By REV. MKPAYEN James Sam, SPSP: ChMC.


Introduction

In every society and community, there are certain behaviours, which are very much detested in the course of interpersonal relationships, and group behaviour. These behaviours which have moral, ethical, legal and religious implications are detested because they are inimical to proper and decent standards. The pattern of that encapsulates all this detested attitude is corruption (Omoluabi, 2007:3). Corruption is a household name in every society and the negative impact it has on the socio-economic and political setting of a country can hardly be over emphasized. Hence, there has been a global outcry and coordinated efforts to tackle this social evil through the creation and implementation of anti-graft laws and policies across nations.

Some nations have been successful in their quest to reduce the level of corruption while others are still lagging behind. In this light, Nigeria seems to be an example of a nation state that failed in combating corruption. From the common man in the street to the highest political figure, corruption is recurrent in almost every transaction in the Nigerian society. Within the last one decade, the issue of corruption and good governance has taken the centre stage in development discourse worldwide. Corruption is shaking the foundation of the nation as there is no sector that is not affected by this monster. The challenges of corruption remain a major devastating issue facing Nigeria since the colonial period, although, this phenomena has become a cankerworm that has eaten deep into the fabrics of our system (Muhammed, 2013:120).
Over the years, public sector in Nigeria has been characterized largely by ineffectiveness and inefficiency. The situation is not different in other African countries. High-level corruption has been identified as being responsible for Nigeria’s underdevelopment and growing crime rates. It is instructive to note that the Nigerian government and citizens have not totally committed themselves to introducing and implementing measures that can prevent or drastically reduce the extent and consequence of corruption in the country.

Definition of Corruption
The meaning of corruption is ubiquitous. Defining activities as “corruption” is highly subjective and, as Levi and Nelken (1996:32) point out, ‘corrupt’ acts in some countries are seen as normal elsewhere. This made it possible for scholars to define corruption in different ways. In fact, it is easy to talk about corruption, but like other complex phenomena, it is difficult to define corruption in concrete terms. It is not surprising therefore that there is often no consensus as to what exactly constitutes this concept. There is always a danger as well that several people may engage in a discussion about corruption while each is talking about a different thing completely (Obayelu, 2007:19). Ikotun (2004:24) posit that the term corruption comes from Latin word ‘rumpere’, meaning “to break”, implying that something is broken. This something might be moral or social code of conduct, more often, an administrative rule.
On his own view, Onuoha (2005:45) describes corruption as an illegal act, which involves inducement and/or undue influence of people either in the public setting or the private sphere to act contrary to the extant rules and regulations which normally guide a particular process. These definitions bring to light the extent to which corrupt practices are indulged and perpetrated. Corruption viewed from different perspectives by scholars, share some common concern. There is a general agreement among scholars that corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. It hurts everyone whose life, livelihood or happiness depends on the integrity of people in a position of authority. It is a serious societal problem about which something has to be done to reduce its occurrence and prevalence (Fatile & Adejuwon, 2012:159).

Definition of Governance
Governance on the other hand has been defined as the use of political authority and exercise of control over society and the management of its resources for social and economic development. It encompasses the nature of functioning of a state's institutional and structural arrangements, decision-making processes, policy formulation, implementation capacity, information flows, effectiveness of leadership and the nature of the relationship between rulers and the ruled (Doig, 1995:154-155). Governance can also be described as the use of authority and the exercise of control over society and the management of its resources for social and economic development. It is the manner in which power is exercised by governments in the distribution of a country’s social and economic resources. The nature and manner of distribution is what makes governance
good or bad one.
Thus, according to Ogundiya (2010:238) when resources must be distributed to promote inequality or to achieve personal or group ambitions, the essence of governance which coincides with the essence of politics and essence of the state is defeated. Therefore, resources must be distributed responsibly, equitably and fairly for the realization of the essence of the state. As noted by Okeke (2010:5), governance is said to have evolved from the need to organize society towards the achievement of a common goal. An opinion worth considering is that society derives its roots from the solitary man who later got transformed into a family person to fulfil the need for socialization. Within this union, he enjoyed the love, care and company of family members and recognised their inherent and inalienable rights in order to preserve the love, harmony and cohesion within the family. Society later grew out of the family in response to the need to fulfil other higher needs and the collective satisfiers of the people, such as security, economic well-being and survival, through negotiations and the formation of social contract between the governors and the governed. Governance, therefore, concerns not just the integrity, efficiency and economy of government but also its effectiveness in terms of the ends to which government organization and activity are directed.

