Corruption remains a major concern for foreign companies and investors in Tanzania, according to the assessment by the US Department of State 2011. According to the report, corruption is economy-wide, and measures to combat it are applied impartially to foreign and domestic investors. It is particularly petty corruption that has been identified by foreign companies as an obstacle to investment. This perception is supported by the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011, in which, business executives have identified corruption as the most problematic factor for conducting business in Tanzania, followed by access to financing and an inadequate supply of infrastructure. According to the report, companies consider the occurrence of irregular payments and bribes in Tanzania as common. In addition, companies behave unethically in interactions with public officials, politicians and other companies to the point that their behaviour constitutes a competitive disadvantage for the country. In the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, almost half of the surveyed companies operating in Tanzania expect to make informal payments to 'get things done', while a fifth of them identify corruption as a major constraint on their business operations. 

According to Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2009, the informal sector amounts to more than 50% of Tanzania's economy and in the 2009 Policy Brief on Business Environment, published by the NGOs' Twawesa and Policy Forum, the procedures for registering a company in Tanzania are described as non-transparent, time-consuming and arbitrarily applied, thus discouraging companies from entering the formal sector. Ministers and high level officials can exercise a significant amount of discretion, and well connected companies may obtain unfair advantages. In the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011, the surveyed companies give the favouritism of government officials towards well-connected companies and individuals when deciding upon policies and contracts a score of 3.4 on a 7-point scale (1 'always show favouritism' and 7 'never show favouritism').

One of the main problems regarding business corruption is the lack of enforcement of the various anti-corruption initiatives. Business-relevant areas in which corruption persists include government procurement, licensing, privatisation, taxation, ports, and customs clearance, according to the US Department of State 2011. According to the report, the traffic police, the revenue authority and immigration officials are cited as being very prone to corruption. Public procurement is an area of business activity where foreign companies are very likely to encounter corruption. For example, according to the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, 43% report that they expect to give gifts in order to secure a government contract, and that the average payment is 3% of the value of the contract. In order to best reduce the risk of extortion and demands for bribes in the procurement process, foreign investors considering bidding on public tenders are advised to use a specialised due diligence tool on public procurement. Foreign investors considering establishing themselves in Tanzania are generally advised to consult with experienced attorneys, to develop, implement and strengthen integrity systems, and to carry out extensive due diligence before committing funds and when already doing business in the country.

Since the late 1990s, the government has improved the country's investment climate significantly with assistance from international donors. Markets have been liberalised and a number of public companies have been privatised with the participation of foreign investors. Tax free export processing zones (EPZs) have been established and the country's membership to the East African Community provides for low tariff trade of some products between member countries. In 2006, Tanzania had the highest inflows of foreign direct investment in the East African region. Nevertheless, Tanzania's regulatory environment still suffers from inefficiency, and companies investing in the country often face inconsistent application of regulations, as illustrated by Global Integrity 2010. Thus, cumbersome bureaucracy is a major constraint on business operations in Tanzania, presenting opportunities for rent-seeking and encouraging corruption.

Companies surveyed in the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011 perceive government administrative requirements to be quite burdensome, and tax regulations are ranked among the five most problematic factors for conducting business in Tanzania. In contrast, inefficient government bureaucracy is not ranked by companies to be among the greatest constraints on business operations in Tanzania. Commercial regulations can be inconsistent, and the lack of transparency increases start-up and overall operational costs. According to the World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2011, Tanzania performs particularly poorly when it comes to dealing with construction permits and registering property that, with slower and more costly procedures than the regional average for Sub-Saharan Africa. Dealing with these business activities requires a company to spend a substantial amount of time preparing numerous documents and business activities in which companies may encounter demands for bribes or facilitation payments by corrupt officials. On the other hand, starting a company in Tanzania is considerably faster and cheaper than the regional average, which according to the World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2011, requires entrepreneurs to go through 12 procedures over an average of 29 days, at a cost of nearly 31% of GNI per capita. According to the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, senior management can expect to spend 4% of its time on average dealing with the requirements of government regulation.

The US Department of State 2011 reports that the Tanzanian government is modernising the procedures governing business licensing in order to improve the investment climate, and a positive step towards circumventing the regulatory burden faced by companies investing in Tanzania has been the establishment of the Tanzanian Investment Center (TIC) - see 'Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives' in the Initiatives section. Commercial disputes over regulatory issues can be very difficult to settle due to the high levels of corruption within local courts. Arbitration is normally used in cases of commercial disputes, but companies should note that local arbitration is reportedly ineffective. For that reason companies are advised to use the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) or the World Bank Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) to which Tanzania is a member. Tanzania has also signed the New York Convention of 1958 on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

Individual Corruption

According to Afrobarometer 2008, a great majority of Tanzanians perceive the judicial system to be affected by corruption. This perception is supported by the US Department of State 2010, according to which, the Tanzanian judiciary remains underfunded, corrupt, and inefficient, especially in the lower courts. Court clerks take bribes to decide whether or not to open cases and to hide or misdirect the files of those accused of crimes. Furthermore, magistrates of lower courts occasionally accept bribes to determine guilt or innocence, pass sentences, or decide appeals of cases.

Business Corruption

According to World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011, the surveyed business executives do not consider the Tanzanian legal framework for settling disputes and for challenging regulation to be sufficiently efficient. Companies should be aware that the corrupt and inefficient judiciary poses a hindrance for settling commercial disputes in the country, according to the US Department of State 2011.

According to the Legal and Human Rights Centre Justice Watch Annual Report 2007, corruption and bribery are widespread at all levels of the judiciary. Court clerks often demand facilitation payments in order to perform their duties and can be bribed to hide files, thus delaying a case to such an extent that the case might end up being dismissed, while judges and magistrates receive bribes in order to deliver favourable verdicts. The US Department of State 2009 reports that in May 2009 a district magistrate was found guilty in soliciting a TZS 5 million bribe from a businessman in return for a favourable judgment.

Political Corruption

According to Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, the Tanzanian judiciary is a relatively independent institution and Freedom House 2010 reports that judges are promoted and dismissed in an unbiased manner. In contrast to this, however, the US Department of State 2010 outlines that the judiciary remains highly corrupt and subject to executive influence. This is further supported by Global Integrity 2010, according to which, political interference, bribery, cronyism and other flaws are often factors in judicial outcomes in Tanzania. Similarly, according to the report, national-level judges may sometimes be influenced by political incentives in their judgements.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011:
- Enforcing commercial contracts requires a small or medium-sized company to go through 38 procedures, taking an average of 462 days at an average cost of 14.3% of the claim.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011:
- Business executives give the Tanzanian judiciary's level of independence from influences of government, citizens, or companies a score of 3.5 on a 7-point scale (1 'heavily influenced' and 7 'entirely independent').

