1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Economic crimes has been described as the manifestation of a criminal act done either solely or in an organized manner with or without associates or groups, with an intent to earn wealth through illegal means, carrying out of illicit activities which violate the laws of the land and other regulating statutory provisions governing the economic activities of the government and its administration. It can erode the confidence in the system of a country; threaten the integrity of government, its programmes and institutions, thereby undermining national security, law and order. On the whole, the overwhelming presence of economic crimes can make such a country unattractive to investors (Okolie 2006).
Irrespective of the sophistication of the methods adopted by criminals, the common characteristics of the crime include cheating, lying and stealing. Corruption is a menace in the public sector, although is a global malaise, the extent of its reach in the public sector was tragically stupendous. All indicators showed that the spread of this cancer had become frightening.
The menace of corruption leads to slow movement of files in offices, police extortion at tollgates and slow traffics on the highways, port congestion, queues at passport offices and gas stations, ghost workers syndrome, election irregularities, among others. Even the mad people on the street recognize the havoc caused by corruption – the funds allocated for their welfare disappear into the thin air.
Corruption is endemic in all governments, and that it is not peculiar to any continent, region and ethnic group. Corruption is found in democratic and dictatorial politics; feudal, capitalist and socialist economies. Corruption practices did not begin today; the history is as old as the world. Ancient civilizations have traces of widespread illegality and corruption. (Lipset and Lenz 2000).
The price of corruption has been extremely high. The economic, political, social and moral bases of the country have been severely eroded and degraded. It has brought us near the brink and almost rendered us helpless and hopeless. It became imperative that something drastic had to be done to arrest the rot. This impelled the commitment of the president to tackle corruption head – on. (ICPC ACT 2000).
1.2 STATEMENT OF RESEARCH PROBLEM
Due to government insincerity in fighting corruption and economic crimes in the public sector, civil servants in the delta state board of internal revenue take advantage of looting the treasury. The civil servants perpetrate these act because they are connected to the top government functionary and thereby they were spared from been punished.
Interference in the duties of the anti – graft agencies such as independent and corrupt practices commission and economic financial crimes commission in combating the scourge. The anti – graft agencies are been used to witch – hunt any civil servants that do not dance to their tune by the government in power. The independence of the anti – graft agencies to punish corrupt civil servants in the ministry has been distorted.
Inefficiency and underutilization of public funds surface as a result of corruption and economic crimes. Due to corruption and economic crimes in the public sector, the ministry have not be able to perform efficiently and proper utilization of the resources that have been assigned to their ministry.
Collusion by officials in the public sector with foreigners to perpetrate corruption and found safe refuge and acceptance abroad. The officials in the public sector have engaged in this act now. This has caused the resources provided to the public sector to be mis – spent and misplaced.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
Corruption and economic crimes have hitherto hindered the efficiency and growth of the public sector in rendering their services. It is in this stead, the study is aimed at:
(1) To evaluate measures by government in curbing corruption and economic crimes in the public sector.
(2) To determine the role-played by anti – graft agencies.
(3) To evaluate the effectiveness and utilization of public funds by ministry.
(4) To evaluate the checks and balances in ministry on public funds.
1.4 STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS
The following hypotheses are formulated for testing in the course of this research.
(1) Null Hypothesis (H0) – The measures by government and anti – graft agencies in curbing corruption and economic crimes does not eliminate crimes in the public sector.
Alternative Hypotheses (H1) - The measures by government and anti – graft agencies in curbing corruption and economic crimes eliminate crimes in the public sector.
(2) H0 – The checks and balances in ministry does not result to the effectiveness and utilization of public funds.
H1 – The checks and balances in ministry result to effectiveness and utilization of public funds.
1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The research work focus on corruption and economic crimes, it’s possible effect in the public sector. The time frame covers from 1991 to 2008 using delta state board of internal revenue and to know the possible effect of corruption and economic crimes in there. This is necessary because it takes an equal amount of time from the last years of military regime and an equal amount of time from the first few years of the present democratic the economic and financial crimes commission and independent corrupt practices commission were established.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Corruption and economic crimes have eaten into the fabrics of the public sector and it has been taken as business as usual. These deadly acts had been perpetrated without any regret, since these crimes started from the top. It is in this light the study is carried out to find a means of drastically reducing the ugly menace called corruption and economic crimes.
This study will be beneficial to civil servants in the public sector, relevant to law enforcement agencies, public office holders, researchers, bankers, accountants and the general public. This will help to unfold perpetrators of such crimes and how these crimes are perpetrated.
This study will also serve as a basis for putting into place various procedures and policies, which will help, curb this dreaded monster (corruption and economic crimes). This development would help to bring sanctity and sanity in the public sector and re – introduce confidence in the public sector.