Good governance, therefore, refers to government that fulfils the terms of the social contract with the people. Good governance is a fundamental right in a democracy and it implies transparency and accountability. Good governance entails an administration that is sensitive and responsive to the needs of the people and is effective in coping with emerging challenges in society by framing and implementing appropriate laws and measures. It includes strict rules of accountability. Good governance largely depends on the extent to which the general citizenry perceives a government to be legitimate, i.e., committed to improving the general public welfare deliver public services and equitable in its conduct favouring no special interests or groups. It is among other things, participatory, transparent and accountable. It is also effective, equitable and promotes the rule of law. Good governance ensures that political, social and economic priorities are based on broad consensus in society and that the voices of the poorest and the most vulnerable are heard in decision-making over the allocation of development resources (Richardson, 2008).
Good governance however remains elusive with no limitation of scope that commands universal acceptance. The true test of good governance is the degree to which it delivers on the promise of human, civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. It ensures that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision making. It is also responsive to the present and future needs of society and the nation at large. Governance is good when it is able to achieve the desired end of the state defined in terms of justice, equity, protection of life and property, enhanced citizens’ participation, preservation of rule of law and improved living standard of the populace (Ogundiya, 2010). There is no doubt that in Nigeria since the return to democratic rule in 1999, good governance has been elusive which many scholars believes is largely attributable to large scale level of corruption in different facets of the society and most especially the public sector.

Definition of Tupocracy
The concept “Tupocracy” was first developed in 2006 by Dr. Godwin Akpan Amawoh and popularized by the same author Dr. Amaowoh in 2007. According to Amawoh (2006) Tupocracy is a system of government involving people who lead by positive example based on transparency, integrity, altruism, patriotism and godly character which is worthy of emulation by their colleagues and followers. He aver that Tupocracy is one word for leadership by example, coined from two Greek words, tupos (example, pattern, model which is worthy of emulation) and Krateia (government, leadership, ruler-ship or administration. One of the major challenges which the world is facing today is the absence of good leadership. This has precipitated poverty, insecurity, instability, war, ethnic tensions, criminality and corruption in the land dissatisfaction and despair among the citizenry in many nations. People are looking for role models in politics, religion, civil service, the academia, business, the Private sector and even in the family but they are grossly in short supply. The answer to this dilemma is found in Tupocracy which is rightly predicated on the age-old axiom that “example is better than precept.” Based on this, the Tupocract says, “Emulate me in all things”; “Do as I do” and not “Do as I say.” He does not contradict himself or what he says as a leader by negative example in conduct, ip so facto, he is a role model. The beauty of Democracy, as a world acclaimed political doctrine, lies in Tupocracy. Dr. Amaowoh has therefore recommended Tupocracy to be adopted as the handmaid of Democracy, without which Democracy becomes “Dem all cracy”, or “Dem on cracy” meaning, “Governance by insane people.”

Origin of Tupocracy in Nigeria
Tupocracy is a socio-political culture or doctrine developed and popularized by Dr. Godwin Akpan Amaowoh, a Nigerian Clergyman, of Assemblies of God, Nigeria, in 2006 as the brainchild of his doctoral dissertation at Nigeria’s foremost institution of higher Education, the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Faculty of the Social Sciences. The Dissertation topic was An Understanding of Tupos in Pauline Letters on the Pastoral Ministry of the Church and its implication for Contemporary society. Tupocracy as an emerging concept in leadership and governance, was recognized by the Board of Examiners with the Rev. Fr. Prof. Vincent Nyoyoko of the University of Port Harcourt as External Examiner/Chairman.