- Business executives give the efficiency of the legal framework for private companies to settle disputes and to challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations a score of 3.7 and 3.5 respectively on a 7-point scale (1 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'highly efficient').

The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Tanzania 2010:
- Only 5% of corruption cases reported to the Prevention of Corruption Bureau from 2000 to 2005 were heard by a court of law.

Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2008:
- 55% of citizens responding to a survey believe that 'some' judges and magistrates are corrupt, 25% state that 'most or all' of them are corrupt and 8% state that 'none' of them are corrupt.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 47% of companies believe that the court system is fair, impartial and uncorrupted.

- 6% of companies identify the functioning of the courts as a major business constraint.

Individual Corruption

According to the US Department of State 2010, the Tanzanian police force is notorious for corruption and impunity. As a consequence, according to the report, more than 350 mainland police officers were dismissed for unethical behaviour and corruption and an additional five were demoted during 2010. Similarly, the US Department of State 2011 notes that the police remain among the country's most corrupt public institutions.

Business Corruption

The police are generally perceived to be prone to corruption - the traffic police in particular. For instance, according to the US Department of State 2011, foreign companies have identified petty corruption among traffic police as an obstacle to investment in Tanzania.

In addition, the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011 reveals that companies identify Tanzania to perform insufficiently in relation to the reliability of police services to protect them from crime. This is corroborated by the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, which reveals that the majority of the surveyed companies pay for security in Peru, while a much smaller part identifies crime, theft and disorder as major constraints to doing business in the country.

Political Corruption

According to the US Department of State 2010, the police suffer from lack of resources, inefficiency and widespread corruption. Furthermore, Global Integrity 2010 reports that, in practice, the law enforcement agencies are not protected from the interference of the executive. Likewise, appointments to law enforcement agencies are often based on non-professional criteria, and party loyalties or personal relationships are often considered. Moreover, according to the report, it is not uncommon for law enforcement officials, most often high-level figures, to enjoy protection from criminal investigations.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
- Business executives give the reliability of the police services to enforce law and order a score of 3.8 on a 7-point scale (1 'cannot be relied upon at all' and 7 'can always be relied upon').

Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2008:
- 84% of respondents stated that 'some', 'most' or 'all' police were involved in corrupt practices.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- More than 71% of the surveyed companies pay for security in Tanzania.

- 16.4% of companies surveyed identify crime, theft and disorder as a major constraint on doing business in Tanzania.

Business Corruption

According to the US Department of State 2011, companies should note that bureaucratic procedures for licenses and permits in Tanzania are burdensome and time-consuming. This environment could potentially trigger corruption, with businesspeople paying bribes to public officials in return for expedited processing.

According to the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, the surveyed companies reported that bribes are expected in order to obtain basic infrastructure services such as obtaining an electrical connection. However, the number of companies expecting to pay bribes is considered quite low compared to the regional average.

Another site for corrupt practices is the business inspections conducted by government officials. Thus, Global Integrity 2010 reports that, in practice, business inspections by government officials to ensure public health and safety standards are usually carried out in an arbitrary and ad-hoc manner, and bribes are often paid by companies in return for favourable treatment or expedited processing.

Political Corruption

In May 2010, the former Central Bank director of personnel and administration was sentenced to two years in prison for abuse of office in connection with the construction of the Bank of Tanzania building, according to the US Department of State 2010.

Among high-profile corruption cases was the case of Joseph Mungai, an MP and former cabinet minister, who was charged with corruption in August 2010. Mungai was alleged to have given gifts to 15 members of the ruling CCM party. The investigations into this case continue.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011:
- Starting a company requires the entrepreneur to go through 12 administrative steps, taking 29 days at a cost of nearly 31% of GNI per capita.

- Building a warehouse requires a company to go through 22 administrative steps, taking as long as 328 days at a cost of 2,756% of income per capita.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011:
- Business executives give government administrative requirements (permits, regulations, reporting) in Tanzania a score of 3.3 on a 7-point scale (1 'extremely burdensome' and 7 'not burdensome at all').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 20% of companies surveyed expect to give gifts in order to get an operating licence.

- 32% of companies surveyed expect to give gifts in order to get a construction permit.

- 9%, 13% and 19% of companies surveyed expect to give gifts in order to obtain a water, phone and electrical connection respectively.

- Senior management spends an average of 4% of its time on dealing with the requirements of government regulation.

Business Corruption

According to Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, even though property rights and property acquisition are legally guaranteed in principle, nevertheless, corruption and inefficiency both within land administration and the judicial system limit their enforceability. Moreover, according to the report, there is an informal system of land distribution in urban areas, which is insecure and causes increasing numbers of disputes. This environment could potentially trigger opportunities for corruption within land distribution.

The pervasiveness of corruption within Tanzanian land administration is also pointed out by Global Integrity 2006. According to this report, corruption in the approval and issuing of building permits in land administration is common, as the procedures are very slow. Bribes can total around TZS 135,000 in addition to the official fees.

Political Corruption

Global Integrity 2008 illustrates that Tanzanian land authorities have been involved in forceful eviction of residents of Tabata Dampo in Tanzania in 2008. The report concludes that this eviction was illegal, rooted in personal interests of the concerned authorities, and facilitated by a corrupt system within, among others, land administration.

According to the report, another recurrent problem within land administration has been corruption in processing land title deeds.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011:
- Registering property requires 9 procedures, takes 73 days and costs 4.4% of the property value on average.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011:
- Business executives give the protection of property rights in Tanzania, including financial assets, a score of 3.7 on a 7-point scale (1 'very weak' and 7 'very strong').

Individual Corruption

Employees of the tax department reportedly solicit bribes in assessing taxes. There is generally a low degree of trust towards tax collectors and a perception among citizens that the taxes collected are not properly allocated. According to the Research on Poverty Alleviation (REPOA) Special Paper 2009, more than one-third of citizens surveyed viewed the dishonest tax collectors as the most serious problem in tax collection. Despite this, only a small amount of citizens reported violations to the council offices and the police. Fear of consequences and not knowing where to report corruption were the top two reasons for not reporting incidents.