1.7 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
As this is a relatively new era, not much has been carried out due to insincerity of purpose amongst writers and non – availability of important literature works and text. Due to the sensitive nature of the study, this would place a constraint on the method analysis available for this study.
Non – cooperation by the officers in the ministry also posed a challenge in this research works. Despite the shortcomings, this research is aimed at carrying out a comprehensive and empirical work that will meet the yearnings of people.
1.8 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE ORGANIZATION
DELTA STATE BOARD OF INTERNAL REVENUE
The Delta State Board of Internal Revenue is the body entrusted with controlling and administering the different taxes/tariffs set out in schedule to the Delta State Internal Revenue Consolidation Law, 2009. In accordance with S.4 (1) and (2) of the Delta State Internal Revenue Consolidation Law 2009, The Board shall consist of:
a. An Executive Chairman. b. Three (3) members with relevant qualifications and expertise who shall be appointed by the Governor, to represent each of the three (3) Senatorial districts of the State. c. Two (2) Directors of the Revenue Service. d. A representative of the Ministry of Economic Planning who must not be below the rank of Director. e. A representative of the Delta state board of internal revenue who must not be below the rank of Director. f. A representative of the office of Accountant General who must not be below the rank of Director. g. A legal adviser from the state Ministry of Justice who must not be below the rank of Director. h. A secretary who shall be a legal practitioner with not less than 10 years post call experience.
· Universal Investment and Development Company, Plc.
UIDC is a development finance Institution (DFI) established with the main objective of facilitating the industrial development of Delta State in particular and Nigeria in general The company was Incorporated in 1971 by the then Midwest State Governement under the name Nigeria Economice welfare services (NEWS) Limited, a purely consultancy/Audti outfit. However in 1987 it was re-organized into its present status as a development Finance/Management consultancy Institution under the name Universal Investment and Development Company (UIDC) plc In February 2000, the company was ceded to Delta State government, and the company was re-organized/re-structured to meet the expectation of the new owner. Uinversal Investment and Development Company (UIDC) plc presently has three branches (Benin, Port-Harcourt and Asaba) and four subsidiaries (UIDC Haulage Ltd, UIDC Beverages Ltd, UIDC Merchandise Ltd and UIDC Securites Ltd). The activities of the company is regulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)
UIDC is a development finance Institution (DFI) established with the main objective of facilitating the industrial development of Delta State in particular and Nigeria in general.
· Delta Building Society Limited
Vision To always assist the Delta State Government with the required funds for the development of the state.
Mission To use every reasonable legal and conventional means to bring eligible Tax payers into the tax net to meet the vision of the Board. The Delta State Board of Internal Revenue is the body entrusted with controlling and administering the different taxes/tariffs set out in schedule to the Delta State Internal Revenue Consolidation Law, 2009.
1.9 DEFINITION OF TERMS
PUBLIC SECTOR: This include all organization set up by the government to satisfy human want to take care of specific want, specific needs of the public without profile purpose.
DUE PROCESS: This refers to the mechanism, procedure and set of standards applied to public sector procurement of goods and services to ensure budget discipline.
FRAUD: This is defined as an irregularity of impropriety involving the use of deception to obtain an unjust or illegal financial advantage (Okolie 2006).
CRIMES: This can be defined as a dishonest, violent, or immoral action that can be punished by law.
ECONOMIC: According to Longman dictionary of contemporary English, defined economic as the system by which a country’s money and goods are produced and used.
FINANCIAL: The management of money especially money controlled by a government, company or large organization.
TRANSPARENCY: As used in the humanities and in a social context more generally, implies openness in every area of business or globally.
MISAPPROPRIATION: This is the misuse of public fund especially by public office holder in the ministries.
ETHICAL VALUE: These are those qualities, which ensure that a member behaves with integrity in all professional, business and financial relationships and that he or she should strive for objectivity in all professional and business judgments.
ACCOUNTABILITY: This is the true openness or giving account of what has been expended by the public officer holder.
FAVORITISM: This is a mechanism of power abuse implying a highly biased distribution of state resources.
PROCUREMENT: This is the acquisition of goods and/or services at the best possible total cost of ownership, in the right quantity and quality.
TREASURY: This is the keeping of accounts of government funds and investment.
BUDGET DISCIPLINE: This involves strict compliance with all the variables about the budget.
CONTRACT: This is a project executed by persons or person normally evidenced by an agreement between two or more parties.
Can't find what you are looking for? Hire A Researchproject Writer To Work On Your Topic or Call 0806-703-7559.
Proceed to Hire a Writer »