The Board scored him Distinction, being a huge contribution to knowledge and recommended that the concept be published as an acceptable political doctrine. Hence, in 2007, Dr. Amaowoh published the book, Tupocracy: Leadership by example for the Church and Civil society. Subsequent editions, including the current one (4th edition, 2018) carried the name of his PhD Supervisor, the Rev. Prof. E. N. Chinwoku (formerly Onwu) as Co-author. For inventing Tupocracy, Dr. Amaowoh was inducted into the Nigerian Books of Record, published by the Federal Ministry of Information and Culture which saw it as a big honour to Nigeria scholarship and Africa at large.

The Need and Importance of Tupocracy in Governance
Tupocracy ensures transparency, integrity and moral rectitude in governance/leadership. Governance or leadership should not be an all comer’s affair. It should be for people whose lifestyles are worthy of emulation whether they are Presidents, Governors, Legislators, Judicial Officers, Ministers, Commissioners or Chairmen of Local Government Areas, Councilors, Mayors, Police Officers, Military or Paramilitary Officers, Traditional Rulers, Heads of Schools, Captains of Industries or Religious Leaders. Tupocracy earns leaders high reputation and respect because followers have nothing against them. It will be a huge disappointment that those we address as “His Excellency”, “His Honour”, Distinguished”, “Honourable”, etc, go to jail for corrupt practices or they hide behind immunity privilege to commit heinous and atrocious crimes.

Furthermore, Tupocracy ensures equity and equality before the law because those in governance will show example in obedience to the laws of the land. So far, although leadership by example has been a household word, its impact has not been felt like Democracy and other ethical terms. With this invention, Tupocracy will become the vehicle to popularize the maxim. Thus, Tupocratic institutions will be built alongside Democratic institutions and Politicians may say in their manifestoes that they will lead tupocratically because they are Tupocrats. Wrong styles of leadership will be branded as untupocratic. One can imagine the level of sanity, peace, prosperity, security, progress and stability that will be experienced under Tupocratic governments as there will be sanity in the electoral system, awards and executions of contracts, the independence of the Judiciary, being free from manipulation by the Executive and the Legislature, etc.

Admittedly, the fight against corruption in any nation can never be won unless their leaders lead by example in all matters, namely: financial matters, award of contracts, electoral matters, patriotism and the Rule of Law. Based on transparency, Tupocracy will checkmate greed, nepotism, personal aggrandizement, ethnic chauvinism, embezzlement of public funds and injustice in the process of governance. Tupocracy will bring about the practice of the Golden Rule, “Do to others what you would want other people to do to you.” Tupocrats are leaders who justify the saying that leaders should be above board. The bane of any society is the preponderance of unscrupulous and unconscionable leaders who have thrown moral values to the winds in their leadership styles.

