MWALIMU (Vol 1.1. – First Quarter 2008)

MWALIMU
BUILD PEOPLE’S POWER IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION, LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND UNACCOUNTABILITY

(The views expressed in the newsletter do not necessarily reflect the views of the organisation)

EDITORIAL

This first newsletter of Transparency South Africa takes its name from Africa’s most respected figure, Julius Nyerere (1922 – 1999). The former president of Tanzania was known widely by the name of his former profession, Mwalimu (which means teacher in Swahili). Influenced by his Catholic, socialist and humanist ideas, Nyerere was an incorruptible African leader who lived a life of integrity and sincerity. We know that Julius Nyerere was not without his faults and critics but we have praise for his dedicated pursuit for social justice, self-reliance, knowledge, activism, human dignity and equality for all, and believe that he puts many of today’s leaders to shame. We, however, will not be a mouthpiece of his ideas, but provide a space for those members and allies committed to the vision of a society, where exploitation and oppression, hunger, and abuse of power, where corruption and the lack of accountability is no more. We are in particular concerned at the nexus between corruption (lack of transparency, lack of accountability, mal-governance, etc.) and sustainable development solutions. It means that we will have to grapple with corruption and the myriad inequalities that it engenders and feeds off.

Hassen Lorgat (coordinator and contributor)

Go to Contents of Mwalimu (Vol 1.1. – First Quarter 2008)

Contents

· Learning from each other – The interview: Hansjörg Elshorst
· The South African Update
· The UN turns 60: UBUNTU’s Statement
· The South African National Self–Assessment Process (APRM): some reflections
· Heinrich Kieber: Whistleblower of a special type?
· Current Debate – Should NGOs and TI and the movement do consultancy work?
· Resources
· Next actions

Learning from each other – The interview: Hansjörg Elshorst

Hassen Lorgat posed these questions to Hansjörg Elshorst during March 2008

In this first interview we talk to one of the founding members of Transparency International (TI), who was member of its Advisory Council until 1997. From 1998 to 2002 he served as Managing Director of TI, and from September 2002 until Oktober 2005 as Chairman of TI Germany. Presently he is Chairman of the Advisory Council of TI Germany and Senior Advisor on Poverty, Development and Corruption in the International Secretariat of TI. Since October 2003, Elshorst teaches at the Potsdam University in the area of International Politics – since 2006 as Honorary Professor.

Prof. Dr. Hansjörg Elshorst was born in 1938 in the Ruhrvalley and raised in Dortmund. He studied German Literature, History and Philosophy and received a PhD in German Literature. Interested in journalism, Elshorst wrote articles during his studies and was afterwards trained as an editor in a regional paper for one year. He then studied and received a MA in Sociology and Economics at Louisiana State University.

From 1967 to 1969 Elshorst taught Sociology at the Catholic University in Santiago del Estero, Argentina. During this time he was strongly involved in the work of community based organisations and NGOs.

After returning to Germany in 1969, Elshorst worked as an Assistant to a SPD-deputy in the Bundestag. In 1974 he was involved in the foundation of the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ), which he headed until 1995. 1996-1997 Elshorst joined the World Bank in Washington as Senior Advisor, focusing on the promotion of partnerships with local organisations and other development agencies.

THE INTERVIEW

Learning about our movement. Urgent priorities: Continue the fight against Northern Dominance of NGOs and work with the poor, says Elshorst, one of the founding members of TI

Hassen Lorgat: Tell us a bit more about you and your history in the formation of TI

Hansjörg Elshorst: About myself… I grew old spending most of my energy on public interest orientated international cooperation. Not satisfied with the results I continue a bit on this, offering my experience to the generation in charge. Regarding the formation of TI, I was among the first people promising Peter Eigen concrete contributions to the new initiative: secure political backing in Germany, out of funds from GTZ-consultancy profits, co-finance TI’s preparatory phase and early years. In my own assessment, already in those years my contribution to shaping TI’s structure and institutional strategy was most relevant. This continued during my turn as MD: I contributed to translating the trial and error culture of TI’s early years into a flexible but accountable organisation.

Hassen Lorgat: Given that you are currently retired, what do you think the priorities are for the TI movement now?

