Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson received accolades from around the world for their important and insightful book, ‘Why Nations Fail’ (2012). Peter Diamond, Nobel Laureate in Economics (2010), observed that the book is packed with historical examples, and makes the case that inclusive political institution is key to sustained prosperity. The book reviews how some good regimes got launched and then had a virtuous spiral, while the bad regimes remain in a vicious spiral.

In the preface the writers talk about the purpose of the book which is to capture the immense differences in incomes and standards of living that prevail between rich countries such as the US, Britain and Germany, as against the poor nations of Africa, Latin America and South Asia. In the introduction, as a prelude to understanding the gravity of the subject, they explore the case of 24-year-old Noah Hamid, who works at an advertising agency in Cairo. “We are suffering from corruption, oppression and bad education, we live amid a corrupt system which has to change.” How aptly has Hamid identified and voiced the issue of people living in developing countries!

History proves that only those ‘nations succeed’ where the leader and the led are subject to the same law. If the laws are tweaked or if they are selectively implemented in relation to different sections of the society they cease to have value or legal validation and legitimacy.

Laws, rules and regulations have to be cast in iron mould. The day laws are made malleable that’s the end of law. The strong and powerful sections of society especially the elite demand special treatment. The demand is to be given exemption to the applicability of laws in relation to their behaviour and attitude. In almost all the down-trodden countries of the developing world, elected parliamentarians frame and pass laws and statutes for ordinary people and not for themselves. Being above the law is considered a legalised privilege.

The least expectation of leadership is to offer to all compatriots, without distinctions of ethnicity, culture, language, religion, and a level playing field for them to exploit their unique strengths, skills and abilities for their betterment and in turn become an effective unit of energy for the country. The responsibility of the leader is to make available to the community a sense of unity amidst the many diversities. Nations that are blessed with intelligent leaders who are voracious leaders of history, usually those who are always willing to learn, and hence they ensure success for their country and its people.

Lee Kuan Yew, the founder and architect of Singapore was ruthless in the implementation of laws. He respected the legal framework and therefore was unwilling to let anyone else take or make exceptions/exemptions. His perspective was that man needs a moral compass of right and wrong. The wrong could be evil too. So to stop the evil man from doing evil things the need is to straight jacket such persons within constrictions of rules, regulations and laws.

Lee Kuan Yew took his job as Prime Minister of Singapore quite seriously. He is reported in documented history to have always avoided social conversations as he had value for time. His view of political leadership is served in the following statement of his: “Politics demands that extra bit from of a person, a commitment to people and ideals. You’re not just doing a job. This is a vocation; not unlike the priesthood. You must feel for people, you must want to change society and make things better.”

On one occasion Lee also said “All I can do is to make sure that when I leave, the institutions are good, sound, clean , efficient, and there is a government in place that knows what it has got to do.’ In fact, a few months before he passed away in March 2015, he remarked, “I am glad, Singapore doesn’t need me, anymore.”

If there are many who find the laws of UAE, in particular Dubai as being particularly stringent, inflexible and hard, it is an absolute truth. However, the beauty of these laws and regulations lies in the fact that it is respected by all from the ordinary citizen to the elite, from the rulers to the royal family. There is no room for exceptions/exemptions. Once the laws are enshrined, the most important thing a leader must do is to pursue unrelentingly on its acceptance, adoption and implementation. The efficacy of law making and its existence lies in its undiluted application and usage.

The parliament in many developing counties reflects as a place where the assembly is of people who are unwilling, chosen from the unfit, to do the necessary. Even today in the newly democratic countries, “One party always devotes its energies to try to prove the other party is unfit to rule — and both commonly succeed and are right, H. L. Mencken in his minority report.

No country can make economic or social progress, if the politicians and bureaucrats consider the frame work of law as a compendium of sections that are meant to deprive the populous of their basic rights.

The constitution to most of them is a document for only public posturing of allegiance to it. The intent to follow its dictate doesn’t normally exist. In fact, in several countries they flout the constitution blatantly, supported by an equally corrupt judicial system.

