When charity slips into the muck of graft

As more and more calls are made upon the purse for charitable donations, so the cry is heard "donor fatigue".

This very much turn of the century expression is used to explain away the diminishing generosity of governments, organisations and individuals.

Yet it is true that it has become increasingly necessary for aid to be given to the underprivileged -without strings attached - to at least give them the basic necessities of life.

Sadly, though, it is often not the generosity of the few that reaches the headlines, but the corruption of many in needy societies, thereby depriving their own people of the intended aid.

A report by the African Union undertaken four years ago estimated that Africa loses an estimated $148 billion (Dh543.16 billion) annually to corrupt practices.

This represents approximately 25 per cent of the continent's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and increases the cost of goods by approximately 20 per cent.

It was also estimated that lower income households spend on average between two and three per cent of their incomes on bribes, and by extrapolation, rich households spend an average of nearly one per cent.

Another report claimed corruption cost many African governments up to 50 per cent of their tax revenues.

There is also the indirect cost of corruption which often dwarfs direct costs as scarce resources are squandered on uneconomical projects because of their potential to generate generous bribes, while priority areas like education and health are overlooked.

Such corruption not only hinders the development of the nation but also, just as seriously, that of the individual making them progressively more unhealthy and illiterate and, thereby, the quality of future government administrations.

It can be no coincidence that two reputed humanitarian organisations have, in a matter of days, highlighted problems in the giving of aid to needy countries.

Care International says that billions of dollars are likely to be wasted unless a more efficient method of administering aid is achieved. They point out that too much money is spent on short-term fixes in emergencies, rather than seeking solutions to longer-term preventive measures.

Care International claim the number of people living on "the edge of emergency" has nearly doubled to 220 million in two years.

Halving hunger

Care International also reminded that halving poverty and hunger around the world by 2015 are key objectives of the UN's Millennium Development Goals (MDG) - a target that seemed achievable (just) eight years ago, but now look hopelessly impossible to achieve.

This coming week there will be another UN meeting to discuss these poverty goals, but much cannot be expected from it other than the usual verbose comments from representatives of various interested or affected nations.

In the past few days, the top UN humanitarian official, John Holmes, has said that food stocks are critically low in parts of Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, northern Kenya and Uganda: the usual suspects. These areas have suffered from drought, continual conflict, and escalating food prices.

Holmes alleges that nearly 17 million people in the Horn of Africa are in desperate and urgent need of food and other aid. Approximately $700 million in emergency aid is needed, says Holmes, to stop the region from descending into a full-scale famine.

Yet contrast this with a comment from Vanessa Rubin, a hunger advisor for Care International. She says it is much more cost effective to support those who are on the brink of disaster rather than "fire-fighting when you have to manage an emergency response".

She went on to say: "If we take the example of Niger, in west Africa. In 2005 it was costing about $80 to save a malnourished child at the height of the crisis. Months before that, at the point where children were vulnerable, the equivalent intervention would have been about $1 a day."

So aside from natural and man-made calamities in Africa, a lot of the problems faced by the people there are due to corruption, pro-active response from aid organisations and governments, and poorly managed systems of distribution and control of that aid.

It is interesting, during Ramadan, to contrast that with zakat, one of the five pillars of Islam, whereby a Muslim is expected to give a portion of his or her wealth to charity.

Muslims who adhere to this requirement will be confident in the knowledge that the distribution of the donation will not only go to a worthy cause, but also be distributed equitably, without fear of favour, and without the risk of any corrupt persons interfering in its administration.