Editor, Reference is made to the article, “MPs decry ‘growing’ gender-based corruption” (The New Times, May 14). Yes, sex for favours, including favouritism in awarding jobs or any other advantage, can be categorised as corruption in some cases though not always. In a majority of cases, the practice may be classified as morally reprehensible without necessarily reaching the degree at which it may be considered corruption in accordance with the tenets of the law. The challenge is how you determine whether an exchange involving sex and an advantage crosses over into criminality when the two parties involved are not likely to be volunteering information on how the one who has gained an undeserved advantage got it. For instance, a girl who sleeps with a man in order to get a job is unlikely to speak out against her “benefactor” if she has obtained what she wanted—she is only likely to do so, if she gives in to sex and does not receive what was promised in exchange. In which case then, you have an instance of sexual exploitation, but no corruption since there has not been a corrupt exchange of favour (i.e. an undeserved advantage) for the sex. It is also not always easy to determine from which side the corruption started. It is quite possible that the initiative may be from the person who seeks the favour and is prepared to go to any length, including seduction of the person who can get him (or her) the favour sought. While the person who controls who gets the position or the advantage would be acting in a morally reprehensible way by ceding to those inducements, or accepting the offer but not respecting their part of the deal, I am not so sure that their behaviour would rise to the level of corruption as the law would define it. Singapore has excellent provisions in its criminal code covering sexual corruption; what it is and what makes it so. Rwanda might be well advised to borrow a leaf from their book on this issue. Mwene Kalinda, Rwanda