Hansjörg Elshorst: Continue to avoid the Northern dominance syndrome so prevalent in many global NGOs. As part of that, don’t imitate the planning and control fancy of large public and private bodies, retain the flexibility to respond to opportunities, among them voluntary engagement. While struggling for funds give highest priority to independence and public interest orientation. Expand working against corruption on political level, using our comparative advantage in this area. Widen our early focus on the giving hand from abroad and also expose private-sector interests in multilateral institutions. As a new priority: discover the poor and their organisations as partners in fighting the corruption that hurts them most.

Hassen Lorgat: As a broad movement – a broad church if you like – what must be the minimum principles we must keep in mind when tackling poverty and inequality?

Hansjörg Elshorst: Corruption increases poverty and inequality. However, fighting corruption does not automatically and always reduce them as a side effect; privatisation may reduce public sector corruption but may increase poverty and inequality. Aid has been challenged to at least do no harm; that could be a minimum but by no means self-understood principle when fighting corruption. In addition, TI should respond with priority to requests from people and institutions mandated and determined to fight poverty and inequality. And TI activists should respond positively to initiatives from within and outside the movement to make poverty and inequality a specific target of TI-tools and innovative work.

Hassen Lorgat: How do we deal with the structural inequalities endemic within capitalism (its way of doing business, over emphasis on competition in sports, life, etc.) ?

Hansjörg Elshorst: Capitalism has also seen phases where its dynamics were turned by countervailing powers to mitigate risks and reduce inequalities. Normally, the state played a crucial role as such a power, often challenged by what was civil society in those times. Relying on self-interest alone turns society into a predatory exercise. If only for self-interest as corruption fighters we should not allow the preachers of such a world in politics, media, universities to go unchallenged. In a world aching under poverty and threatened by conflict and environmental destruction it is unacceptable that huge resources serve nothing but self-interests, as quite frequent for instance in financial markets. TI is expert in where it leads when private gain overtakes responsibility. TI could thus play a role in the growing chorus challenging predatory capitalism.

Hassen Lorgat: What about collaboration with other mass organisations. is it possible and desirable for TI to do, and how do we do it?

Hansjörg Elshorst: It is remarkable that in most parts of the world Unions play such a small role in the fight against corruption. At least in Germany’s widespread corporatist society many other mass associations react the same way. But there are also examples of sections of society being shaken up by scandals. TI should not invest too many of its scarce resources in lobbying the mass organisations. However, it should stand prepared if they show interest or when joint interests can be identified. An example: there are many large civil society organisations fighting poverty in development. Many run into corruption but don’t consider it their role to fight it. That is particularly true when the political level is involved. In a division of labour TI may contribute its experience in fighting corruption and mass organisations may strengthen TI’s clout.

Accounting South Africa briefly

The arms deal continues to bedevil political life in South Africa, post Polokwane Conference of the ANC in December 2007. In the ensuing political dynamics, the politics of corruption is widely played out in the courts, impacting heavily within the ruling party.

The president of the ANC Jacob Zuma’s court case/s continue, whilst German newspapers are allegedly looking at the role of President Mbeki, when he was deputy president. The recent National Executive Committee (NEC) of the ANC agreed to get to the bottom of this all. What this means is difficult to know, but a friend suggested that this may be a matter of whether some persons took kickbacks for themselves (personal enrichment) or whether the ruling party benefitted.

In an interview with the BBCs Fergal Keane, Zuma stated that he was no crook and was fit to lead the country.

This is a snippet of how it went:

KEANE: Ethically and morally are you fit to lead this country?

ZUMA: Absolutely fit. Absolutely fit. I have been fit to fight for the freedom of this country. I have been fit to be in the ANC leadership as that thing happened when I’m already in the ANC leadership and I’m still fit, and I’ve got a better lesson to tell people, don’t commit the same mistake.

KEANE: But this is still a country where the powerful can be held to account. In 2005 Zuma’s financial advisor went to jail for his role in a corrupt arms deal with a foreign company. Now Zuma has been charged with corruption.

A lot of people think you’re a crook.

ZUMA: Is that so? (laugh) Ah huh, I want to see those people and government tell me why they think I’m a crook.

KEANE: Well there’s a whole army of prosecutors clearly think it.

ZUMA: Ah huh, is that so? Oh! Serious.

KEANE: Are you a crook?

ZUMA: Me?! What? I don’t know, unless I must go to the dictionary and learn what a crook is. I’ve never been a crook.

KEANE: Somebody who takes money from other people for corrupt purposes.

ZUMA: Have I ever done so?

KEANE: I’m asking you.

ZUMA: No. I think that’s a mistake you guys make, and I’ve said I currently have two trials, a trial by the media and then trial by court. I’m saying I’m not a crook, I have never been a crook. I will never be a crook.

