOs and
the private sector as “honest” or “completely honest”, according to
77.8 percent, 73.5 percent and 70.3 percent of respondents
respectively.
One trend that stands out in these findings is that integrity is closely
related to performance. In general, public institutions rated as
having high integrity are also highly rated in terms of quality of
services delivered.
3.3 Honesty and Integrity of Private Sector
The business community does business with both the public sector
and with itself. Corrupt practices in both cases adversely affect the
national citizen either as taxpayer of the public sector or the
consumer of the final product from the private sectors. The survey
sought to examine corruption within the private sector.
70.3 percent of the public officials regard the private sector as

being either “honest” or “completely honest” – which rating is better
than the one they accord either to parliament (69.4 percent) or to
PCCB (68.7 percent) – and is ranked sixth after ranking first the
Army (81.1 percent); followed by trade unions (77.8 percent);
NGOs (73.5 percent); Offices of District Commissioners (72.1
percent) and the commercial banks (72 percent).
Enterprises, consider the private sector as ranking first (60 percent)

in terms of transparency, honesty and tendering process followed
by public corporations (20 percent) and government departments
(18 percent), but they also give the following self assessment which
conflicts with the concept of “honesty”:-
• 95.8 percent stated that they “always demand receipts”;
• 91.2 percent stated that only, “a few companies” keep one set of
books;
• 76.4 percent stated that “hardly any company” pays taxes

honestly; and
• 55 percent stated that “corruption is always practiced” in their

sector
23
In a self-assessment of the reputation of the private sector by
industry, ten out of 33 industries assessed were reported by more
than two thirds of the respondents that they had a good reputation,
led by the telecommunications industry (79.6 percent), food and
beverages industry (77.8 percent) and hotel services industry (75.1
percent). The high competition in these industries could be a
contributing factor to this high rating. The industry with the worst
rating is mining and quarrying, followed by contractors, which were
rated to have a good reputation by only 21.5 percent and 23.0
percent of respondents respectively.
3.4 Perception of the Private sector on Policies, Laws and
Regulations
Policies, Laws, rules and regulations prevailing in the country

provide the environment under which enterprises operate.
Accessibility of documents on policies, laws rules and regulations
enables enterprises to know their rights and obligations including
the right rates of fees payable where need be. Figure 5 shows
how easy it is for enterprises to access their documentation. They
are generally available, with 41 percent indicating that they are very
easily available and 30 percent showing they are available, making
a total of 71 percent. Only two percent indicated that they are very
difficult to obtain.
Figure 5: Percentage distribution of firms reporting the

availability of rules and regulations affecting firms
24
When asked how predictable the policies, rules and regulations
were, the firms stated that they are generally predictable, with 40
percent indicating that they are completely predictable and 32
percent indicating they are fairly predictable giving a total of 72
percent. Seven percent indicated that they are completely
unpredictable. Predictable policies, laws and regulations reduce
uncertainty in the business operating environment making it
conducive.
When enterprises were asked to compare between now and 2005

on the predictability of economic and financial policies, rules and
regulations, their response indicates that both years were equally
fairly predictable.
For the private sector to play a leading role in the economy there
needs to be consultations between the business community and
government. Fifty nine percent of enterprises feel that government
consults them sometimes and 20 percent said they are consulted
always adding up to 78.8 percent.
Enterprises also generally rate the intervention of government in

their daily business operations as minimal. When asked to assess
the frequency of such interventions, a majority of respondents
indicated that the government never interfered with their operations
in respect of dividends and mergers (reported by over 80 percent of
firms); investment, sales and employment (reported by over 70
percent of respondents). However, 43.3 percent and 41 percent of
respondents respectively reported that there was government
interference “always” or “sometimes” with respect to pricing and
wages.
3.5 Public Service working environment and administration
Public officials, on average, consider the services provided by their

institutions to be of high quality. Moreover, they point out that the
services provided by their institutions are offered at relatively low
cost and that they fully satisfy the user’s needs and are accessible
to poor citizens.
As an indirect measure of the quality of the working environment in

the public service, public officials perceptions about the quality of
25
management policies, guidelines and regulations related to
personnel issues were assessed by way of responses on how
decisions at the institution level are taken. In this respect, survey
results show that over two thirds of public officials “agree” or
“strongly agree” that stipulated regulations and procedures
• are formal and written;

• are simple, clear and easy to understand;
• do not require an excessive number of administrative steps;
• are well supervised (managers make sure that rule are
followed); and
• are strictly applied (non-compliance always leads to negative
consequences for those who do not follow the rules).
Responses from over two thirds of public officials also confirm that
stipulated regulations and procedures include agreed performance
targets and measurement criteria that are simple, indicating the
existence of good quality management of organizational functions
in public institutions.
Further, public officials were asked about the implementation of

these procedures during the two financial years prior to the survey
as relates to hiring of staff, assignments, promotions and salary
increase. In response more than two thirds of public officials
“agree” or “strongly agree” that
• decisions are made in a transparent manner;

