When the Law Falls Silent… Patronage and Favoritism Prevail — Why Does the State Act Only by Breaking the Collusion?

Abdulaziz Yaqoub

States do not collapse for lack of laws, nor because their statutes are weak. They erode when collusion goes unchallenged. When silence becomes an unwritten policy and overlooking violations turns into institutional behavior, the law is muted—reduced from an instrument of justice to a decorative façade—while the state begins to decay quietly from within.

The crisis is not in the texts. Laws exist, regulations are drafted, and penalties are declared. The real crisis lies in the absence of will—the determination to enforce the law strictly and without exception. It lies in the tacit acceptance that some are held accountable while others are exempt. Here, collusion seeps in quietly: an official sees a violation and remains silent; an employee passes along an error to stay safe or to appease a superior; an oversight body knows but hesitates; an elite understands yet rationalizes. In this way, the law is not abruptly violated—it is gradually silenced.

In such an environment, patronage thrives and favoritism becomes normalized. Citizens no longer ask about their rights, but about the shortest path to securing them. They do not seek the law; they seek who “knows whom.” When relationships grow stronger than statutes, the state loses its ability to convince its citizens of its fairness, and the social contract founded on equality before the law begins to fracture.

Over time, oversight bodies become institutions in form but absent in substance. They are established without genuine independence, constrained by interference, and hampered by fear and limited resources. Their capacity for accountability diminishes, and they shift from guardians of integrity to silent witnesses of abuse. The danger lies not only in the existence of corruption, but in the normalization of silence around it.

The way out of this crisis does not lie in drafting new laws, but in a clear political and ethical beginning—one that restores the primacy of enforcement over appearance. A beginning in which the state declares that no one is above accountability; that patronage is a crime, not a courtesy; and that favoritism is a direct assault on the public good, not an acceptable social practice.

Such a beginning requires the genuine activation of oversight institutions by guaranteeing their legal and institutional independence, protecting their leadership from interference, and linking their findings to clear and swift judicial procedures. Oversight must carry the authority to access, investigate, and hold accountable—not merely to produce reports that are written to be forgotten.

It also demands the creation of safe and reliable channels for reporting corruption, so citizens feel that the state stands with them, not against them. Complaints must be received seriously, addressed promptly, and accompanied by full protection for whistleblowers, ensuring that exposing wrongdoing does not become a personal risk or an unspoken punishment.

Timely response is not an administrative detail; it is the essence of justice. Delay erodes trust, and neglect entrenches the belief that silence is the safer choice. Delayed justice is denial in disguise, and invisible accountability is a loss of authority.

When the state chooses this path, it does more than fight corruption—it rebuilds its relationship with its citizens. It restores the authority of the law, the meaning of institutions, and the citizen’s confidence that rights are protected—not granted through connections nor withdrawn through influence. Only then does the door to patronage close—not because people suddenly change, but because the state fulfills its role.

A state capable of enduring is not one that multiplies laws, but one that breaks the silence, confronts collusion, strikes at patronage and favoritism, and enforces the law equally and without exception. Only at that point does the state truly begin anew—a beginning in which it stands beside the citizen, neither above nor against them.