Business Corruption

In the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011, tax regulations are ranked among the five most problematic factors for conducting business in Tanzania. In addition, the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006 reveals that, whereas small bribes are common, only a small proportion of companies expect to give gifts when meeting with tax inspectors.

According to Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2009, SMEs in Tanzania fought back against false tax demands through a collective action project, in which companies referred the tax demands to a phone number set up for this purpose. Here, the swindlers were questioned by the staff and asked to provide details, such as reference numbers and names of department heads. As a consequence, faced with numerous questions, the swindlers gave up.

Companies in the service sectors are more concerned with tax constraints than companies in the trade sector, according to a 2006 CMI study.

Political Corruption

According to Global Integrity 2010, in practice, tax laws are not enforced uniformly and without discrimination in Tanzania, and tax evasion is common despite incentives, such as tax cuts. The report explains the widespread tax evasion in terms of a combination of bribery, favouritism and lack of commitment, as well as the challenges of taxing the considerable informal sector.

The tax authorities are known to accept bribes to grant import licences of approximately USD 20,000, according to the Swedish Foreign Ministry. 

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011:
- During the course of a year, a medium-sized company can expect to pay an average of 48 different taxes at a total tax rate of 45.2% of profits, and spend 172 hours managing the administrative tasks related to these payments.

Research on Poverty Alleviation: Special Paper 2009:
- 39% of citizens in a 2006 survey viewed the dishonest tax collectors as the major problem in tax collection.

Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2008:
- 49% of respondents in this household survey state that 'some' tax officials are corrupt, 27% perceive that 'most or all' of them are corrupt. 7% perceive 'none' of them to be corrupt.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 19% of companies consider the Tanzanian tax administration as a major constraint.

- 15% of the companies surveyed expect to give gifts in meetings with tax officials.

Individual Corruption

Foreigners are sometimes required to pay random illegal fees (e.g. 'health inspections fees') when entering the country. Also immigration officers accept bribes to issue passports, visas and residence permits to ineligible foreigners.

Business Corruption

Customs administration is considered as prone to corruption by companies as well as individual citizens. According to the World Economic Forum Global Enabling Trade Report 2010, time-consuming bureaucracy related to trade across borders opens the way for public officials to demand bribes in Tanzania. For example, trade is impeded by customs procedures that lack efficiency, and exporting and importing require time-consuming paperwork to clear goods at the border. Corruption and bribery in these processes are not uncommon.

Also the US Department of State 2011 emphasises that customs clearance is marred with corruption. According to the report, foreign companies have identified petty corruption among Tanzanian customs officers as an obstacle to investment in the country.

In addition, Global Integrity 2010 reports that avoidance of import duties, particularly on large and valuable cargoes such as fuel, is widespread. According to the report, large bribes can be insubstantial in comparison to the value of the import duty.

Political Corruption

According to Global Integrity 2010, in practice, customs and excise laws are not enforced uniformly and without discrimination in Tanzania, and some groups, most notably well-connected individuals or companies, consistently avoid paying taxes due to corruption and connections. The regulatory and institutional framework of customs administration thus remains a high risk area for corruption.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011:
- Exporting a container of standardised goods takes 24 days and 5 documents at a cost USD 1,262.

- Importing a container of standardised goods takes 31 days and 7 documents at a cost USD 1,475.

World Economic Forum: The Global Enabling Trade Report 2010:
- Business executives give the efficiency of customs procedures (formalities regulating the entry and exit of merchandise) in Tanzania a score of 3 on a 7-point scale (1 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'extremely efficient').

- Business executives give the transparency of border administration (pervasiveness of undocumented extra payments or bribes connected with imports and exports) a score of 3.1 on a 7-point scale (1 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'extremely efficient').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 7% of the companies surveyed expect to give gifts in order to get an import licence.

Business Corruption

Companies intending to operate in Tanzania should note that corruption in relation to public procurement is very common. According to the US Department of State 2011, companies report that corruption exists in government procurement processes, and companies are generally recommended to use a specialised public procurement due diligence tool in order to mitigate the corruption risks associated with public procurement in Tanzania.

Officers of the Ministry of Public Works receive bribes in order to: give preferences in awarding tenders, accept raising costs of contracts in order to conceal the weaknesses of contractors and to approve payments. Town and district council leaders demand and receive bribes in order to approve and award tenders to private companies, to allocate land plots and market stalls, and to issue trading licences for unauthorised areas. Procurement of goods and services at the local level is reported to be more prone to corruption that at the central level.

According to Global Integrity 2010, in practice, companies guilty of major violations of procurement regulations, such as bribery, are not prohibited from participating in future procurement bids.

See more on procurement under 'Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives' in the Initiatives section.

Political Corruption

Freedom House 2010 reports that although public procurement procedures are designed to guarantee competition, the system remains opaque and disclosure of contract-related information can lead to legal action, especially within the extractive industries.

Tanzania has witnessed several corruption scandals related to public contracting. One of these was related to Tanzania's Central Bank (BoT) and concerned the construction of the Twin Towers in Dar es Salaam. According to an October 2009 article by ThisDay, the two senior officials at the BoT, Amatus Liyumba and Deogratius Kweka, were accused of misusing their authority and inflating the costs of the Twin Towers project, which ended up costing four times the value of a similar building in London or New York. Liyumba was charged with causing the loss of USD 153 million. Nine former members of the BoT board of directors and a former central bank lawyer were set to testify against Liyumba in October 2009. Subsequently, Kweka was released from police custody, while Liyumba was found guilty of abuse of office and sentenced to two years in prison in May 2010. In addition, in relation to this case, in 2011, two Tanzanian businessmen were found guilty of defrauding the Central Bank of over USD 1 million and sentenced to five years in prison each.

Another controversial corruption scandal was the Richmond scandal in 2006, which involved the Tanzanian government and a previously unknown United States based company, Richmond Development Co. (RDC). According to Global Integrity 2007, the former Prime Minister finalised the deal and granted the USD 172 million leasing contract to the RDC. The further investigation revealed that the RDC had no experience in the energy sector and was a 'mailbox company' which had no registered records in the United States. According to the report, the RDC had further passed the contract to Dowans Holding of the United Arab Emirates. The latter was reported to have allegedly pocketed USD 102 million from the government. As a resulting of this case, the Prime Minister and two other ministers resigned in February 2008.