• decisions are useful for improvement of institutional
efficiency; and
• positions falling vacant are made public (when appropriate)
This means that public officials favourably rate the staff recruitment
process and information in their respective institutions.
In response to questions concerning budget administration, most

public officials agreed with the statements that:
• budget administration decisions are subjected to regular

internal and external audits;
• budget administration decisions are based on specific
criteria defined in writing; and
• budget administration decisions are based on purely
technical criteria.
This means that public officials rate budget monitoring mechanisms

as effective. However, we observe significant differences among
26
regions with respect to perceptions on political influence in budget
decisions; over 50 percent of public officials in Kilimanjaro, Tanga,
Dar es Salaam, Ruvuma and Mbeya regions believe that influential
connections within public institutions are an obstacle to budget
management.
Exploring decisions made during the administration of public

procurement is another indirect measure of the quality and efficacy
of public service management. Results of the survey show that
public officials generally believe that guidelines for public
procurement management are adhered to and that the procurement
process is done transparently and competitively as stipulated by the
Public Procurement Act (PPA) and its regulations. This however,
contradicts their own assessment (as reported by 45.8% of the
respondents) that complying to PPA does not eliminate awarding
contracts to unqualified bidders.
When asked about the frequency of corrupt practices (such as bid

rigging, bribery, contract modification to favour a particular bid and
contractor “cartelling”) in the public procurement process, a majority
of public officials gave non-committal responses to the effect that
either they “do not know” or that such practices were “not frequent”,
implying that the tendering process was fairly conducted in their
respective institutions. These responses, however, are in stark
contrast with the results of the enterprise survey which show that
public procurement is prone to corruption (section 3.1 above). This
discrepancy may be attributed to the fact that only a few public
officials are conversant with procurement activities of their
respective institutions. However, it may also be a deliberate
attempt to hide misdeeds of public institutions from the public.
Further research is needed to validate these findings.
In general, the survey results reflect a high level of satisfaction

among public officials with their employment in public service. In
this respect, public officials overwhelmingly agree with the following
statements which are quite revealing.
• “salary increase has helped my standard of living…”;

• “my salary and benefits are very satisfactory”; and
• “working in public sector is better than working in private
sector”.
Clearly, the responses show that as matters stand, a majority of the

public officials prefer to hang on to their public service jobs. It is
difficult to assess, however, the extent to which rent-seeking
opportunities, which are abundant in several public service posts,
27
influence this preference, bearing in mind that, by their own
assessment, public officials confirm that the practice of under-the-
table payments is still thriving at a level of 66 percent.
28
Chapter 4: GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION IN
KEY SECTORS
4.1 Judiciary System and Legal Sector
The malaise in the Judiciary and therefore, indeed, in the entire

legal sector is worrisome. There is wide-spread reporting of petty
corruption – affecting ordinary households – and there is also deep
rooted and systematic grand corruption as is experienced (but
reported indirectly) by the enterprises (and, in all probability, known
also to the more senior public officials who have, throughout, given
evasive answers to direct questions).
Households rank the judiciary as the third most corrupt public

service provider (after traffic police and the police force ranked,
respectively, first and second); over two thirds of the respondents
express the view that the judiciary is “more corrupt” than other
organs of the government, and over 76 percent of households
believe that the judiciary does not deserve public trust. Some
57.4% of the public officials rate the district/primary courts as being
either “dishonest” or “completely dishonest”
Enterprises view the judiciary as the second most corrupt institution

after the police force. Survey results further show that:-
• 73.2 percent of enterprises view the judiciary as being “rarely”
or “never” fair or impartial
• 68.6 percent of enterprises view the judiciary as being “rarely”

or “never” honest or uncorrupted
• 87.4 percent of enterprises do not use the Court for dispute
resolution
• 57.9 percent of enterprises report judges as being given bribes
directly.
There are many obstacles that prevent firms from using the court
system. The first in severity is the excessive amount of time taken
by proceedings, as reported by 88.2 percent of respondents to the
enterprises survey. It was reported that, on average, a case takes
fifteen months to settle, with the longest cases taking an average of
nineteen months. Other obstacles reported by over 70 percent of
enterprises include difficulties in sentence enforcement,
29
complicated legislation, costs of accessing justice and judge’s lack
of credibility and access to adequate legal counsel.
Examination of the most severe obstacle, excessive length of

duration of court cases, shows that Mara and Mwanza regions have
the longest average duration per case of 33 months. Mbeya region
has the shortest average duration of 2 months per case. For those
enterprises with prolonged cases in the courts, 24 percent reported
having been given an indication that there was a need to offer a
bribe (and 58 percent of them accordingly paid out to the judges
direct, with an additional 21 percent paying the court clerks and 16
percent paying to prosecutors or officials in the prosecutor’s office).
Households experience similar obstacles to those cited by

enterprises. Figure 6 below highlights the seriousness of these
obstacles as perceived by households.
Figure 6: Households’ Perception on Obstacles to Using

