European Parliamentarians with Africa

Framework for Strategic Governance and Corruption Analysis (SGACA) (August 2008)

The Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs has launched a new tool for ‘designing strategic responses towards good governance.'  The SGACA provides a framework to help embassies analyse the governance climate in partner countries according to context-specific criteria.  The aim, the framework document specifies, is to provide embassies with ‘a better understanding of what happens behind the "façade" of the state on the one hand and what really drives political behavior on the other.'

The SGACA follows a format that combines embassies' standard monitoring work with a ‘power and change' analysis, which guides a workshop for key stakeholders and facilitates strategic choices.   Through this process, embassy officials consider crucial governance factors, including the history of state formation, sources of government revenue, and the social and economic structure of the partner state.  Importantly, the SGACA framework lays emphasis on the effect that the nature and extent of political competition has on the plight of the poor.      

At the crux of the analysis lies the notion that good governance requires a clear separation of powers.  The framework advises embassy staff that ‘an effective political system depends on achieving a balance between authority and control by the political executive, and accountability to citizens.' The analysis criteria raise awareness of the crucial role that a strong judiciary and efficient bureaucracy play in assuring good governance.  However, the framework alludes only briefly that embassies should examine the extent to which the political executive shares power with a legislature. This constitutes an important omission.   A government that vests power in the executive and judiciary, but ignores parliament, is tantamount to a stool with two legs.  If, as the SGACA suggests, distribution of power offers an accurate metric of good governance, the framework should put parliamentary scrutiny to the fore.

The SGACA also neglects parliamentarians at the workshop stage.  The framework recommends that embassies consult with ‘external stakeholders' like donor countries, experts, civil society, academics and government officials - but with no mention of parliamentary representatives.  If embassies seek to initiate meaningful dialogue on good governance through the SGACA, then they must include MPs in their list of stakeholders. 

However, the SGACA framework proposes compelling suggestions for alternative approaches to ‘reassess opportunities' for anti-corruption at the workshop stage.  Here, the framework acknowledges that aid modalities affect the quality of governance and suggests that embassies should assess whether aid delivery ‘could provide entry points for MPs... to scrutinise the use of public funds.'   In the closing pages, the SGACA also recommends that donors should provide entry points for elected representatives to have a say in policy-making.  Early stages of the analysis would also benefit from in-depth assessment of this key factor.

The Framework for Strategic Governance and Corruption Analysis offers a valuable instrument for embassies to assess the governance environment in a partner country.  However, the framework would further enhance the quality of embassies' efforts to fight corruption if it explicitly addressed the role of parliamentarians in ensuring the separation of powers that good governance demands.