In an October 2009 article The Guardian reports that after several years of investigation the British Serious Fraud Office (SFO) announced that it would seek to prosecute the British arm company BAE Systems over allegations of bribery in several countries, including Tanzania. According to a January 2007 article by The Guardian, BAE allegedly made two parallel agreements with Tanzanian middlemen concerning the sale of a military radar system to Tanzania. A conventional agency agreement was signed, under which BAE paid 1% commission if the deal went through, while BAE at the same time secretly paid a USD 12 million commission to another middleman. The commission represented 30% of the contract value, a percentage that is perceived to be questionably high. In February 2010, BAE pleaded guilty of dubious financial dealings before the SFO and agreed to refund the Government of Tanzania of USD 46 million. However, the Tanzanian Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) communicated in May 2010 that it was proceeding with its own investigation on the case.

See more on procurement under 'Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives' in the Initiatives section.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011:
- Business executives give the diversion of public funds to companies, individuals, or groups due to corruption a score of 3.1 on a 7-point scale (1 'very common' and 7 'never occurs').

- Business executives give the favouritism of government officials towards well-connected companies and individuals when deciding upon policies and contracts a score of 3.4 on a 7-point scale (1 'always show favouritism' and 7 'never show favouritism').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 42% of the companies surveyed expected to give gifts to secure a government contract.

- The average value of a gift expected to secure a government contract is 3% of the contract value.

Individual Corruption

According to the 2008 CMI study Corruption and Industrial Fishing in Africa, dynamite fishing is an illegal act in Tanzania where NGOs, donors and industry representatives have been fighting against it. However the progress seems to be minimal. In a February 2009 article by Illegal Fishing Info it is reported that corruption among fisheries officers and a lack of funds hinder the anti-dynamite fishing awareness and campaigns. Some fisheries officers in Dar es Salaam and Tanga have been reported to be corrupt; alleging that they receive bribes instead of arresting offenders. Furthermore, dynamiters are given warnings prior to the arrival of Fisheries Patrol Unit.

Business Corruption

CMI reports in a 2009 study that corrupt government officials allow for national and international companies to plunder resources in the fisheries and wildlife sector in exchange for a share of the profit the companies make.

Forest officers receive bribes to grant permission for cutting down more trees than are allowed in the licences or to free suspects caught with unauthorised forest products.

Companies report that bribery is not uncommon when dealing with environmental inspections in Tanzania. For instance, Global Integrity 2010 reports that business inspections by government officials to ensure public environmental standards are usually carried out in an arbitrary and ad-hoc manner, and bribes are extracted from companies in return for favourable treatment or expedited processing.

Political Corruption

According to a 2009 CMI U4 report on natural resource programmes in Tanzania, corruption is pervasive in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, which is responsible of managing forestry, fisheries and wildlife resources. The report states that the legal acts, policies and strategies governing the management of these natural resources are of international standard, but that the political will to enforce them is lacking. Furthermore, hunting and fishing licences are granted at a price much lower than the market price, thus depriving the Tanzanian state of huge amounts of money. For example it is estimated that the loss of potential state revenues due to the underpricing of fishing licences for trawlers amounts to USD 20 million annually.

According to a 2007 article by the Danish organisation U-landsnyt.dk, corruption in logging budgets is a big problem in many areas of the country. Increasing Chinese demand for timber and Tanzanian demand for firewood have made logging a profitable business. However, the CMI report reveals that illegal logging and corruption cause Tanzania a USD 52 million loss of potential revenue annually. In the article from U-landsnyt.dk it is reported that most companies engaging in either timber imports or exports have close ties to top level politicians.

Frequency

U-Landsnyt.dk: Lokal dansk NGO-chef: Tanzanias skove presses hårdt af korruption og Kina-eksport - donorer bør oppe sig, 25 June 2007:
- Only 5% of the revenues from timber go to villages and to local authorities for cutting and transporting the wood.

- It is estimated that approximately 95% of the revenues end up in the pockets of corrupt politicians, ministers and companies.

• Legislation: The current anti-corruption legislation dates back to the Prevention of Corruption Act, No. 16 of 1971. The Anti-Money Laundering Act was enacted in 2006, while in 2007, as a revision of the existing anti-corruption legislation, the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Act (PCCA) was enacted in order to implement the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption. Corruption is criminalised under the PCCA, which covers attempted corruption, extortion, passive and active bribery, money laundering, and bribing a foreign official. The intention has been to bring together and strengthen existing anti-corruption legislation and institutions, as well as to expand the range of corruption offences and add provisions to tackle private sector corruption. Nevertheless, according to the US Department of State 2009, Tanzania is characterised by a weak anti-money laundering regulatory framework, in particular with regards to financial institutions and law enforcement capabilities. A Freedom of Information Bill continues to remain in the legislative pipeline, even though it has been criticised for containing many exemptions for accessing government records. As an example, it has been revealed that the bill allows the government to block publication of information that is not 'in the public interest'. Corruption is designated as an economic offence, and provisions exist for imprisonment, but there are no financial penalties for economic crimes except for the recovery of assets. See ISS Africa's overview of Tanzanian corruption legislation or access the Lexadin World Law Guide for a collection legislation in Tanzania.

• Government Strategies: Much of the current anti-corruption efforts can be traced back to 1996, when former President Benjamin W. Mkapa created the Presidential Commission of Inquiry Against Corruption (the Warioba Commission). The Warioba Commission produced the Warioba Report, which identified areas where corruption occurs and revealed mechanisms in the society that generate corruption. Today it is regarded as one of the most profound analyses of corruption by any African state and has helped to open up public discussion on corruption. The government's practical response to both the Warioba Report and the ensuing public debates on corruption was to launch the National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan 2000-2005 (NACSAP I) in 1999. It was mandated to a) carry out relevant institutional reforms to eradicate corruption, b) implement a public awareness campaign against corruption, and c) bring together stakeholders working on rooting-out corruption in Tanzania. The NACSAP led to the establishment of a number of anti-corruption bodies, including the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau, the Ethics Inspectorate Department and a strengthened Controller and Auditor General. In December 2006, the NACSAP-II was launched for the period up to 2011. The aim of this second phase of the NACSAP was to include local government authorities, civil society and the private sector under the national anti-corruption strategy. A Triangulation Partnership Programme (NATPP) was established in 2005, aiming to coordinate joint supportive efforts of civil society, government and the private sector directed towards the NACSAP. The government also participated in a pilot programme to test methodologies for the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) implementation review. The corresponding 2010 country report was the outcome of a peer review process and assessed the implementation of selected UNCAC articles. 