Hopefully, Tupocracy will take its seat with other systems of governments like Democracy, Autocracy, Oligarchy, Aristocracy, Bureaucracy, etc. Tupocracy is a wake-up call as well as a moral guide for all leaders, whether in Religion or civil society, who need the respect, loyalty, welfare and co-operation of their followers. There is a popular saying that when we take care of our character, our reputation will take care of itself. Leaders should know that they are Mentors who should mentor followers by positive example in all walks of life. Unfortunately, in most nations one bad leader will hand over to another bad leader to sustain the vicious circle of bad leadership and its attendant unpleasant consequences. Biblical examples of Tupocrats and what they said.
1. Abraham: When there was to be a conflict between Abraham and his nephew and mentee, Lot, Abraham as a man of peace said, “Please let there be no strife between you and me, and between my herdsmen and your herdsmen; for we are brethren. Is not the whole land before you? Please separate from me. If you take the left, then I will go to the right; or, if you go to the right, then I will go to the left." (Gen 13:7-9) This is an example of making concessions to avoid conflict.
2. Joseph: Joseph was not vindictive to punish or kill his brothers who maltreated him but he forgave them and provided a safe place for them in Egypt: “Joseph said to them, Do not be afraid, for am I in the place of God? But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive. Now therefore, do not be afraid; I will provide for you and your little ones." And he comforted them and spoke kindly to them.” (Gen 13:7-9) This is an example of non-vindictiveness and forgiveness by leaders.
3. Samuel: As a judge and prophet in Israel, Samuel was just and transparent in all things and so he said in his valedictory speech, “Now Samuel said to all Israel: "Indeed I have heeded your voice in all that you said to me, and have made a king over you. And now here is the king, walking before you; and I am old and gray headed, and look, my sons are with you. I have walked before you from my childhood to this day. Here I am. Witness against me before the Lord and before His anointed: Whose ox have I taken, or whose donkey have I taken, or whom have I cheated? Whom have I oppressed, or from whose hand have I received any bribe with which to blind my eyes? I will restore it to you." And they said, "You have not cheated us or oppressed us, nor have you taken anything from any man's hand." Then he said to them, "The Lord is witness against you, and His anointed is witness this day, that you have not found anything in my hand."(1 Sam 12:1-5). Can the contemporary leader be bold to address his citizens and staff like this, including Asset declaration?
4. Jesus Christ: The Lord Jesus Christ was exemplary in love, compassion, humility, obedience to God and the laws of the land, righteousness, forgiveness, mercy, goodness and in all good works. He said, “Do you know what I have done to you? You call Me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you. Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him. If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them. (John 13:12-17): This is an example of love, humility and service to humanity which Jesus urged His disciples to emulate. There are other examples in the Bible which could follow.

Theoretical Exploration
At this juncture, our attention is directed to the review of some relevant theories that give explanatory power to this discourse. The technical (effectiveness) theory posit that an organization is technically efficient, if it is adequate for the demand made on it. What the technical theorists are saying is that efficiency of the public administrators should be measured by how well they have performed in meeting the objectives of the organization. That is, to provide and deliver essential services and goods to the public at an affordable price and at the right time. Public sector comprises of the department, ministries and others like public corporations. It is through these organizations, which makes up the public sector that government carries it activities (Akpan, 1982:13). An organization might try to be efficient but it activities – its interdependency or inter-relationship with other departments – might affect negatively or positively its efficiency. From the aforementioned theories on how efficiency in the public sector can be measured, the best of them is target theory because, embedded in it are all other theories on public sector efficiency.


Corruption in Nigeria: Historical Perspective
Corrupt practices are not issues just beginning today in our society; its history is as old as the world (Lipset & Lenz, 2000:3). Most countries around the globe are noted for their area(s) of specialization. Nigeria is best known for her corrupt practices, and this has been on for decades. The country formally came into existence about a hundred years ago and more precisely in 1914 with the amalgamation of the Northern and Southern protectorates by Lord Lugard. According to Fawole (2013:9) there was no objective criterion for the amalgamation except for the administrative convenience of the British colonialist. The Northern and Southern protectorates had little or nothing in common. From 1960 to date, the word 'corruption' has become the order of the day in every facet of our national life. No wonder that the Transparency International (TI), an organization based in Germany has consistently rated Nigeria as one of the most corrupt country over the last one decade. During the second term of Chief Olusegun Obansanjo as a civilian president, there were rays of hope, as he indicated his willingness to hold the bull by the horn and tackle the “hydra-headed'' monster called corruption, considering several institutions established to combat corruption including the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) which came into being in 2000 and 2004 respectively under the administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo to deal with untopcratic and other unethical practices in the high and low places. This is an effort which has not been sustained by subsequent civilian administrations in the country. This is why today, some school of thought believe that the EFCC is more corrupt than when it started because after Mallam Ribadu left the organisation, the institution is yet to win a case leveled against some notorious corrupt officers. The EFCC has been rendered useless by the National Assembly and it is now a toothless bulldog.