Meanwhile, Commissioner of Police Jacob Selebi, reportedly a Mbeki supporter, has been charged by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and released from his duties as INTERPOL president. In a statement on 12 January 2008, noted that while “it would be inappropriate for INTERPOL to comment on the ongoing investigation in South Africa, it should be stated that President Selebi has significantly helped the organization and its member countries to enhance security and police co-operation worldwide.”

In the ensuing court appearance, Selebi was read the provisional charges: corruption, accepting bribes worth 1.2m rand ($160,000, £80,000) and defeating the course of justice. Various media agencies, in particular the Mail and Guardian, have written much about the chief of police and his friendship with convicted drug smuggler, Glen Agliotti. Agliotti is also facing a charge fort the murder of a prominent mining magnate.

And comrade Pîkoli, former head of the Prosecuting Authority who was suspended by Mbeki before Selebi was charged, has his matter being adjusticated by Frene Ginwala, respected ANC veteran and former speaker of Parliament. This is also a work in progress with one blogger asking when will it end?

UN turns 60 and we keep pushing for more fundamental reform

TI-SA signed up to the 60^th anniversary UN statement facilitated by the UBUNTU Forum as part of our ongoing work (remember the 2007 signature campaign?).

OPEN LETTER TO THE NEW UN SECRETARY GENERAL: MR. BAN KI-MOON calls for more effective democratic change that will address poverty, and inequality integrally. The Open Letter stresses interalia calls for “move towards a fair world trade system oriented towards sustainable human development, unlike the system that would be brought in by the Doha Round of the WTO, which, following the failure of its last meeting in Hong Kong, is still insisting on a neo-liberal model of world trade that would continue to benefit the rich and powerful of the world only.”

and

* “a worldwide commitment to tackle global warming, in keeping with the principles of the Rio and Johannesburg summits, that would see countries responsible for their own emissions — first and foremost the USA, which must, as a minimum, sign and comply with the Kyoto Protocol — and beginning with rich countries, would develop and implement alternatives to the existing unsustainable trends in production, consumption and energy model.”

To achieve this in part calls for

* “consequently, as the manifesto of the World Campaign for In-depth Reform of the System of International Institutions asserts, there is a need for “a stronger, more democratic UN, placed at the centre of a consistent, democratic, responsible, effective system of international institutions. More specifically, we need to democratise the composition and decision-making procedures of UN bodies and agencies to ensure that they are effective and democratic. And we need to refound and integrate within the UN all other global multilateral organisations (IMF, WB, WTO, etc.).”

For more read

The South African National Self–Assessment Process (APRM): some reflections

First prepared for Partnership Africa Canada

With its various thematic areas and with all major social forces inside government and outside government playing a role, the APRM provides an opportunity for addressing the internal and external factors that lie behind Africa’s problems. It’s a time for a fundamental rethink after the failed policies of aid, trade, the raping of raw materials and capital migrations, and anti-people mal governance – coups, military rule, multi party and single party misrule, rampant corruption. When civil society organisations seek to get involved in the African Peer Review process as we in South Africa have done, they must be politically aware that Africa has been consciously mal developed over the years through imperialism and, now, globalisation.

I want to propose here some guidelines for effective civil society participation in the APRM. These experiences and reflections are by no means exhaustive but raise some considerations for progressive, mass-based civil society to engage in national processes that have both a national and international impact – real and effective participation that impacts positively on people’s lives.

This opinion piece is a call for critical and principled participation of civil society organisations in a terrain not of our own making. To do this effectively, NGOs in South Africa had to work with other organisations and in our case – SANGOCO – we sought to work closely with the trade union movement, and also with the faith based communities, in particular the South African Council of Churches. We believed that the right to participation is fundamental and avoided the politics of boycott, or that which regards all struggles as preordained failures rather than a process which requires conscious struggle as part of the broader struggle for democracy, justice, against poverty and inequality, and for peace on the continent and in the world. So when our participation in the process was sought, we were armed with the necessity for effective participation.