Courts in Tanzania
Figure 3.1.20: Households' Perception on Obstacles to Using Courts in Tanzania
Other
Courts are too far
Lack of efficient enforcement

of court decision
Too complex process
Too long process
Incompetent
magistrates/judges
Court decisions influenced by
corruption
High gratification
Too high lawyer fees
Too high court fees
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0
NOT SERIOUS AT ALL FAIRLY SERIOUS EXTREMELY SERIOUS DK/NS
4.2 Police Force
30
Previous sections of this report have shown that the police force in
Tanzania is lowly rated by ordinary citizens in terms of honesty and
integrity. The survey further sought to assess whether people trust
the police force, the extent to which the force cooperated with them
in tackling crime and the manner it treats people suspected of
having committed a crime.
When asked whether the “police force deserve trust”, 62.7 percent
of households stated that the force does not deserve any trust.
This finding is not surprising; it is consistent with the general
perception held by people that the police force is corrupt.
On whether police officers are faithful or not, 44.6 per cent of

households felt that police officers are not faithful. However,
according to 55 percent of households there is good cooperation
between the police force and the people in tackling crime. On
whether the police force takes timely action in case of emergency,
64 percent of households expressed satisfaction with the timely
arrival of the force at the scene of crime and only 34 percent of
households complain that the police are not at the scene of the
crime on time.
To assess people’s perception on how the police force treats

people suspected of having committed a crime, households were
asked whether any member of the household was involved or
implicated in a dispute in which the police had to be called in.
Sixteen percent of households responded in the positive. On
whether any arrests were made after calling in the police, 71
percent of households confirmed that those members who were
involved or implicated were in fact arrested and locked up in a
police cell. When asked further whether those members held in
police custody were bailed out, 83.6 percent of households
responded in the positive. According to the respondents, various
means were deployed to bail out the suspected culprits, as follows:
• Personal means (deployed by 10.3 percent of respondents);

• Bribing the police (32.9 percent);
• Assistance received from friends or relatives (47.8 percent);
• Using high ranking officials to exert influence (1.4 percent)
• Other unspecified means (7.5 percent)
It is obvious from the above findings that the system of handling

people suspected of having committed a crime is fraught with
corruption. Corruption is, in fact, the currency of bailing out
suspected criminals, considering that 32.9 percent of suspected
criminals in police custody directly pay bribes to the police in order
31
to get released and another 67 percent are released through
dubious assistance received from friends or relatives or other
“unspecified” personal means.
The high proportion of suspected criminals that are remanded in

police custody is also alarming. The fact that a high proportion of
them are bailed out through corruption or other dubious means also
questions the motives of arresting them in the first place. Arbitrary
arrests of suspected criminals by the police are fertile grounds for
perpetrating petty corruption by extorting bribes from innocent
ordinary citizens.
4.3 Education Sector
Education is a major sector which impacts nearly every citizen.

Hence, the household survey focused on it further and asked
households to assess the quality of education and extent of
corruption in the education system. The results, which are
summarized in Figure 7, show that 81 percent of the respondents
rate the education services as good (including 11 percent who state
that the services are very good), while 18 percent rate them as
poor. This is a generous assessment, considering the constraints
reflected earlier in the survey as impacting negatively on the
households’ standard of living, notably high cost of living, inflation
and inadequate remuneration for teachers.
Figure 7: Households' Perception of Quality of Education Services
1% 3%
11%
15%
70%
VERY POOR POOR GOOD VERY GOOD DK
32
While fees for public primary education have been abolished, it is
known that some schools demand unofficial payments for specified
or unspecified “additional” services that such schools provide.
33
When asked to indicate the amounts of such unofficial payments,
30.2 percent of household respondents stated that they are not
subjected to any unofficial payment arrangements, while 46.4
percent are paying less than TZS 50,000 per year and another 20
percent are paying between TZS 50,000 and TZS 200,000 per
annum. Apart from these payments, the survey reveals that
households do not have to pay bribes to school officials and
teachers in order to obtain public primary education services. This
is a remarkable achievement.
4.4 Health Sector
Respondents of the household survey were asked to assess the