The Nature and Causes of Corruption in Nigeria
It is extremely appalling that despite the long years of independence, Nigeria, the so called “giant” of Africa is still battling with the problem of good governance. The crop of leaders that have attained leadership position since independence had in one way or the other lacked vision, most of them have been engrossed with corruption and political bickering leading to the enthronement of maladministration and mismanagement of public resources, and consequently economic setback and abject poverty as nation heritage (Lawal & Owolabi, 2012:9). Since Independence in 1960, corruption has persisted and grown enormously in variety and magnitude. Pervasive corruption endures in both the private and public sectors of the Nigeria society; however, the emphasis here is on public sector corruption which contributes more than 70% of the corruption cases in Nigeria and as well, seen as the source of heightened divide between Nigeria‘s wealth and its poverty (Abiodun, 2012:5). Ironically, Nigeria is among the countries of the world endowed with immense natural and human resources that are capable of improving socio-economic status and living standards of the citizenry; yet the reverse has always been the case. In view of this ugly trend, one begins to wonder what kind of superficial “giant” position Nigeria claims to hold in Africa, after almost fifty three (53) years of independence with nothing to show for it.
Even though no country in the world is corrupt free, corruption in the case of Nigeria has become very worrisome because she has consistently been placed among the most corrupt nations in the world. The pervasive and deep rooted nature of corruption in Nigeria is indicated by the fact that in 1996, Transparency International (TI) ranked Nigeria as the 2nd most corrupt nation among the 54 nations surveyed. In 1998, Nigeria was again ranked the 2nd most corrupt nation out of the 85 countries polled by TI. In 2001, Nigeria was ranked 90 out of 91 countries polled. By 2009, the Global Corruption Perception Index (CPI) by TI rated Nigeria 130th out of the 180 countries surveyed. For the year, 2010, Nigeria ranked 134th out of 178 countries assessed. In 2011, the TI, in its report on corruption perception, rated Nigeria as the 143 most corrupt nations out of the 183 countries surveyed (Chukwuemeka, et al, 2012; Lipset & Lenz, 2000:244; Abiodun, 2012:7). There are varieties of corruption as they manifest in Nigeria, these include: political, bureaucratic, private, public, materialistic and non-materialistic corruption, petty corruption and grand corruption, systemic and non-systemic corruption, etc (Fawole, 2013:5). Corruption and Good Governance: The Nigeria Dilemma
According to World Bank study of sub Sahara Africa (SSA), “The problem of Africa’s Development is a crisis of governance; the study affirms that because of the countervailing power that has been lacking, state officials in many countries including Nigeria have served their own interests without fear of being called to account (Lawal & Owolabi, 2012:.

Conclusion / Recommendation
Corruption is like a cankerworm that easily eats deep into the social and moral fabric of any society or nation. It is a major factor responsible for the nation’s comatose state of underdevelopment despite the abundant wealth. It is the reason why policy makers with executive immunity divert scarce public resources to uneconomic high profile projects that are detrimental to the provision of simple basic and highly essential projects like investment in education, health and other infrastructures such as good roads, portable water and power supply. The doctrine of Tupocracy should be included into our national life, and it is recommended here that any corrupt leader should be punished adequately.