The APRM process represents an opportunity for collaborative search for solutions hopefully based on a broad consensual understanding of the problems and challenges facing the country. It must be a struggle for a developmental paradigm that puts Africa as both the subject and the object of development. African scholar-activists like Mwalimu Nyerere, Walter Rodney, Babu and others have tried to assist a pan African vision that was not controlled by others but by Africans only. This view of African participation was confirmed in the 1990 African Charter for Popular Participation in Development and Transformation, which stated:

“It is manifestly unacceptable that development and transformation in Africa can proceed without the full participation of its people. It is manifestly unacceptable that the people and their organizations be excluded from the decision-making process. It is manifestly unacceptable that popular participation be seen as anything less than the centrepiece in the struggle to achieve economic and social justice for all. In promoting popular participation, it is necessary to recognize that a new partnership and compact must be forged among all the actors in the process of social, political and economic change. Without this collective commitment, popular participation is neither possible nor capable of producing results. We, therefore, pledge to work together in this new partnership to promote full and effective participation by the masses together with Governments in the recovery and development process in Africa.”

So, the simple advice I can proffer at this stage of the APRM’s development is:

* Participation or non-participation is not just an issue of principle but equally a matter of strategy. To engage in the politics of fundamental change, civil society participation must be informed relying on knowledge and resources, and having a broad vision and open eyes.

* It goes without saying that civil society is broad and diverse and this is both a strength and a weakness. The greatest weakness is the failure to organise this diverse mass into clout that can be leveraged alongside the masses of people seeking fundamental change. Hence our NGO alliances with trade unions, faith based organisations, research–technical expertise NGOs and institutions.

* These groupings got involved and met around a platform/set of principles dealing with understanding of the process, the parties involved and what can and must be won, the so-called non negotiable demands.

* As SANGOCO, we prepared our own submission, which we put on our web, and gave to our members to use when engaging in the four thematic areas (democracy and political governance, economic governance, corporate governance, and socio-economic development) and the subsequent meetings of the National Governing Council, and meetings at the provincial and local levels.

* Despite our best intentions there were weaknesses in the process, some structural to the APRM founding documents and some due to a failure of civil society to consistently participate in meetings tasked with drawing up the National Programme of Action. One point we raised in our strategic document was the control of the process going forward, which we felt must be located in a structure that is relatively autonomous of government and the private sector, and tackle issues of fundamental importance to the country, the sub-region and the continent. Clear budgeting and monitoring measures must be set up to ensure compliance.

* It is important to note that in the Country Self-Assessment Report (CSAR) much of what was asked for did not feature in the report – but that is subject to the continuous struggle that we must engage in. It is clear proof that this struggle is not a sprint (a short run in and around the board room with documents etc.) but a marathon that is long and arduous. Warts and all, the CSAR presents a decent publication from which we can struggle to ensure greater accountability and progress in meeting our challenges.

* Finally, we must be pro-active and seek to get civil society prepared before the APRM show hits town. But to ensure it is not a show, we must get organised. I know that such expertise is difficult to assemble, but it can be acquired and nurtured at home. Government and other parties must provide resources without strings attached for effective participation. These are tall orders, but an urgent necessity if civil society in other African countries is to effectively participate in the process.

* Hassen Lorgat represented SANGOCO (the South African National NGO Coalition) in the South African APRM process

Current Debate: Should NGOs and TI and the movement do consultancy work?

Should NGOs be consultancies or pitch for consultancy jobs?

This is a hot debate inside the TI movement or maybe more at leadership level. I find the debate of a high standard, and must admit that from its inception the very concept Consultant was seen by many including me as those vultures who were eating off the public sector (circa 1980s). True, whilst large sections of the public sector were in need of serious reform, the attacks were ideological and now the debate has to deal with an evolved, we have to admit that there are some consultants whose values and practices are building of public goods and services, and values… But should a movement like TI itself (or its country chapters) avail bid for this type of work? What is the motivation for such considerations in the first place? (it’s a reality for some and for others it’s to fulfill the mandate…).

I have tried to assert the view that IF, as I assert, the aim of the current debate within the movement on the above must be to LIMIT a creeping privatisation of a social – not for profit movement, then a different set of programmes, processes and institutions must follow.

Others if we must ask, as Sion Assidon (TI Morocco and Board member of the global movement) has asked, the fundamental question: What kind of NGO are we? What is the balance we should have in each country and in TI in general between advocacy and consultancy ?

Sion further argues that we must be commited to building the grassroots and citizens movement rather than spending time on becoming a consultancy: “otherwise, the risk for any chapter (and more for a weak beginning chapter) to become quickly and exclusively a paid consultancy firm is very big.” Practically, he argues, there are tax implications and also: what of the collective intellectual property rights that we build up as a movement voluntarily that will not be used for profit? There are many viewpoints but what do you think?