• Anti-Corruption Agency: Tanzania's first anti-corruption agency dates back to 1974 when the passing of Act No. 2 mandated the establishment of an Anti-Corruption Squad. In 1991, the squad was restructured and the name changed to the Prevention of Corruption Bureau (PCB). In July 2007, the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) was abolished and replaced by the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Act (PCCA) which renamed the PCB the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB). The PCCB is an independent body under Section 5 of the PCCA. Part 2, Article 7 of the PCCA empowers the PCCB in seven areas: 1) to give advice on the practices and procedures of the public, parastatal and private sectors in order to facilitate the prevention and detection of corruption; 2) to disseminate information about the negative consequences of corrupt practices to the public; 3) enlist and foster public support in combating corrupt practices; 4) to give advice to the public, parastatal and private sectors on how to prevent corruption; 5) to cooperate with international institutions and agencies to combat corruption; 6) to investigate and prosecute corruption offences subject to the instructions of the Director of Public Prosecutions; and 7) to investigate any alleged attempted or committed corruption offence. According to the PCCB case statistics 2009, there were 41,177 alleged cases (not all cases were related to corruption) between 1995 and 2009. Of the reports investigated, 190 corruption cases resulted in convictions, 904 public servants were sanctioned for corrupt practices and more than TZS 87 billion was recovered during this period. Critics have pointed towards the PCCB's lack of independence as a significant problem hindering its performance. According to Global Integrity 2010, the PCCB is not protected from political interference in practice. Similarly, according to the report, appointments to this anti-corruption agency are sometimes made based on political considerations, and individuals appointed may have clear party loyalties. Appointments of the PCCB's Director General and the Deputy of Director General are made by the President, and the agency is unable to prosecute cases of corruption involving public officers without the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions, which is reportedly often difficult to obtain. Furthermore, according to Global Integrity 2010, even though the PCCB's number of employees was increased from 700 in 2005 to 1,700 in 2010, nevertheless, the report assesses that the agency lacks significant powers, which in turn limit its effectiveness. However, in the wake of the recently revealed corruption scandals some politicians have expressed the need for a law that would make the PCCB an autonomous institution, in order to give it more power to deal with dubious top government officials. For further information on the PCCB, see the Strategic Plan for 2008-2013 and a legal expert review of the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bill.

• Controller and Auditor General (CAG): The Public Finance Act No. 6 and the Public Procurement Act No. 3 enacted in 2001 have strengthened the possibilities of oversight by the Auditor General in public procurement and finances. The CAG receives regular funding but is understaffed and lacks resources. The CAG makes annual reports, however, the reports are difficult to access, and the government rarely acts on them. Its independence is guaranteed in the constitution, and the budget is determined by the executive. According to Global Integrity 2010, appointments to the CAG often do not support its independence and may be based on non-professional criteria, such as political, family-based or personal loyalties. The CAG's audit reports are usually ignored or only given superficial attention by the government. Furthermore, according to the report, even though the CAG has been given a wider scope under the Public Audit Act of 2008 and has initiated useful audits of the finances of education and public health services, still, politically-sensitive issues are consistently avoided. For instance, the CAG has had no role in investigating controversial procurement issues, such as the BAE military radar or the Richmond emergency power generation contract. 

• Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA): The TRA has taken several steps to avoid corruption. For example, the audit section of the income tax and VAT departments has integrated their systems in order to reduce corruption. The teams and staff are constantly changed so that the risks of either collusion or corruption with taxpayers are reduced. Hotlines have been established, and these are well used by the public. The TRA is known to work closely with the PCCB on corruption cases.

• Ombudsman's Office: In 2001, the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance (CHRGG) replaced the Permanent Commission of Inquiry. Citizens can lodge complaints at the CHRGG which deals with human rights abuses and the contravention of principles of administrative justice. As such, the Commission functions as an Ombudsman institution that makes non-binding recommendations to the state. The CHRGG can also instigate investigations on its own. Furthermore, it advises and educates on issues of human rights and good governance. The CHRGG is not independent from the Office of the President (which cannot be investigated by the CHRGG), and it does not have the capacity to cover the whole country, although funding has recently increased significantly. According to Global Integrity 2010, the CHRGG is sometimes influenced by political and personal incentives, such as personal and professional loyalties, but also possibly exposed to some abuses of power. Moreover, according to the report, the appointments are sometimes made based on political considerations, and appointed individuals may sometimes have clear professional loyalties. Global Integrity 2010 outlines that the government often ignores the findings of the CHRGG or only gives them superficial attention, particularly if they concern politically sensitive issues.

• Ethics Commission (EC): The EC is the implementing institution of the Public Leadership Code of Ethics, enacted in 1995. The EC handles asset disclosures and is to ensure that elected politicians and public servants do not engage in illegal or unethical activities. Under the law, members of government are required to file annual reports on statements of assets, which are available to the public only under limited circumstances. However, some assets are exempt from disclosure and many government officials simply do not disclose their assets. The EC can instigate investigations upon receiving a justified and relevant complaint. However, this process has been criticised for being problematic, because the complaint must be justified by the EC before it is able to access the evidence. Complaints cannot be filed anonymously.

• E-Governance: E-Governance is relatively well developed in Tanzania and all ministries have own websites from which information can be obtained. For additional information consult the home-pages of Tanzanian ministries as well as the Tanzania Investment Centre (TIC) and Zanzibar Investment Promotion Agency (ZIPA).

• Whistle-Blowing: In law, both civil servants and private sector employees who report cases of corruption are protected from retaliation and other negative consequences (Section 54 of the 2007 Prevention and Combating of Corruption Act). However, according to Global Integrity 2010, this protection is not upheld in practice, and whistleblowers often face substantial negative consequences. The Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) has the mandate to provide and maintain the hotline service to which corruption can be reported. The PCCB also provides an online complaint form which allows citizens to report corruption; however, it very rarely reacts on complaints within a reasonable time period and initiates the necessary investigations. According to a REPOA 2008 study, the key problem regarding whistle-blowing in Tanzania, is that people do not know how and where to report corruption. The study refers to the Afrobarometer 2006, in which only 3% of the respondents in the household who had witnessed a corrupt act committed by a public official had actually reported it. The same survey confirms that the reason for not reporting a crime is of the fear of negative repercussions.