References
Abiodun, A. (2012). Combating Financial Crimes and Corruption in Nigeria: Prevention versus Enforcement Strategies. A paper Presented in National workshop on Performance, Transparency, Accountably and Development at the Local Government Level organized by the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation at Abuja, February- March.
Achebe, C. (1988). The Trouble with Nigeria. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishers.
Aderonmu, J.A. (2011). Civil Society and Anti-corruption Crusade in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa. 13(1):75-86.
Akpan, A.U. (1982). Pubic Administration in Nigeria. Lagos: Longman Publishing Company
Chukwuemeka, E; Ugwuanyi, B.J and Ewuim, N. (2012). Curbing Corruption in Nigeria: The Imperatives of Good Leadership. African Research Review: An International Multidisciplinary Journal. 6(3):338-358
Doig, R.A. (I995). Good Government and Sustainable Anti-Corruption Strategies: A Role for Independent Anti-Corruption Agencies? Public Administration and Development 15(2): 151-65.
Familoni, K. 2007. The Political Economy of Corruption. in Lai Olurode and Remi Anifowose (eds.). The Rich but Poor: Corruption and Challenges of Good Governance in Nigeria. Lagos: Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Lagos
Fatile, J.O and Adejuwon, K.D 2012. Democracy and Development under the Shadow of Corruption in Africa: The Nigeria’s Fourth Republic in Perspective. International Journal of Physical and Social Sciences. 2(4):152-176.
Fawole, A. 2013. It’s Corruption, Mr President. Nigerian Tribune Newspaper, Tuesday, 8 January p.56.
Ikotun, A. 2004. Ethics in the Nigerian Public Service: An Analytical Perspective. Lagos: Concepts and Print, Nugalitho Productions.
Lawal, G and Tobi, A. 2006. Bureaucratic Corruption, Good Governance and Development: The Challenges and Prospects of Institution Building in Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences Research. 2(10): 642-649
Lawal, T and Owolabi, B. 2012. Leadership Debacle: The Bane of Good Governance in Nigeria. Afro Asian Journal of Social Sciences. 3(3.3):1-12
Lipset, S.M., and Lenz, G.S. 2000. Corruption, Culture, and Markets. in Lawrence E. Harrison, and Samuel P. Huntington. (eds). Culture Matters. New York: Basic Books
Mauro, P 1997. The Effects of Corruption on Growth, Investment and Government Expenditure: A Cross-Country Analysis. in Kimberly Ann Elliot. (ed). Corruption and Global Economy. Washington, D.C: Institute for international Economics.
Muhammed, S. 2013. Corruption in Nigeria: A Challenge to Sustainable Development in the Fourth Republic. European Scientific Journal. 9(4): 118-137
Obuah, E. 2010. Combating Corruption in a “Failed” State: The Nigerian Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa. 12(1): 27-53
Ogundiya, I.S. 2010. Corruption: The Bane of Democratic Stability in Nigeria. Current Research Journal of Social Sciences. 2(4): 233-241.
Okeke, E. 2010. The challenges of Governance in Nigeria: Broad Perspectives and implications for the Engineering Practice. Paper presented at the “Engineering is Development” Conference Organized by the Association of Consulting Engineers of Nigeria (ACEN). Held at Sheraton Hotel, Abuja 8-10 November.
Olowu, D. 1993. Roots and the Remedies of Governmental Corruption in Africa. Corruption and Reform. 7(3): 227-236.
Omoluabi, P. 2007. The Psychological Concomitants of Corruption in Nigeria. In Olurode, L and Anifowose, R. (eds). Rich but Poor: Corruption and Good Governance in Nigeria. Lagos; Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Lagos
Onuoha, E.I. 2005. The Effective Administration of Criminal Justice for the Prevention of
Corruption Activities by Public officials. The Nigerian Position, in Resource Materials Series No: 56.
Richardson, P. 2008. Good Governance: The Challenge of Leadership in Africa. A paper presented at 2008 International Management Conference organised by Nigerian Institute of Management and Association of Management organizations in Africa at Manchester Business School, United Kingdom

REV. MKPAYEN James Sam, SPSP: ChMC.
Oyo District Secretary
B. Ed. University of Ibadan
MA. University of Ibadan
Ph. D In view