Resources

We will use this space to refer you to people and organisations thinking creatively and progressively about fundamental change.

· In its latest edition, Corporatewatch Newsletter 40 features NeoCon City, DEMOCRACY VERSUS THE PEOPLE, about an upcoming which will focus on Iraq’s social and political reconstruction. It argues that the “occupying forces invaded Iraq with high ambitions. Their ‘reconstruction’ of Iraq attempted to build in Iraq, almost from scratch, a version of the liberal capitalism we know in the ‘West’. This ‘reconstruction’ is another example of capitalism’s insatiable need to expand and capture untapped markets and resources. Labelled the creation of ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’, ‘justice’ and ‘peace’ it is, in fact, antithetical to the true meanings of these words.
Read more

· TI Calls on Leading Oil and Gas Companies to Increase Revenue Transparency – A new report from Transparency International, based on data made publicly available by companies, states only a third of those evaluated should be considered high performers in reveue transparency. Shell makes it on top, but ExxonMobil, alongside the China National Petroleum Corporation, are considered low performers.

Next actions

THIRD NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION SUMMIT scheduled 8 – 9 MAY 2008, BIRCHWOO HOTEL AND CONFERENCE, KEMPTON PARK postponed yet again… (www.nacf.org.za) now it appears it will take place on 3 – 5 AUGUST 2008.

The Third National Anti-corruption Summit is hosted by National Anti-corruption Forum and the theme of the Summit is, “Towards an Integrated National Integrity Framework, Consolidating the Fight Against Corruption”. The Third National Anti-Corruption Summit presents the opportunity for all parts of South African society, namely the Public, Business and Civil Society sectors, to collectively reflect on the crafting an Integrity Framework for the country as well as the values underlying such a Framework. President of the Republic of South Africa was to have addressed the Summit. And we hoped that the president touches on the Arms deal and the serious challenges of accountability that South Africa faces. It is also an opportune time to have elections for the new leadership of the FORUM and talk of funding a radical programme of action that will tackle corruption without fear or favour.

For more information on getting into the summit contact: Mr Roderick Davids or Mr John Mentoor. Their e-mail addresses respectively are RodericksD@opsc.gov.za and JohnM@opsc.gov.za or you may fax confirmations to fax number country code 27 (12)- 012 323 2768, 27 (12) 323 8382 or 012 321 3338.

Heinrich Kieber: Whistleblower of a special type?

I am not in the habit of trying to get out of the mores that some arguments are able to tie up in. These usually involve firstly moral and ethical implications, but also practical matters of state-citizens relations, rights to privacy, solidarity, good public values and the like. Let’s take the case of the alleged informant in the tax evasion scandal, who has been identified by the German press as Heinrich Kieber.

It is alleged that from the information he supplied thousands of tax evaders in Europe and elsewhere are now being investigated for tax evasion by German and other European authorities. It is not clear whether the USA authorities are acting on this information.

German authorities have confirmed that they paid an informant between four and five million Euros – about 6 million and 7.5 million US dollars – for data of account holders in the LGT (Liechtenstein Global Trust) banking group. The banking group is said to be largely or partly owned by the ruling family in Liechtenstein. Forbes says it is controlled by Crown Prince Alois of Liechtenstein and has assets worth nearly 100 billion Swiss francs ($92 billion) under management.

Welcome to Liechtenstein

Is often described as a beautiful alpine country, rich in snow, where the beautiful people go and enjoy. It is a principality, speaks German, uses the Swiss franc as currency and shares borders with other tax havens Austria and Switzerland.

The principality’s website is not talking about the scandal, but does talk of its economy on its front page. It also does take one to such information quite easily:

9. Is there banking secrecy in Liechtenstein?

Answer: Yes, there is banking secrecy in Liechtenstein. It is actually called bank client secrecy, since it is based on the protection of individual privacy. This is a basic attitude and a tradition in Liechtenstein. However, bank client secrecy is waived in the case of criminal acts. The Liechtenstein financial sector has zero tolerance for criminal assets. In contrast to tax fraud, tax evasion is an administrative offense in Liechtenstein, not a criminal offence. This approach is based on the conception of citizens as trustworthy and well-informed persons, not as entities to be administered.

It is said that the financial sector accounts for about 30 % of the country’s economy.

So what is the story all about and how did it begin?

Heinrich Kieber – it has been reported – had a dubious past. Suggestions in the media are that he was criminally inclined. (my words).