• Public Procurement: The Public Finance Act and the Public Procurement Act (PPA) have strengthened the possibilities of oversight by the Auditor General in public procurement and finances. By law, major procurements require competitive bidding and strict formal requirements limit the extent of sole sourcing. Unsuccessful bidders can instigate an official review of procurement decisions and challenge the concrete procurement decision in court, according to Global Integrity 2010. Contractors must register in order to participate in tenders, and a list of registered contractors is distributed to all tender boards in order to prevent the use of non-registered companies. Although government procurement is not entirely transparent, the Tanzanian government has carried out comprehensive reforms in its public procurements system. In 2004, the government passed the PPA which was followed up by a revision in May 2005. The PPA aims to increase the transparency of Tanzania's Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA), and to provide a margin of preference for local tenders to enhance the participation of local companies in public procurement processes. Tender notices and procurement legislation can be found on the website of the PPRA. Apart from this, newspapers, particularly state-controlled papers, carry a constant stream of tender announcements. Thus, according to Global Integrity 2010, in practice major procurements are effectively advertised, and sufficient time is allowed for bidders to respond to tender advertisements. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of the procurement law could be questioned, since in practice companies guilty of major violations of procurement regulations, such as bribery, are not prohibited from participating in future procurement bids. Furthermore, in the UNCAC Implementation Review 2010, it is stated that public procurement in Tanzania suffers from lack of capacity at both implementing and oversight level.

• General Comments on Anti-Corruption Initiatives: Tanzania has a comprehensive body of laws, regulations and oversight agencies intended to prevent, investigate and sanction corrupt practices. The legislation should be adequate to deal with corrupt activities at all levels. However, as the Warioba Report made clear, it is the failure to enforce these rules, or the wilful circumvention of them, and the weakness of the institutions set up to deal with corruption, that is responsible for the current situation. Furthermore, while a number of the recommended reform efforts are ongoing, many of these initiatives are of a long-term nature and will have little impact on short-term success in fighting corruption. Finally, while the government has dismissed some corrupt civil servants and a few senior officials, and is strengthening some anti-corruption regulations and institutions, there has been a general perception in the country that the actions taken since publication of the Warioba Report have been insufficient in terms of reducing corruption. Lack of coordination between public institutions as well as with civil society and the private sector cause problems in the anti-corruption efforts of Tanzania.

• Media: Freedom of the press is guaranteed in Article 18 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977, Chapter 2. Print and electronic media are active, but their impact is limited largely to the urban areas. According to Reporters Without Borders, there is genuine freedom of press in Tanzania and its media sector is large and mostly acts responsibly. One exception is Zanzibar where the semi-autonomous government often attacks the independent press, accusing it of being a 'threat to national unity' at the first sign of criticism. According to other sources, self-censorship is reported to be widely practised, and some instances of harassment towards journalists investigating sensitive subjects like corruption and power abuse have been reported as well. Furthermore, it has been revealed that some journalists accept bribes in order to either publish or ignore certain information. Members of Parliament (MPs) reportedly offer bribes to reporters so that they can publish good stories about the MPs' activities (also known as 'check book' or 'envelope journalism'). President Kikwete has encouraged the media to report on corruption and abuse of power, and there are reports on improved independent and balanced media coverage. The government exerts influence via state newspapers, radio and television stations. The legislative framework still contains acts that have been used to curb media freedom by invoking 'national security concerns'. According to Freedom House 2010, the media report widely on corruption and play an important role in the fight against corruption. During the Central Bank and public procurement scandals, which led to the firing of the Central Bank's governor and resignation of the Prime Minister, the media have been accredited for their persistent coverage of the stories, which is said to have pressured the government to establish the parliamentary committee that is investigating the scandals. According to Afrobarometer 2008, 79% of the surveyed households agree with the statement that the media should constantly investigate and report on corruption and government mistakes. This indicates a genuine public trust in journalists. In 2008, 5 local journalists were awarded by the Media Institute of Southern Africa on corruption and good governance. Reporters Without Borders 2010 ranks Tanzania 41st out of 178 countries, while Freedom House 2010 ranks Tanzania 105th out of 196 countries and describes its press environment as 'partly free'.

• Civil Society: Opposition voices in the party system and civil society have traditionally been very weak in Tanzania. All basic civil liberties, such as freedom of speech, association and religion, are guaranteed in the constitution, but there are frequent reports on violations of these civil rights by state authorities. Civil society has gradually consolidated itself since the democratisation process which started in the early 1990s. However, civil society organisations are still politically weak, fragmented and often ignored by political leaders. According to Global Integrity 2010, it is not uncommon for the Tanzanian government to make attempts to restrict media coverage of corruption-related issues through unofficial means, such as restricting access by disfavoured media outlets. In addition, according to the report, the government may occasionally censor material prior to its publication, especially politically sensitive or damaging corruption-related material. Nevertheless, the report assesses that, overall, it is safe for journalists in Tanzania to report on corruption.

• Research on Poverty Alleviation (REPOA): REPOA is a non-profit NGO that conducts research, coordinates training and promotes dialogue on poverty reduction and governance issues, including corruption. The organisation also conducts workshops and training seminars. REPOA is also publishing research studies and articles on good governance and corruption. The most notable publications are an April 2008 study on regional perceptions on corruption in Tanzania, a July 2008 study on corruption in local taxation systems and a September 2009 study on citizens' changing views on taxation systems.

• African Parliamentarians Network Against Corruption (APNAC): APNAC is a leading all-party parliamentary anti-corruption network in Africa. Its main work is to promote good governance and to strengthen parliamentary capacity to fight corruption. It has a local chapter in Tanzania, where TI-Tanzania is the official Secretariat of APNAC-TZ. APNAC-TZ has carried out various activities in Tanzania, including investigation of corruption scandals in different government parastatals, and reported the findings to the Parliament, as well as given recommendations on amendments of Parliament's Standing Orders. The national chapter has also helped to get Tanzania to ratify the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption.

• Policy Forum: Policy Forum is a network of NGO's working to increase civil society's influence on policy making, focusing on three main areas: Local Governance, Public Money and Active Citizen's Voice. Policy Forum organises workshops, give comments on proposed legislation and has issued a number of reports on subjects such as transparency in local governance, oversight of revenues from extractive industries and budget analysis.

• Legal and Human Rights Centre (LHRC): LHRC is an NGO that promotes human rights, conducts awareness-raising and provides legal assistance through a number of legal aid clinics. LHRC has set up watch panels monitoring the performance and accountability of the government, the parliament and the judiciary and the centre issues reports based on the panel's findings as well as annual human rights reports.