quality of health services in public health delivery points. Figure 8
below summarizes results of the evaluations in terms of staff,
facilities and surroundings. The findings show that, in general, the
quality of services provided by the health sector is favourably
perceived by households, whereby over 65 percent of respondents
rate these services as “good” or “very good”.
Figure 8: Households’ Perception of Quality of Health Services
Figure 3.1.15: Households' Perception of Quality of Health Services
70.0
64.0
60.0 56.4 56.8
50.0
40.0
30.0
25.0 25.1
20.0 18.6
10.7
10.0 7.7 7.6 8.7 9.0
5.5
2.2 1.4 1.2
0.0
VERY POOR POOR GOOD VERY GOOD DK/NS
Medical Staff Fcilities Surroundings
Notwithstanding the above favourable assessment, the

overwhelming perception is that medical personnel are corrupt, as
rated by over 50 percent of household respondents. In this respect,
doctors are perceived as the most corrupt, as rated by 71 percent
34
of respondents, followed by nurses (68.2 percent) and ward
attendants (67.5 percent). It is difficult to understand how such
corrupt medical personnel can deliver good quality services. This
apparent contradiction merits further research.
When asked to compare the current quality of services with the

situation three years ago, 53 percent of households consider that
the services have improved and only 11 percent consider them to
have deteriorated. On expectations for the future, 52.5 percent of
households perceive that the services will improve further, while
seven percent are pessimistic and expect the services to be worse
than they are now.
Households were also asked to assess the gravity of obstacles

currently facing the provision of quality health services in Tanzania.
Details of the evaluations are summarized in Table 6 overleaf. It is
clear that over 70 percent of households overwhelmingly rate all the
six perceived obstacles listed in Table 6 as “serious” or “very
serious”. The obstacles are: poor working conditions for medical
staff, inadequate coverage of medical services, inadequate
infrastructure facilities and equipment, low professional capacity of
medical staff, outdated health sector reform programmes and cost
of accessing health services.
Table 6: Households Perception on Obstacles to Quality

Health Services
Gravity of Obstacle
Perceived Obstacle (% of Respondents)
Not Very
Serious Serious Serious
Poor working conditions for staff 12.5 25.1 46.8
Inadequate coverage 13.2 28.2 42.7
Inadequate buildings, 12.5 25.6 59.3
infrastructure and equipment
Low professional capacity of 16.6 27.4 48.9
medical staff
Outdated health sector reforms 13.8 31.5 43.1
Costs of accessing health 19.4 30.6 48.3
services
4.5 Public Utilities
35
Access to public utilities such as electricity supply and piped water
supply is limited countrywide, and these utilities are not available to
many ordinary citizens in Tanzania, especially those living in the
rural areas. The survey sought to assess the availability and
quality of electricity and water supply services by households.
Findings of the survey reveal that only 15 percent of household

respondents have electricity supply (TANESCO) connection, of
whom 80 percent confirmed having obtained the connection
“officially” with 4 percent admitting that they did so “unofficially”.
However, around a quarter of those having a connection officially
(28 percent) report that they had to bribe in order to obtain service.
On whether it is common practice for an applicant of electricity
connection to make unofficial payment to TANESCO, about 20
percent of the respondents responded in the positive. Twenty five
percent of the respondents also stated that one can bribe
TANESCO officials in order to have ones monthly electricity bill
reduced. On reliability of service, three quarters of the household
respondents confirmed that once connected, the electricity supply
is reliable irrespective of whether one bribes TANESCO personnel
or not.
With respect to water supply, findings of the survey show that only
eleven percent of households have a water supply service
connection, of whom 89 percent secured it “officially”, but with 16
percent of them having had to bribe in order to secure connection.
Three percent admitted having made the connection “unofficially”.
It was stated by 18 percent of respondents that it is common
practice to bribe staff of Water Supply Agencies in order to obtain
water supply connection. On whether the service is reliable, 73.5
percent of households confirm that it is reliable, and only 26.5 of the
respondents stated that it is unreliable. Around 12 percent of the
respondents also stated that constant supply of water is guaranteed
on bribing staff of the Water Supply Agencies.
4.6 Other Governance Indicators
Household respondents give pertinent indication of the level of

governance in Tanzania in response to questions concerning the
political environment, rule of law, human rights, transparency and
accountability of government, and women rights.
(i) Political Environment
36
When asked to give their opinion on the functioning of the
political environment in the framework of the multi-party
system, households responded as follows:
• Elections: 64.4 percent of respondents believe these to

be free and fair.
• Joining a political party: 89.1 percent of households

believe that they are free to join any political party.
• Allocation of resources to political parties: 56.1 percent

of households believe that the distribution of public
resources to the parties is unfair, and are not happy with
it.
(ii) Human Rights and Rule of Law
On questions concerning their rights as citizens and the

application of the rule of law, the households responded as
follows:
• Respect and application of the law: 48.1 percent of