A cursory examination of the sub-Saharan countries amply proves this point. The elite capture is too deep and well entrenched. Only when these shackles are removed will any developing nation represent a picture of civilised society. Until then, the free fall towards a deeper cavity and abyss is assured. There can be no redemption from their economic morass without abandoning the culture of financial, moral and intellectual corruption.

Violation of law is the first rung on the ladder of corruption; this ladder is very tall and its last rung is obscure in the clouds of delusional view of being eternal. Mankind thus far has not been able to take their wealth whether honestly earned or ill gotten to the yonder. Yet the greed doesn’t end. For the corrupt, more is less. Most underdeveloped countries have shepherds and butchers, and not in a balanced ratio, so consequently, the environment remains prone to massive corruption.

It is a fallacy of Himalayan proportions to view natural endowments such as minerals, oil, gas, etc. as a guarantee for a country to be considered successful, let me as a case in point draw a parallel between oil producing nations of the Middle East with another OPEC member, lying on the west of Africa. The far-sighted leadership of King Faisal, Shaikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahayan, the Sabah ruling family of Kuwait, etc. invested their oil wealth wisely and focused on building institutions with a great sense of history and prosperity. They paid serious attention to allocation of resources for economic development. They were focused more on economy than political institutional building, for good reasons.

The leadership in Nigeria, however, including the bureaucracy compromised on ethical values and squandered the natural wealth by whole-heartedly embracing corruption in all its formats and manifestations. From an agrarian economy, with the discovery of oil, it transitioned into being an import dependent economy inclusive of buying grains.

In the early 1980’s the local currency, one Nigerian Naira was equivalent to three USD, and today due to deplorable economic mismanagement, the Naira trades at 1655 to a single USD. A woeful tale of manipulative leadership. A betrayal of economic integrity. A despicable decline.

When nations banquet upon borrowing they entrap themselves in the web of debt and debtors. Borrowing must always be seen as sorrowing. Regrettably there are some countries that rejoice on obtaining loan, grant and aids from friendly countries and multi-lateral financial institutions.

A singular objective that should remain the focus of any nation’s leadership must be to maximise the well-being and continuous economic and social progress for the highest number of its citizens. To do this, the need for having in place a regulatory framework is crucial that must encompass, the ideology to pursue the political, social and economic apparatus, to be developed and put in place for stringent applicability.

Leadership in the developing world today must address the challenges of the future. Leaders such as Lee (Singapore) , Mahathir (Malaysia) Park Chung Hee (South Korea), Deng Xiao Ping (China), Helmut Kohl and Angela Merkel (Germany), Margaret Thatcher (UK), Shaikh Zayed, Shaikh Mohammed, Shaikh Rashid Al Maktoum (UAE) had one thing in common — they all gave an economic direction to their nation, while keeping a lid on loud and vociferous cries for political reforms. This class of leadership made a critical decision to allow economic growth firstly, as economic well-being of their populace was their priority. This is leadership with clarity and no ambiguity.

The difference between Deng Xiao Ping and Mikhail Gorbachev is that the former preferred economic reforms to political opening, while the latter in a suicidal move went for political reforms; consequently the Soviet Union today is dead. We have 13 republics instead, each suffering, barring Russia from serious economic challenges. China on the other hand is the giant that has emerged from the fog of having been considered to be an obscure state for almost three decades, to a now prominent role on the world’s stage.

Any leader who wills to live to benefit from his hard work is most likely to be an individual who will not invest himself into the future beyond 3-5 years. Such leadership indulges into populist economic and social programmes that inherently lack financial sustainability. Also, what gets seriously compromised is the building of institutions. Narrow minded and manipulative leaders direct their energies to seek glory for themselves in the shortest time. Leadership has to rise above their egos and must unleash all the might needed to build and craft institutions that would live beyond them as a testimony to their enlightened approach towards building a nation. Any takers?

Institutionalisation must be based upon morals and legislation. Laws and leaders make or break a nation.

Sirajuddin Aziz is a senior banker & freelance contributor

All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the writer