The websites listed below provide useful facts on Tanzania as well as contacts and tools for companies operating in Tanzania:

• International Finance Corporation: Global SME Toolkit
  Guide to sustainable business management practices for SMEs.
• Business Fighting Corruption
  An online resource centre for business on collective action to avoid corruption which contains a guide and resources for partnerships with companies and other stakeholders to fight against corruption.
• CIA World Factbook: Tanzania Country Profile
• World Bank: Tanzania Data Profile

Sources for further reading:

• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Tanzania 2010.
• Freedom House: Countries at the Crossroads - Tanzania Country Report 2010.

UNCAC Status: Signed 9 December 2003. Ratified 25 May 2005.

Status on UNCAC Implementation
This field describes the country's status on the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Please note any declarations and reservations made upon ratification. The list of signatories can be found on the UNODC website. Read more about the UNCAC. The Government of Tanzania participated in a pilot programme to test methodologies for UNCAC implementation review. The corresponding Tanzania UNCAC Pilot Review Programme Implementation Report 2010 is the outcome of a peer review process and assesses the implementation of selected UNCAC articles. Participation in the programme and publication of the report was purely voluntary.

Other Relevant Conventions or Treaties:

• African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption: Signed: 5 November 2003. Ratified 22 February 2005. Deposited 12 April 2005. Read more about the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption.
• United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime: Signed: 14 December 2000. Ratified 24 May 2006.
  Read Transparency International's summary and assessment of the convention.

Transparency CPI: 2011: 100/182 (Score: 3)

Transparency CPI
This field consists of the score for the country in question on the Corruption Perceptions Index from Transparency International as well as its ranking.

World Bank Corruption Index (-2.5 - +2.5): 2010: -0.49

World Bank Corruption Index
This field consists of the score for the country in question on the 'Control of Corruption' indicator in the World Bank Governance Research Indicator Country Snapshot (GRICS): 1996-2010.

OECD Country Risk Classification (0-7): 2011: 6

Country Risk Classification
The classification of countries by risk category has the aim of providing OECD countries with a basis for calculating the premium interest rate to be charged to cover the risk of non-repayment of export credits. Countries are placed in risk categories 0 - 7, with 0 being the lowest risk category and thus the least expensive. Conversely, premium group 7 is the highest risk category. Each classification is comprised of 2 components: 1) an assessment of the country's economic-financial situation, and 2) its overall political stability. Access the complete list of OECD Country Risk Classification figures.

Data Verification:

Publication date: June 2011

Data verified by: Global Advice Network

General Information Sources

• Reuters: 'Businessman jailed for Tanzania central bank fraud', 24 May 2011.
• Bloomberg: 'Tanzania ruling-party Central Committee urges graft-linked leaders to quit', 13 April 2011.
• AllAfrica: 'Tanzania: Wikileaks - US.. Role in Liyumba Case Exposed', 16 March 2011.
• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Tanzania 2010.
• Freedom House: Countries at the Crossroads - Tanzania Country Profile 2010.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• PCCB: Grappling with Corruption in Local Government Elections 2010.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2009.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2009.
• Policy Forum and Twawesa: Policy Brief - Business Environment, 2009.
• Tanzania Corruption Tracker System: 'Local gov't elections were marred with corruption', 28 October 2009.
• ThisDay: 'The EPA link', 16 October 2009.
• AllAfrica: 'Tanzania: EPA Accused Allowed to Travel', 23 September 2009.
• AllAfrica: 'Tanzania: Spirited Bid to Have Sitta Expelled From CCM Fails', 18 August 2009.
• AllAfrica: 'Tanzania: Over 30 Percent of Budget Eaten By Corrupt Officials, Says President', 10 July 2009.
• Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2008.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2008.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Tanzania 2008.
• Tanzanian Affairs: 'Report on Richmond scandal', 1 May 2008.
• International Herald Tribune: 'Tanzania's leader names new PM after Cabinet dissolved in corruption scandal', 8 February 2008.
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark: 'Tanzanians Premierminister har indgivet sin afskedserklæring', 8 February 2008.
• BBC News: 'Tanzania in bank scandal sacking', 10 January 2008.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2007.
• CMI: Bribes, Taxes and Regulations: Business Constraints for Micro Enterprises in Tanzania, 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• U4 Anti-Corruption Research Centre: Measuring 'success' in five African Anti-Corruption Commissions 2005.
• The World Bank & IFC: Investment Climate Assessment, Improving Enterprise Performance and Growth in Tanzania 2004.
• Transparency International: National Integrity Systems Country Study Report Tanzania 2003.
• Basel Institute on Governance: Bank of Tanzania (BoT) External Payment Arrears (EPA).

Corruption Levels Sources

Judicial System

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Tanzania 2010.
• Freedom House: Countries at the Crossroads - Tanzania Country Profile 2010.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2009.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2008.
• Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2008.
• Legal and Human Rights Centre: Justice Watch Annual Report 2007.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2007.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2006.
• Amon Chaligha, Bob Mattes and Annie Dzenga: Public Perceptions on Democracy and Governance in Tanzania, May 2004.
• Transparency International: National Integrity Systems Country Study Report Tanzania 2003.
• United Kingdom Home Office: Tanzania Bulletin 1/2002.

Police

• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2008.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative: The Police, The People, The Politics: Police Accountability in Tanzania, 2006.
• U4 Anti-Corruption Research Centre: Measuring 'success' in five African Anti-Corruption Commissions, 2005.
• Amon Chaligha, Bob Mattes and Annie Dzenga: Public Perceptions on Democracy and Governance in Tanzania, May 2004.
• United Kingdom Home Office: Tanzania Bulletin 1/2002.
• Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF) and Front against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania (FACEIT): The State of Corruption in Tanzania, Annual Report October 2002.

Licences, Infrastructure and Public Utilities

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• CMI Working Paper: Bribes, Taxes and Regulations: Business Constraints for Micro Enterprises in Tanzania, 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Investment Climate Assessment, Improving Enterprise Performance and Growth in Tanzania, November 2004.
• Sunday Observer: 'TANESCO operational problems: Easier said than done?', 20 June 2004.
• Utrikesdepartementet: Ekonomisk och handelspolitisk rapport 2004 (in Danish).
• Transparency International: National Integrity Systems Country Study Report Tanzania 2003.
• Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF) and Front against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania (FACEIT): The State of Corruption in Tanzania, Annual Report, October 2002.