respondents believe that the law is respected, while 51
percent believe that the law is applied equally to all.
• Freedom of movement: 97.3 percent of respondents

believe that they are free to go anywhere.
• Freedom of worship: 97.4 percent of respondents

believe that they have freedom to worship.
• Freedom of speech: 83.2 percent of respondents confirm

that they have freedom of speech.
• Access to education: 54.8 percent of respondents

believe that they have access to education.
• Access to health services: 57.8 percent of respondents

believe that they have access to health services.
• Access to employment: Only 34.5 percent of respondents

believe that there is equal opportunity to employment.
(iii) Transparency and Accountability of Government
37
Transparency and accountability are the landmarks of good
governance. The integrity of the government depends on
how transparent and accountable it is to the general public.
On questions concerning transparency and accountability of
government, households responded as follows:
• Transparency: 55 percent of respondents believe that

the government is transparent.
• Accountability: 54.4 percent of respondents believe that

the government is performing its duties in an accountable
manner.
• Freedom of courts: 53 percent of respondents believe

that the courts are performing their duties freely without
interference.
• Freedom of the National Assembly: 70.4 percent of

respondents believe that the Parliament is performing its
duties freely without interference.
(iv) Respect for Women Rights
Households were also asked to assess whether women

rights in Tanzania are respected, and their evaluation is
summarized in Table 7 below. The findings show that over
half of the respondents believe that women rights are
“respected” or “highly respected” in five out of the seven
areas listed in Table 7, namely reproductive rights,
employment, maternal and child health care, education and
participation in decision making. However, the majority of
respondents (65 percent) believe that women rights are not
respected in property and land ownership rights.
Table 7: Respect for Women Rights
Respect (% of respondents)
Area Respected/highly Somehow/not
respected respected
Reproductive rights 60.3 37.7
Land issues 35.8 63.7
Ownership of property 37.4 62
Employment 55.8 43.5
Maternal & child health 68.7 31
Education 65.8 33.7
Decision making 55.7 43.8
38
Chapter 5: FIGHTING CORRUPTION
The ultimate goal of studying corruption is to enable the
government to design effective measures of fighting corruption.
The survey sought to assess the prevailing status of the efforts to
fight corruption in the country.
5.1 Political Will
One very positive finding from all the three surveys is that
households, public officials and company executives believe that
the current Tanzanian government has a genuine desire to fight
corruption. This finding is particularly evident from the following
responses by households:
• When asked to agree or disagree with the statement that

“the government has no desire and will to fight corruption”,
68.4 percent of households disagree with this statement,
only 30 percent agree.
• When asked to agree or disagree with the statement that

“corruption is a natural occurrence and a part of our daily
lives, so denouncing it is unnecessary”, 90.5 percent of
households disagree with this statement.
• When asked to comment on the effectiveness of the

government’s anti-corruption strategy, 75.2 percent of
households agree that it is effective.
Another important finding of the survey is that public officials also

believe that there is genuine desire to fight corruption within their
own organizations. Yet another is the finding that most company
executives disagree with statements that condone corruption, such
as “corruption is a practical necessity for getting things done
quickly”, “corruption is beneficial provided you are not caught”, and
“corruption gives better services”. Sixty nine percent of company
executives also confirmed their willingness to provide material
support in government initiatives to combat corruption by way of
donating funds or volunteering staff on company time and
resources to participate in such initiatives.
39
5.2 Public Agencies in the Fight Against Corruption
When asked to rate how some institutions have helped in

combating corruption in Tanzania, households give a high rating to
the media (90.5 percent), Faith-Based Organizations (88.7
percent), PCCB (83.7 percent), Non-Governmental Organizations
(82.9 percent), political parties (81.5 percent), academics and
teachers (80.1 percent), professional associations (79.2 percent)
and Members of Parliament (74.7 percent). Similarly company
executives give a high rate to Faith Based Organizations (93.8
percent), media (92.7 percent), NGOs (86.4 percent), Development
Partners (85.4 percent), PCCB (84.6 percent), Legal and Human
Rights Commission (79.8 percent) and Members of Parliament
(77.1 percent).
The least effective institution in combating corruption is the police

force which has been rated by 60 percent of households and 69.2
of company executives as ineffective. This is followed by the courts
which are rated by 52.6 percent of company executives as
ineffective.
The high rating given to PCCB is gratifying. It is even more

gratifying as regards the perception in Tanzania of the activities of
faith-based organizations, and it is so in sharp contrast to other
countries of the world wherein their activities lead to deep divisions
or fanaticism.
The perception that the public media (press, TV and radio) is very
effective in fighting corruption in Tanzania is a remarkable
achievement; even in some developed countries (e.g. Italy) the
media is often deployed to cover up corruption.
5.3 Corruption Reporting System
An effective anti-corruption strategy has as its core a system of

