Why would a head of state openly surround himself with crooks and criminals?

Tendai Ruben Mbofana

When a head of state sits at a banquet table flanked by individuals known for illicit dealings and financial scandals, it is not an oversight.

***To directly receive my articles please join my WhatsApp Channel on: ***https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08

It is not an accident of seating arrangements.

It is a deliberate display of how authority operates when the formal institutions of a nation have been quietly hollowed out.

We often expect political leaders to maintain a public facade of moral rectitude.

We assume that even if corruption exists in the shadows, a president will keep questionable figures at a safe distance to protect the dignity of the office.

But when that distance disappears, a fundamental shift has occurred.

The high table ceases to be a symbol of public service and becomes a visible marketplace of patronage.

The most direct answer to why a leader openly embraces such figures lies in the political economy of survival.

In systems where democratic legitimacy is frail, power requires money.

It requires immense, liquid, and easily moved wealth to fund political machinery, purchase factional loyalty, and secure influence.

Formal state budgets cannot easily be disbursed for private political preservation.

Shadow networks, however, operate without public accountability.

Individuals who accumulate vast fortunes through illicit trades and state contracts become indispensable.

They are the financiers of power.

In return for their capital, the presidency offers them something more valuable than gold.

It offers them legitimacy, protection, and immunity.

To sit next to the president is to receive the ultimate seal of state approval.

It signals to investigators, judges, prosecutors, and the public that these individuals are beyond the reach of the law.

The proximity itself acts as a shield.

An ambitious prosecutor will think twice before opening a dossier on a figure who shares tea with the head of state at official banquets.

The public display of closeness is the message.

It announces that loyalty to the leader grants total exemption from the standards imposed on ordinary citizens.

There is also a deeper, more transactional dynamic at work.

A leader who relies on honorable advisers risks being held accountable to principles.

An honest lieutenant can resign in protest or challenge a questionable decision on moral grounds.

A figure whose wealth and freedom depend entirely on presidential favor poses no such threat.

Their survival is tied directly to the leader’s continued tenure.

This creates a bond of absolute dependency.

The corrupt associate cannot afford to betray the sovereign, because without the sovereign, the law would immediately catch up to them.

For a leader obsessed with internal threats and factional rivalries, this total dependence is often preferred over genuine integrity.

This open alignment alters the moral architecture of an entire society.

When citizens watch convicted felons, cartel bosses, and tenderpreneurs treated as honored guests of the state, the social contract breaks down.

The implicit promise of a just society is that hard work, honesty, and civic duty lead to dignity and success.

But the presidential table tells a very different story.

It teaches the young that virtue is for the naive, while lawlessness, if done on a grand enough scale and in service to the right person, is rewarded with prestige.

Eventually, the distinction between the government and the syndicate blurs entirely.

The state stops functioning as an arbiter of justice and begins acting as an umbrella organization for private interests.

Law enforcement turns its focus away from high-level financial crimes and directs its full force against minor offenders and political dissidents.

The judiciary becomes an instrument for settling commercial disputes between favored elites.

When a president openly surrounds himself with crooks and criminals, it is not a sign that he is unaware of who they are.

It is a declaration that the state no longer belongs to the public.

It belongs to a brotherhood of mutual interest, where the highest law of the land is no longer the constitution, but the preservation of shared power at any cost.

• *Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. Please feel free to contact him on +263715667700 or *

  [email protected]