Water wells case leaves DRC high and dry

On 24 February 2025, a court in Kinshasa, capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), sentenced former minister of rural development Francois Rubota to three years in prison for conflict of interest in the “Water Wells Embezzlement Case”, which involved nearly $400 million of public funds. The other accused, Mike Kasenga, was acquitted and released from jail.

The story starts in April 2021 when the DRC ministry of rural development and a company called Stevers Construct-Sotrad Water, belonging to Kasenga, reached an agreement on a five-year project valued at $398 million to build 1,000 water wells and mobile water treatment plants in 1,000 localities across the country. One item would cost nearly $400,000, according to the contract.

Three years later, in April 2024, only 29 water wells had been built, according to two civil society organisations, L’Observatoire de la Depense Publique (Public Expenditure, OEDP) and the Ligue Congolaise de Lutte Contre la Corruption (Congolese league for the Fight Against Corruption, LICOCO).

According to these civil society groups, the first disbursement of $80 million was made available by the then-finance minister, Nicolas Kazadi, to the company in April 2021. The payments were made in four instalments: $20 million around June 2021, $20 million in January 2022, $20 million in early 2023 and $20 million in January 2024.

However, Kazadi, who is close to DRC President Felix Tshisekedi, claimed he only paid $71 million in three instalments for the construction of 241 water wells, a claim contradicted by the civil society organisations.

In a report published in April 2024, the two movements flagged a possible embezzlement of funds and overcharging, and proposed that a monitoring committee be set up to oversee the project.    

Kazadi left the country for France on 30 June 2024 before the beginning of the trial, after the chief prosecutor, Firmin Mvonde, declared he was “innocent”. Afterwards, Tshisekedi defended his friend, saying he believed he was indeed innocent.

Taty Assumani (not his real name), a Congolese civil society activist, commented: “Impunity is hampering the fight against corruption in DRC, where most of the high-profile corruption cases involve powerful people such as ministers, CEOs, provincial governors and others, most of whom are close to the ruling party and the government of the day.”

He bemoaned the fact that Kazadi “fled” the country without having his day in court.

“Yet, during the trial, Mr Rubota (a former rural development minister) repeatedly mentioned Mr Kazadi (the former financial minister) as the sole financial manager of the project,” Assumani told Africa in Fact. “And, apparently, Kazadi wanted to pay $375 million at once for a project that was going to last five years, in violation of the contract. Rubota opposed it and said the contract stipulated that the payment should be done bit by bit. Kazadi should have been in court to explain all of this, but alas. This shows you how powerful people easily get away with corruption.”

The case robbed the war-hit Central African nation of water infrastructure, which is seriously lacking after decades of underinvestment, failed policies, and economic mismanagement. Only 52% of the population has access to water and 29% to adequate sanitation.

“We don’t lack adequate electricity and water supply,  good roads, sufficient and quality food, education and good health infrastructure because there is no money,” Assumani said. “It is because most of the public funds made available to provide for these things are swindled, and nobody lifts a finger to say anything. The fact that the government, which disbursed that money, keeps quiet after allegations of embezzlement surface shows that those who steal public money benefit from complicity with the people tasked to pay that money to the contractors.

“How can one, just one, water well cost $400,000? And how can you only deliver 29 wells long after the first payment was made around June 2021; it’s madness, corruption.”

In a report published in October last year, ODEP and LICOCO said several state-funded projects were unfinished because millions of US dollars set aside for them had disappeared without trace. The report said the perpetrators of theft remain unpunished, or, in the case of rare prosecutions, embezzled money and assets were never returned to the state.

Asset recovery in corruption cases in Africa has been challenging, due to various factors highlighted by the Civil Forum for Asset Recovery (CiFAR) in its 2022 research paper. These include the absence of legal and policy frameworks, operational obstacles, networking and coordination challenges, and political interference.

Assumani told Africa in Fact that, though the verdict in the water wells case was not what civil society wanted, it was better than nothing.