reporting corruption that encourages individuals to come forward
and report corrupt acts without fear of retribution. If this is a criteria
for an effective corruption reporting system, then data from the
household survey suggests that the corruption reporting system in
Tanzania needs significant improvement to be fully effective.
When asked whether they know the process they should follow to
report a corrupt act, 40 percent of households responded in the
40
positive. When asked further to indicate where they would report
such a corrupt act, only 53.3 of households knew where to report.
41
These findings reflect that a significant proportion of citizens were
not only unaware of the process to follow to report corruption but
they also did not know where to report. When examined from a
regional perspective, the regions which have a slightly high
proportion of households who know the process to follow to report a
corrupt act are Shinyanga (66.1 percent), Ruvuma (53.3 percent),
Dar es Salaam (45.6 percent) and Pwani (44.2 percent).
The majority of households who said they knew where to report

(41.8 percent) mentioned PCCB, while 22.7 percent said they
would go to a police post. Other places mentioned by respondents
are shown in Figure 9. They include Ward Executive Officers,
Village/Mtaa Governments, District Commissioners, Members of
Parliament and Councilors.
Figure 9: Distribution of Households with Indication where to

Report a Corrupt Act
PCCB 41.8
Police 22.7
Ward Executive Officer 8.3
Village/Mtaa Government
6.4
Office
District Commissioner 4.7
Councilor 1.7
Other 1.6
Member of Parliament 1.1
Don’t Know 0.1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Percent
Many households stated that they are not willing to report

corruption. When asked for reasons of this unwillingness 43
percent of households said that they feared being victimized. Other
reasons stated as contributing to this unwillingness and their
significances are shown in Figure 10. For instance, some believe
42
that they would not get protection from retaliation; some felt that it is
useless to report because culprits would not be prosecuted; some
do not wish to betray anyone; while some believe that even if the
suspect is sent to court, the case may not be easy to prove.
Figure 10: Distribution of Households by Reasons for not

Reporting a Corrupt Act
Fear of Victimization 42.9
Would Not Get Protection 14.8
Do Not Know Where to Report 9.3
Useless Because Culprits Won’t

8.9
be prosecuted
Does Not Want to Betray Anyone 5.1
Other 4.9
The Case Cannot be proved 4.7
Bribes are justified 2.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Percent
5.4 Sources of Information
When asked to indicate where they get information on corruption,

92.7 percent of households stated that the radio is their principal
source. Other sources mentioned and their levels of significance
are newspapers (39.3 percent), television (36.4 percent), public
meetings (7.4 percent), and places of worship (6.1 percent). When
asked to comment on the quality of the information, 68.4 percent of
households confirmed that the quality of information during the past
twelve months was very reliable, while 29.4 percent of households
stated that the information was somehow reliable. Only one
percent felt that the information was unreliable.
43
44
SECTION III: CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter 6: CONCLUSIONS
This survey is the first composite baseline survey of governance

and corruption in Tanzania that covers households, public officials
and business enterprises.
The information collected from the survey offers a set of key

messages that complement and reinforce the government’s stand
on the fight against corruption. The findings show that:
(i) Corruption in Tanzania is not only significant, but also

persistent and serious. Comparing developmental problems
currently facing the country, respondents to the survey rank
corruption in public services as a major problem. It is ranked
as the biggest problem by company executives, followed by
inflation and high cost of living; it is ranked third by
households after inflation and high cost of living and fourth
by public officials after high cost of living, inflation and
unemployment. The respondents overwhelmingly consider
corruption – both petty and grand – to be very harmful to the
national economy.
(ii) Corruption is a complex phenomenon that is not adequately

understood by the ordinary citizen and a majority of officials
in both the public and private sectors, who normally relate
the word “corruption” with only one or two types of
corruption, notably “demand for unofficial payment”, “abuse
of power”, or “demand for sex”. Hence several serious acts
of corruption such as embezzlement and fraud are either not
considered or recognized as corruption by many ordinary
citizens and even by both public and private sector officials.
This limited understanding of corruption in its different
manifestations undermines strategies and plans to fight
corruption.
(iii) Corruption in Tanzania is attributed to many causes, notably

greed, moral indecency, poor leadership, poverty, poor law
enforcement and lack of accountability by public servants.
However, it is not always appreciated that these are not
stand alone causes; the causes are, in fact, intricately
45
related in a manner that is not easily discernible, and are
probably mere manifestations of a more deeply rooted cause
that has not been addressed in the fight against corruption
such as greed which drives grand corruption and the latter in
turn gives rise to and perpetuates poverty which then
generates petty corruption.
(iv) The level of corruption is not uniform in various sectors of

