info@businessghana.com
Ghana’s anti-corruption efforts have suffered a setback, with the country’s score on the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) dropping for the first time in five years.
According to a report released by Transparency International (TI), Ghana scored 42 out of a possible 100, ranking 80th out of 180 countries assessed worldwide. This performance places Ghana 11th among 49 Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, alongside Albania.
The country lags behind regional leaders such as Seychelles (72), Cabo Verde (62), Botswana (57), Rwanda (57), and Mauritius (51), all of whom scored above 50. However, Ghana performed better than Burkina Faso (41), South Africa (41), and Tanzania (41).
The report highlights a broader trend of persistent corruption worldwide, with over two-thirds of countries scoring below 50. Sub-Saharan Africa remains the lowest-performing region, with an average score of 33 out of 100, and 90 percent of countries scoring below 50.
Commenting on the findings, François Valérian, Chair of Transparency International, warned of the dangers corruption poses to democracy and development.
"Corruption is an evolving global threat that does far more than undermine development – it is a key cause of declining democracy, instability, and human rights violations. The international community and every nation must make tackling corruption a top and long-term priority," he stated.
This year’s index also highlights the link between corruption and the climate crisis, noting that corruption diverts resources meant for environmental protection and weakens enforcement of regulations.
In Ghana, corruption remains a challenge, particularly in mining license allocations, where abuse of power threatens forests and water bodies. A recent example cited in the report is the attack on three journalists from the Multimedia Group, including Erastus Asare Donkor, by armed men allegedly working for Edelmetallum Resources Limited, a mining company in the Ashanti Region.
Calls for action
To address these concerns, the Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) has called on the government to implement key anti-corruption measures, including:
1. Enhancing parliamentary oversight – Empowering the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) with enforcement authority and establishing a Budget and Fiscal Analysis Department (BFAD) to prevent the mismanagement of public funds.
2. Establishing a specialized anti-corruption court – Fast-tracking corruption-related cases with a dedicated court, as implemented in Tanzania.
3. Merit-based civil service appointments – Depoliticizing the public sector to ensure appointments are based on professional competence rather than political affiliations.
4. Protecting whistleblowers and journalists – Strengthening legal protections for individuals exposing corruption.
5. Enacting key anti-corruption legislation – Prioritizing the Conduct of Public Officers' Bill and the Internal Audit Agency Bill to strengthen asset declaration laws and enable lifestyle audits.
6. Ensuring transparency in climate finance – Developing systems to track climate finance flows, expenditures, and outcomes at both national and local levels.
7. Reforming political party financing laws – Reviewing laws to reduce undue political influence on governance.
The GII has urged the government to take swift action to reverse the decline and restore confidence in Ghana’s fight against corruption.
How are country scores calculated?
Each country’s score is a combination of at least 3 data sources drawn from 13 different corruption surveys and assessments. These data sources are collected by a variety of reputable institutions, including the World Bank and the World Economic Forum.
CPI scores do not reflect the views of Transparency International or staff.
What is the difference between a country/territory’s rank and its score?
A country’s score is the perceived level of public sector corruption on a scale of 0-100, where 0 means highly corrupt and 100 means very clean.
A country's rank is its position relative to the other countries in the index. Ranks can change merely if the number of countries included in the index changes.
The rank is therefore not as important as the score in terms of indicating the level of corruption in that country.
What does it mean if my country’s score has gone up or down?
Small fluctuations or changes in a country’s CPI score are not usually significant, which is why every year in the full table of results [.xlsx], we mark all those countries that have undergone a “statistically significant” change. This is a change which is reflected in a majority of the CPI’s underlying data sources. When only a few data sources register a change, this means that it is not yet clear whether public sector corruption has gone up or down in that country.
What kind of corruption does the CPI measure?
The data sources used to compile the CPI specifically cover the following manifestations of public sector corruption:
Bribery
Diversion of public funds
Officials using their public office for private gain without facing consequences
Ability of governments to contain corruption in the public sector
Excessive red tape in the public sector which may increase opportunities for corruption
Nepotistic appointments in the civil service
Laws ensuring that public officials must disclose their finances and potential conflicts of interest
Legal protection for people who report cases of bribery and corruption
State capture by narrow vested interests
Access to information on public affairs/government activities
There was a lot of corrupt activity reported recently in my country, but I see that my country’s CPI score has increased. How could this have happened?
There are a number of possible reasons for this. Corrupt activity not within the timeframe of this year’s CPI could take a year or more to reflect in the data sources.
Some positive developments in controlling public sector corruption might have been captured, balancing out these negative cases. Certain types of corruption, such as money-laundering or foreign bribery, are not measured in the CPI.
Why is the CPI based on perceptions?
Corruption usually entails illegal and deliberately hidden activities, which only come to light through scandals or prosecutions. This makes it very difficult to measure.
The sources and surveys which make up the CPI are based on carefully designed and calibrated questionnaires, answered by experts and businesspeople.
Can a country’s score in the latest CPI be compared with last year?
Yes. As part of the update to the methodology used to calculate the CPI in 2012, we established the new scale of 0-100. Each country score given by the underlying data sources is rescaled using the global mean and standard deviation from the CPI 2012 as the year of reference. Using this scale, we can compare CPI scores from one year to the next since 2012. Because of the update in the methodology, however, only CPI results from 2012 onwards can be compared.