Land Administration

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2008.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2006.
• Guardian Tanzania: 'Corruption in Land Sector Stems from High Demand, Zephania Ubwani', 23 May 2003.
• Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF) and Front against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania (FACEIT): The State of Corruption in Tanzania, Annual Report, October 2002.
• Lawyers' Environmental Action Team (LEAT): Granting Hunting Blocks in Tanzania, Nepotism.

Tax Administration

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• REOPA: 'Maybe We Should Pay Taxes After All?' 2009.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2009.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2007.
• Southern African Regional Poverty Network (SARPN): To Pay or Not to Pay? Citizens' Views on Taxation by Local Authorities in Tanzania, 2006.
• CMI Working Paper: Bribes, Taxes and Regulations: Business Constraints for Micro Enterprises in Tanzania, 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• Afrobarometer: Combating Corruption in Tanzania: Perception and Experience, April 2006.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2006.
• U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre: At the root of adjustment and growth problems, February 2005.
• Utrikesdepartementet: Ekonomisk och handelspolitisk rapport 2004 (in Danish).
• Amon Chaligha, Bob Mattes and Annie Dzenga: Public Perceptions on Democracy and Governance in Tanzania, May 2004.
• Transparency International: National Integrity Systems Country Study Report Tanzania 2003.
• OECD Development Center: Public Procurement: Lessons from Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, The Integration of Developing Countries into the World Trading System, March 2003.
• Odd-Helge Fjelstad with Florida Henjewele, Geoffrey Mwambe, Erasto Ngalewa and Knut Nygaard: Local Government Finances and Financial Management in Tanzania, Observations from Six Councils, 2000-2003.

Customs Administration

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2011.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• World Economic Forum: Global Enabling Trade Report 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2009.
• CMI Working Paper: Bribes, Taxes and Regulations: Business Constraints for Micro Enterprises in Tanzania, 2006.
• Utrikesdepartementet: Ekonomisk och handelspolitisk rapport 2004 (in Danish).

Public Procurement and Contracting

• AllAfrica: 'Tanzania: Wikileaks - US.. Role in Liyumba Case Exposed', 16 March 2011.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• Freedom House: Countries at the Crossroads - Tanzania Country Profile 2010.
• ThisDay: 'Military Radar Scandal: BAE bosses face the "people's jury" this week', 3 May 2010.
• AllAfrica:'Tanzania:Dar to Probe Radar Scandal despite $46m Payout', 15 February 2010.
• ThisDay: 'Liyumba case: Prosecution witnesses include board members, EPA suspect', 7 October 2009.
• The Guardian: 'SFO seeks BAE prosecution over bribery claims', 1 October 2009.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2007.
• The Guardian: 'BAE's secret $12m payout in African deal', 15 January 2007.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Investment Climate Assessment, Improving Enterprise Performance and Growth in Tanzania, November 2004.
• Odd-Helge Fjelstad with Florida Henjewele, Geoffrey Mwambe, Erasto Ngalewa and Knut Nygaard: Local Government Finances and Financial Management in Tanzania, Observations from Six Councils, 2000-2003.
• Transparency International: National Integrity Systems Country Study Report Tanzania 2003.
• Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF) and Front against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania (FACEIT): The State of Corruption in Tanzania, Annual Report, October 2002.

Environment, Natural Resources and Extractive Industry

• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• Chr. Michelsen Institute: Does aid work? Reflections on a natural resources programme in Tanzania, 2009.
• Illegal-Fishing Info: 'Tanzania's fishing industry under threats', 26 February 2009.
• Chr. Michelsen Institute: Corruption and Industrial Fishing in Africa, 2008.
• U-Landsnyt.dk: Lokal dansk NGO-chef: Tanzanias skove presses hårdt af korruption og Kina-eksport - donorer bør oppe sig, 25 June 2007.
• The World Bank and IFC: Investment Climate Assessment, Improving Enterprise Performance and Growth in Tanzania, November 2004.
• Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF) and Front against Corrupt Elements in Tanzania (FACEIT): The State of Corruption in Tanzania, Annual Report, October 2002.
• The Lawyers' Environmental Action Team (LEAT): Environmental Impact Assessment of Foreign Investment Projects, A Study in the Law, Policy and Governmental Decision-Making in Tanzania.

Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives Sources

• Bloomberg: 'Tanzania ruling-party Central Committee urges graft-linked leaders to quit', 13 April 2011.
• AllAfrica: 'Tanzania: Wikileaks - US.. Role in Liyumba Case Exposed', 16 March 2011.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2011.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• UNODC: Tanzania UNCAC Pilot Review Programme Implementation Report 2010.
• AllAfrica: 'Tanzania: PCCB Takes Fire Over Graft Ranking', 19 November 2009.
• REPOA: Citizens Demand Tougher Action on Corruption in Tanzania, April 2008.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Tanzania 2008.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Tanzania 2008.
• AllAfrica: Bank Scandal Dirtier Than Any Other, Says Ex-PM, 11 February 2008.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2007.
• Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2006.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2006.
• OECD/NEPADU/UN Global Compact/Transparency International: Integrity and Investment Promotion, 'The Case of Tanzania', 2005.
• U4 Anti-Corruption Research Centre: Measuring 'success' in five African Anti-Corruption Commissions, 2005.
• Transparency International: National Integrity System Country Study Report Tanzania 2003.
• Edward G. Hoseah: Measures to combat corruption at the local, national and international level 2001.
• The 9th International Anti-Corruption Conference assessment of Tanzania.

Private Anti-Corruption Initiatives Sources

• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Tanzania 2010.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• Freedom House: Freedom of the Press Index 2010.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Tanzania 2010.
• Freedom House: Countries at the Crossroads - Tanzania Country Profile 2010.
• Reporters Without Borders: Tanzania Country Report 2010.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Tanzania 2009.
• Reporters Without Borders: Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2009.
• REPOA: 'Maybe We Should Pay Tax After All?', 2009.
• Tanzanian Affairs: 'Other Corruption Cases', 1 January 2009.
• Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Tanzania 2008.
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark: Tanzanias premierminister har indgivet sin afskedsbegæring, 8 February 2008.
• Global Integrity: Tanzania Country Report 2007.
• Swedish Trade Council: Country Report Tanzania 2006.
• U4 Anti-Corruption Research Centre: Measuring 'success' in five African Anti-Corruption Commissions 2005.
• Transparency International: National Integrity Systems Country Study Report Tanzania 2003.