the national economy. Findings of this survey clearly identify
the major areas and public agencies that are hot spots for
corrupt activities where more resources for fighting
corruption should be directed. These areas are the police
force, courts and local government authorities for petty
corruption and public procurement, customs, revenue
collection, and land allocation for grand corruption.
(v) A majority of public institutions in Tanzania need to focus on

improving performance in service delivery, both in terms of
efficiency and quality of services delivered. Users of public
services are entitled to efficient and good quality services. In
addition, a central measure of governance is the quality of
service the government delivers; whether it be in the form of
law enforcement, regulation of markets or other social
services such as health and education. Findings of this
survey confirm that there are several key public institutions
deemed to be ineffective and dishonest.
(vi) The government is not alone in the fight against corruption.

Respondents to this survey generally rated government
efforts to fight corruption to be effective. However, they also
cited other players whose activities in the war against
corruption are recognized as being equally effective in
supplementing government programmes, particularly the
faith based organizations, media, academicians, NGOs,
professional associations, Members of Parliament and
political parties.
(vii) The system of fighting corruption in Tanzania lacks an

effective reporting mechanism. Results of the survey confirm
that a majority of people do not know where and how to
report a corrupt act. Even most of those who said that they
know where to report corruption stated that they were unable
to do so for fear of being victimized or because they believe
that it is useless to do so since no action will be taken
against the culprits. Corrupt people in society can only be
prosecuted if reported.
46
47
Chapter 7: RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this survey and the conclusions made in
the preceding chapter, a number of follow-up actions will need to be
implemented, whose prime objectives are two-fold: to consolidate
the achievements already made in the fight against corruption and
to strengthen the capacity of various organs involved in this fight.
In this respect we recommend a five-strand approach whose key
elements are highlighted below:
(i) More research is needed in high risk areas that are prone to
corruption. A precondition for effective solutions of
combating corruption in the long term is the identification of
the root causes of the problem. This is particularly important
in high risk areas that are prone to corruption such as the
police force, courts and local governments in the case of
petty corruption; and public procurement, customs and
revenue collection in the case of grand corruption. Better
knowledge of the underlying causes of corruption in these
areas will enable the government to devise effective
strategies of combating corruption.
(ii) PCCB needs to enhance its capacity to tackle high profile

grand corruption cases. The experiences of corruption cited
by the respondents of this survey demonstrate that the
extent of both petty and grand corruption is considerable.
However, the rate of prosecution does not reflect this reality,
in the sense that very few cases of grand corruption have
ever been successfully prosecuted. PCCB’s success rate of
prosecuting grand corruption cases is not particularly
impressive, a reflection of weak capacity in this area.
(iii) A majority of public institutions need to improve performance

in service delivery. To ensure this happens special attention
should be given to the provision of effective oversight
(through enforcement of rules and regulations relating to
personnel and financial management, and more effective
and transparent audit strategies and otherwise) in order to
control abuse of power and financial malpractices. Strong
ties with the media will be helpful in this respect, as a means
of drawing public attention to corruption cases that are
brought to light by audits and other oversight vehicles.
48
(iv) The government needs to strengthen collaboration with all
stakeholders involved in fighting corruption. The main
organs in the civil society and private sector that are active in
combating corruption include the media, faith-based
organizations, NGOs and professional associations.
Effective strategies of engaging these organs should be
worked out. If real change is to occur, anti-corruption efforts
must go beyond state interventions: other non-state actors
must be actively mobilised.
(v) Promote measures to enhance greater public awareness of

corruption, its causes and consequences and to encourage
the public to report corruption. A well sensitized public that
is aware of corruption and that knows the causes of
corruption and its consequences to national development is
vital to the success of any anti-corruption strategy.
Awareness alone, however, is not sufficient; it must be
supported by an effective user-friendly system of reporting
corruption, with in-built incentives – including protection – to
encourage more people to report on corruption. Appropriate
and proportional financial awards need to be urgently
considered for those who blow the whistle and save
government money.
49
REFERENCES
“Dar Asked to Act Tough on Graft”: front-page headline in Daily News

