Since December 19 we have a new president for the oldest and most powerful African party. His involvement in a major corruption scandal didn’t change the outcome of the election. Why could someone with his name besmirched by corruption still deserve the trust of the majority? Perhaps for too many reasons. I can guess at least a couple of them.


In fact, the scandal around the arms deal revealed the corruption nature of all parts. The ones selling and the ones buying. The ones in favor of one supplier and the ones in favor of the others. This is a strong reason. Why punish one individual when it seems like they all have done the same, only the paying source being different?


Besides, is corruption that grave? Ethic says it is. Praxis says it’s not. For Africans, and I start to feel a bit the same way, what people point out as corruption it’s nothing else but a form of payment for a rented service.


Everybody has a price. The question is the actions. If someone intends to act a certain way and someone else says that intends to pay him for that, why not accept that money? At the end, only the individual being paid can know at which extend he is selling his soul for a couple of coins.


In such poor countries, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear: “He received money to facilitate the arms deal? Good for him! I wish I had the same luck!”


One thing is truth: for each case of corruption there is an army of poor individuals dreaming about having some kind of opportunity, and that includes corruption.


Note: The coins on the picture are chocolate made. Well, they can be very tempting too…