“It was not an easy task, first of all, to bring the case to court, due to political manoeuvering and threats of all sorts going on behind the scenes. Who knows what the judges go through while presiding on high-profile corruption cases? I’m pretty sure that whatever they go through influences the kind of verdict they deliver,” he said, adding that the water wells case was just the tip of an iceberg in an “ocean of corruption” in DRC.

Lidet Tadesse Shiferaw, head of inclusive governance and accountability at the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), told Africa in Fact that community-led efforts to combat corruption included the use of social media and investigative journalism, which allowed for anonymity, to collect evidence of corruption, create a public outcry and demand action on specific cases.

However, she said, rooting out corruption systematically was not easy as corrupt quid pro quo practices or influence-purchasing election financing, carried high political stakes, “which directly affect people in high positions and may be conducted through legal loopholes – challenging the possibility of building popular and political momentum to address the problem”.

Mathias Huter, managing director of the UNCAC Coalition, ponted out to Africa In Fact that the most meaningful ways and best opportunities to demand accountability depended on the local context.

“For example, civil society can organise on the local level to monitor service delivery and public procurement, document problems, and engage with local leaders to demand improvements,” he said. “Non-governmental organisations, academics, the media, and community leaders are also important actors in holding those in power to account by monitoring and reporting on developments linked to possible corruption, and to demand reforms. Civil society can also provide input to demand from their elected representatives new or stronger laws and regulations to address pressing corruption-related problems.”

Tadesse Shiferaw emphasised that corruption undermines citizens’ trust in public institutions, their sense of belonging, and their commitment to public service and the public good.

“…people start to feel it’s only a certain group of people who have access to resources and services (which can be around religious, ethnic, or political lines), that the state doesn’t intend to serve them. So they ask ‘why should I pay tax’ for example.”

Huter said corruption was one of the biggest obstacles to achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 16: Peace, justice, and strong institutions.

“Corruption weakens institutions by fostering inefficiency and mismanagement, leading to a lack of resources for critical public services. Weak state institutions may be unable to effectively collect taxes, leaving the country without adequate domestic resources to provide education, healthcare, clean water, or adequate infrastructure.

“In conflict-affected regions, corruption exacerbates violence by allowing criminal networks and armed groups to flourish. Without strong institutions and transparent governance, achieving peace and justice remains a distant goal. Human rights are also negatively affected by corruption.”

As corruption shows no sign of abating across the world, including in so-called democratic countries, calls have been mounting to establish an international corruption court, similar to the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC).

Huter agreed that the International Anti-Corruption Court (IACCourt) was an option but said it might  take many years to set up because political will and broad international support would be necessary.

Huter said governments should ensure anti-corruption bodies and agencies had the necessary resources, independence, capacity, and mandate to implement and enforce the laws already on the books. Often, enforcement and implementation of laws lag behind.

“Strengthen transparency and accountability in public procurement through the open contracting approach.

“Establish beneficial ownership transparency: require that all legal entities must disclose who ultimately owns and controls them through a central registry, so that all relevant stakeholders can access this information and understand who is behind a company – when a state body awards a government contract, for example.

“Increase whistleblower protection – enact and enforce robust laws and establish mechanisms to effectively shield whistleblowers from retaliation.

“Involve civil society in anti-corruption efforts, for example in the drafting and implementation of anti-corruption strategies, action plans, laws and policies, as well as in monitoring implementation; empower civil society and the media to uncover and report on corruption. And lastly, ensure a high level of transparency and accountability in the financing of political parties and campaigns.”

Tadesse Shiferaw noted that another aspect of anti-corruption strategies – especially when deployed by governments – was a tendency to “instrumentalise” them for political ends, for instance to attack opponents and dissenters.

“So, civil society and the media will have to be attentive to such attempts as well, which if ’ used too frequently by the government, can make a mockery of the very idea of state-led anti-corruption efforts.”