(Tanzania) of 16th September 2009 giving 2008 CPIA Score of 3.8
2009 Ibrahim Index of African Governance: page 5 of Daily News (Tanzania)
dated 5th October 2009 giving overall score of 59.2 (rank 12 out of 53
African countries).
Transparency International’s CPI scores for period 1999 to 2009: website
archives.
Centre for Democracy and Development: CDD – Ghana (2000); The Ghana
Governance and Corruption Survey – Evidence from Households,
Enterprises and Public Officials, CDD – Ghana Accra.
FACEIT and ESRF (2002); The State of Corruption Report – Annual Report Dar
es Salaam.
Government of Kenya (2007); National Corruption Perception Survey, Kenya
Anti–Corruption Commission Nairobi.
Government of Malawi (2005); Governance and Corruption Baseline Survey,
Millennium Consulting Group Ltd, Lilongwe.
Government of Nigeria (no year); Governance and Corruption Diagnostic Survey
– Analysis of Survey Results, Households, Enterprises and Public Officials,
Lagos
Government of Sierra Leone (no year); Governance and Corruption Study,
CDMA/GRS i Freetown.
Government of Zambia (no year); Corruption Survey Report: Zambia National
Governance Baseline Survey – Executive Summary Lusaka.
Kaufmann, D et al (2008); Governance Indicators, World Bank Washington D C.
Political Economy Centre (2000); Corruption in the public Sector in Thailand,
Chulalongkorn University Bangkok.
The United Republic of Tanzania (1999); The National Anti–Corruption Strategy
and Action Plan for Tanzania, President’s Office State House Dar es
Salaam.
The United Republic of Tanzania (2006); The National Anti – Corruption Strategy
and Sector Specific Action Plans for all Ministries, Independent Government
departments and Executive Agencies Phase II 2006 – 2010, President’s
Office State House Dar es Salaam
USAID, nola and PCCB (2007); Yajue Makosa ya Rushwa Yaliyoainishwa Katika
Sheria ya Kuzuia na Kupambana na Rushwa Namba 11 ya 2007
50

Tanzania: Anti Corruption Survey Volume 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tanzania: Anti Corruption Survey Volume 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The United Republic of Tanzania

THE PREVENTION AND COMBATING

NATIONAL GOVERNANCE AND

21st November 2009

CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................ ii

Table 1: Survey Sample and Response Rate………………………….. 3

Table 2: Percentage distribution of respondents

Table 3: Forms of gratification given ………….………….………………… 7

Table 4: Key Problems in Tanzania

Table 5: Percentage distribution of enterprises reporting ………….…………. 18

Table 6: Households Perception on Obstacles to Quality ……………… 26

Table 7: Respect for Women Rights ………….………….………….……… 33

Figure 1: Distribution of Households by Level of Incidence of …………. 8

Figure 2: Relationship between Grand and Petty Corruption …………. 10

Figure 3: Percentage distribution of enterprises indicating the …………. 11

Figure 4: Percentage distribution enterprise reporting frequency of ……. 17

Figure 5: Percentage distribution of firms reporting the availability …….. 21

Figure 6: Households’ Perception on Obstacles to Using Courts …..…… 26

Figure 7: Households' Perception of Quality of Education Services …………. 28

Figure 8: Households’ Perception of Quality of Health Services …………. 29

Figure 9: Distribution of Households with Indication where …………. 36

Figure 10: Distribution of Households by Reasons for not …………. 37

PCCB Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau

“BAKSHISH” Kiswahili word for payment or an article given as a gift after

Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete

The consultants benefited from contributions made by the Technical Committee

Current government initiatives to promote good governance and to fight

Since 1996 significant improvements have been achieved within good

Tanzania’s performance in recent international corruption surveys shows a mixed

Information on governance issues and corruption in Tanzania has not been

[B] KEY MESSAGES

• Corruption in Tanzania is a serious governance and developmental

• The business environment is undermined by corruption and excessive

• Improvement in public administration is needed in order to make public

• Intensive public awareness campaign is needed to make the general public

[C] MAIN FINDINGS AND CHALLENGES

C.1 Prevalence, Severity and Trends in Corruption

• Respondents of the three surveys have a common understanding of

• The leading cause of corruption is attributed to greed. This is followed,

• Public officials have been singled out by a majority of respondents as

• Respondents to the survey indicate that corruption is ebbing in some

C.2 Quality of Service, Integrity and Honesty of Public Institutions

• A central measure of governance is the quality of service delivered,

• Service quality is one measure of the strength of governance. The

• Public officials, on the other hand, consider the services provided by

• Enterprises rate their own sector as ranking first in terms of

C.3 Governance and Corruption in Key Sectors

• Performance of the Judiciary: The administration of justice is

• Performance of the police force: Poor governance in the police

• Performance of the education sector: Education is a major sector

• Performance of the health sector: Like education, the health sector

• Performance of public utilities: Access to public utilities such as

• Public procurement: Public procurement and contracting sectors are

• Other governance indicators: In response to questions concerning

C.4 Fighting Corruption

• Political commitment is essential in the fight against corruption. One

• Clearly the government is not alone in the fight against corruption.

• On sources of information about corruption, households indicated that

[D] RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE WAY FORWARD

• Measures to make public institutions improve performance in service delivery;

• Measures for strengthening collaboration between the government and other

• Measures to enhance public awareness of corruption, its causes and

Corruption, commonly defined as the abuse of entrusted power for private