This past, according to Forbes, relate to 1996 in Spain, when he financed a real estate deal with “uncovered checks”. He was not charged and did not have a criminal record when he joined the bank in Liechtenstein.

In 2001, he was fined 600,000 Swiss francs ($552,000) for fraud by the Liechtenstein judicial system. (Forbes)

From about 2001 and 2002 he worked at LGT Treuhand banking the trusts records, work which included digitalizing the paper archives. Some explained his job as involving checking documents that were being scanned and transferred into electronic databases, but what is clear is that he had access to information.

It is alleged that he stole the documents during 2002 when he was working there.

By the end of 2002 he left the company and the country but that is only the beginning…

It is alleged that before Kieber left LGT he created four DVDs containing the details of the client data he had been scanning. His intention appears to have been blackmail, apparently not against the company but the legal authorities whom he felt treated him unfairly. (Forbes)

In January 2003, apparently Kieber communicated with Prince Hans-Adam of Liechtenstein, outlining his grievances and seeking a way out of his legal difficulties. He apparently demanded also two new passports, and threatened to pass on the stolen client data to foreign media and authorities. (Forbes)

The principality of Liechtenstein refused to accede to his demands and sought his arrest whilst the company LGT – according to Forbes – took a softer approach. It managed to make contact with Kieber and coax him back to the country to face the legal consequences by offering to pay for his legal counsel and his apartment in Liechtenstein. During the subsequent court proceedings, the four DVDs were returned to the bank and destroyed.

Apparently Kieber sent two more letters to Prince Hans-Adam, one seeking a pardon for his conviction of fraud. This was not acceded to and kieber fled the country for the second time in 2003.

In 2006, Kieber allegedly contacted German authorities

The company confirmed this week that they believed the informant was Kieber and that they do not believe that he had destroyed all the DVDs and must have had copies.

Based on the information (believed to contain 1 400 names and about 600 of them believed to be German), it is reported that hundreds of homes and offices across Germany have been raided.

So is Kieber a whistleblower and does it matter what he is called?

If one uses the old dictionary and given our obsession with sports, I think he can qualify as a whistleblower. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, whistleblowing involves bringing an activity to a sharp conclusion as if by the blast of a whistle. Well… this is not the end of the league season but one match, and he played well, even if he was a bit dirty.

As members of the global justice movement (including anti corruption), we must know that these issues are not easy to deal with but in the real world they require some compromises from ideal type moral – ethical positions which many of us hold. Although modest, it is clear that Transparency International is moving towards tackling tax havens and must make greater strides towards doing so …fast. The last press release on the subject was encouraging and included the view that “Global financial centers play a pivotal role in allowing corrupt officials to move, hide and invest their illicitly gained wealth. Offshore financing, for example, played a crucial role in the looting of millions from developing countries such as Nigeria and the Philippines, facilitating the misdeeds of corrupt leaders and impoverishing those they governed.”

The question the Kieber makes many ask is: Did the German authorities do the right thing to pay for this information from an employee with a grievance against his company or its host country?

My answer is Yes. Very little if any harm has been caused to any person although I feel uncomfortable about payments personally. But this is not a perfect world and the fallout (personal anger, etc.) is good news for the justice movement worldwide, and it is widespread. If the authorities say – as they assert – that they believe that most of the citizens that invest with them are upright citizens, who are law abiding, they should have nothing to fear. I understand that Kieber has to take up a new identity as his life is obviously in danger from those law-abiding citizens who were simply banking in Liechtenstein.

Inside Germany the Deutsche Post AG was arrested based on the information for alleging he evaded paying about €1 million in taxes. And outside there is great movement and interest from many countries from far and wide (Australia, USA, Spain, etc.) to deal with tax evaders who use so-called tax havens.

Those who evade taxes deny countries the necessary resources for national and international development, so much needed to fight HIV Aids, hunger, poverty and inequality, and the scourges of violence against women and children and much more.

In addition, the German Finance Minister Peer Steinbruck warned Liechtenstein and other European tax havens, which use the cover of banking secrecy laws, including Switzerland, Luxembourg or Austria (interestingly enough, in this case Austrian tax authorities will apparently not pay for information but have no qualms of using the information available to act upon those evaders).

That’s breathtaking stuff.

For a long time now many in civil society and in particular the Tax Justice Network have inspired the struggle to fundamentally reform this financial architecture of some nations. Although more has to be done, it is appropriate to pause and take a bow for those comrades.