The Rwanda Governance Scorecard (RGS 2014), that will be released today, has seen the indicator on rule of law and justice sector leapfrog others to emerge second best out of eight, due to increased access to justice.

This is the third edition of the scorecard, which is produced by Rwanda Governance Board (RGB) as a tool to guide policy and improve governance.

In the previous index, rule of law was second-last of eight indicators, while one on quality of service delivery, for the third time running, emerged with the least score, further exposing the problem of poor service delivery in public entities, especially in local governments.

The top performer is the indicator on safety and security, with an average score of 91.6 per cent accrued from the four sub-indicators; maintaining security, national security, personal and property safety and reconciliation and social cohesion.

In an interview with The New Times on Wednesday, Prof. Anastase Shyaka, the chief executive of RGB, said service provision, both at central and local government levels, remains wanting due to several government initiatives that have many implementers and many beneficiaries, increasing corruption incidence.

He cited the cattle-stocking programme commonly known as Gir’inka, and the social protection programme where cash is distributed to the vulnerable through local leaders.

"These programmes that are going through many people need to be followed very closely and we need to maximise our accountability,” he said, adding that in some cases, people have to pay a bribe to be included on such programmes.

"Such petty corruption affects efficiency.”

Former US Assistant Secretary of State, Jendayi Frazer, who was among the external reviewers of the scorecard said "while Rwanda scores highly across all indicators, the data reveals quality of service especially in the economic sector has room for improvement.”

Dr Venuste Karambizi, a political science lecturer at the Kigali Independent University, suggested the deployment of a paid worker to the grassroots level to reduce corruption in implementation of certain programmes.

"Because these people are not paid for their work, you find them either putting less effort, or worse, engaging in corruption to offer a service that they ought to give for free…either way it breeds inefficiency in delivery of public services,” said Karambizi.

However, Appolinaire Mupiganyi, the executive secretary of Transparency International-Rwanda, said the spirit of volunteerism is very crucial for the country to achieve its development aspirations.

Mupiganyi argued that the best way to fight corruption is to encourage people to know their rights and putting in place checks and balances for the local leaders to ensure accountability.

"Paying someone at the village level should not arise at all because we have those that solicit for bribes at sectors, cells, or even districts yet they are paid public servants,” said Mupiganyi.

Other mechanisms, Karambizi said, should be devised include checking on what he called endless meetings, which makes public officers inaccessible to the people that seek their services.

"For example, the notaries; it is good that government decentralised notary services up to the sector level but that does not help if the officer is locked up in a meeting for a whole day. Because their nature of work does not allow them to delegate, one is compelled to go to another sector which could be tens of kilometers away,” the don said.

Non-state actors

Under the performance indicator on political rights and civil liberties, the scorecard ranked lowest the sub-indicator on the vibrancy of non-state actors in policy formulation, scoring 59 per cent.

The non-state actors surveyed include the civil society organisations, the media and the academia.

Shyaka said the worst performers among these non-state actors were the academics, where the level at which members of the academia engage the public on policy debate remains low, which he said does not reflect the growing number of universities in the country for the past few years.

"We are much more focused on teaching than research, yet it is critical for the academic to engage the public in meaningful debate that could influence policy,” he said.

Media

On the role of media in influencing policy, much as Shyaka believes there has been an improvement compared to previous barometers, Jean Bosco Rushingabigwi, a media expert, said there is still a long way to go.

Citing the capacity gaps that are still prevalent in the media sector, Rushingabigwi, who has taught journalism at the former National University of Rwanda, believes that the kind of stories capable of influencing policy are investigative in nature.

"We have seen the vibrancy increasing steadily. And at the policy level, a couple of laws enacted have made the environment in which the media operates much better; but problems remain, you cannot influence policy when you are working for a media house that does not pay you.”

He also cited lack of capacity for practitioners to put out investigative stories.

Rushingabigwi also cited a challenge on the part of the newsmakers, who often-times are not forthcoming in releasing information, while some, he said, still consider it a favour to give information to the journalist.

"Thanks to the Access to Information Act, we have seen most of them forthcoming though naturally, the media should not need to invoke this act to get information from the official,” said Rushingabigwi, who is now a media expert at Rwanda Local Governments Association (Ralga).

Civil society

On civil society, stakeholders commend the growing vibrancy of the civil society organisations (CSOs) not only in policy formulation but also in holding the government accountable.

According to the scorecard, CSOs influenced policy during the period in review, at the rate of 67 per cent.

"The vibrancy is not so much may be because most of these organisations lack funding and that is why the ongoing seven-year programme by RGB and One-UN has been helpful in empowering CSOs by providing financial support,” said Dr Karambizi, adding that over the years, CSOs have grown to up to over 700.

Asked whether government involvement in the funding of these organisations may not stifle their independence, Karambizi said this is a normal practice even in other countries.

He gave an example of the media, which gets government support. "But does this jeopardise the independence of the media? I do not think so.”

The scorecard, whose first edition was published in 2011, is measured against eight indicators; rule of law, political rights and civil liberties, participation and inclusiveness.

Others are safety and security, investing in social development, control of corruption, transparency and accountability, quality of service delivery, and economic and corporate governance.

editorial@newtimes.co.rw