SEPT. 27, 2016
President Ashraf Ghani of Afghanistan at his office in Kabul. Of 83 of the most senior officials in the country, only Mr. Ghani has fully complied with financial disclosure laws — and even his declaration form was filled out incorrectly. CreditSergey Ponomarev for The New York Times
KABUL, Afghanistan — An effort to fight corruption by monitoring the financial assets of top Afghan officials, underwritten by the United States, has been a near-total failure, according to American auditors.
Out of 83 senior officials in the past two Afghan governments, only one — the current president, Ashraf Ghani — fully complied with financial disclosure laws, according to a report issued by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction last week.
The United States and its allies have long seen fighting corruption as crucial to long-term success in Afghanistan. Public anger over rampant graft in the country is a major reason many Afghans are dissatisfied with the Western-supported government and have turned toward the Taliban insurgents.
The auditors’ report focused on the High Office of Oversight, or HOO, an Afghan agency that examines the assets of Afghan officials when they take office and after they leave. The officials are required by the Constitution to disclose their assets at those times.
The United States Agency for International Development earmarked $26.6 million in aid specifically for the asset-tracking effort, on top of $87 million in financing for other anti-corruption efforts over seven years, the inspector general said.
The report found widespread noncompliance under the previous government of President Hamid Karzai. Of the 56 top officials who were required to declare their assets as they took office, seven never did so at all and an additional 11 never had their declarations verified, as required by the law. On their way out, compliance was even worse: only 8 of the 47 Karzai officials who left office made a declaration, and none of those were checked by the anti-corruption office.
Among the non-compliers, the report said, was Mr. Karzai himself, who appointed the head of the anti-corruption office. Despite his reputation for probity, Mr. Karzai had cash in two German bank accounts and never revealed the account numbers to enable auditors to verify his holdings, the report said. That appeared to be the first public evidence of irregularities in Mr. Karzai’s financial arrangements.
An aide to Mr. Karzai called the report inaccurate and said the American inspector general had no right to police the integrity of Afghan institutions. The aide refused to be identified by name. He said the High Office of Oversight was in a better position than the American inspector general to discuss asset declarations by officials like Mr. Karzai.
The American report was based on data supplied by the oversight office, according to Jennifer George-Nichol, a spokeswoman for the inspector general.
Most of the budget for the oversight office has been financed by international and American donors. In general, the Afghan government is estimated to depend on such donations for 70 percent to more than 90 percent of its budget.
Former President Hamid Karzai, center, declared no fixed assets, cars nor homes, but said he had cash in two German bank accounts. He also declared jewelry but did not provide a value for it nor an explanation of how it was bought. CreditAdam Ferguson for The New York Times
The report said an unnamed official at the Afghan oversight agency told investigators that the asset declaration process for top officials was “window dressing designed to keep the international community happy.”
The report detailed findings against Marshal Mohammad Qasim Fahim, who was first vice president under Mr. Karzai. The marshal filed a declaration that he or close family members owned 10 homes, plus land and unspecified amounts of cash — but he did not explain where he got the money to buy such assets, and his holdings were never verified. Mr. Fahim, who died in 2014, had an official monthly salary of about $5,000 at the time.
Other Karzai administration members who failed to file asset declarations, the report said, included Yunus Qanuni, who succeeded Mr. Fahim as first vice president, and Ghulam Mujtaba Patang, Mr. Karzai’s interior minister.
Mr. Qanuni was traveling and could not be reached on Tuesday. Mr. Patang insisted that he had filed the required declarations, listing one bank account with $2,000 when he took office and $500 when he left. “I have never taken one afghani from the public purse,” he said.
The report said that 27 officials in Mr. Ghani’s current government were required to declare their assets when they took office, but only Mr. Ghani’s filings have been verified by the anti-corruption agency; 22 other declarations were still under review. Four current officials never submitted their declarations at all, the inspector general said, including the current first vice president, Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum; the defense minister, Mohammad Masoom Stanekzai; and two officials in the chief executive’s office, Mohammad Khan and Mohammad Mohaqiq.
The report said that Mr. Ghani’s form was filled out inadequately. It listed cash in accounts at two banks, but did not name one of the banks or give the account number at the other. “While President Ghani’s declaration was much more complete than that of President Karzai, our review of the declaration did find several omissions that would likely hinder the HOO’s verification efforts,” the report said, referring to the Afghan oversight office by its initials.
Haroon Chakhansuri, the spokesman for Mr. Ghani, said the gaps in Mr. Ghani’s declaration were caused by a technical issue that has since been resolved. “There was limitation in form space,” Mr. Chakhansuri said, “and a separate letter containing additional details was sent subsequently to the HOO.”
The inspector general’s report said the Afghan anti-corruption office lacked the means, the political will or the independence needed to fulfill its duties. It cited a Transparency International rating of the office’s independence: 0 on a scale of 0 to 100. The office accomplished so little, the report said, that in 2012, the American aid agency cut its budgeted contribution for the asset-checking effort down to $9.4 million from the original $26.6 million.
When anti-corruption officials did refer cases for prosecution, the Afghan attorney general’s office failed to investigate or prosecute those cases, the report said. “Some of those cases referred involved embezzlement, bribery, and forgery, ranging from bribes of $1,000 to cases involving more than $100 million, and implicated ministers,” the report said.
Mr. Chakhansuri said the inspector general’s report was outdated now that the country has a new attorney general, Mohammad Farid Hamidi.
“This is of the past,” Mr. Chakhansuri said. “The report is not covering the measures carried out by the reformist attorney general.” He said that since March, when Mr. Hamidi was appointed, 400 corruption cases had been opened, resulting in 317 investigations and prosecutions.
No comments:
Post a Comment