From liberation to integrity: Ruth First can inspire anti-corruption advocacy

Ruth First’s life and work remain a powerful reminder that research, when combined with political purpose and moral clarity, can become a weapon for justice. 

Her research approach evolved from her fearless work as an investigative journalist exposing injustice and her academic studies examined grassroots conditions in Namibia and Mozambique, combining on-the-ground inquiry with critical analysis to inform transformative action.

First’s intellectual activism was never detached from the realities of those at the margins. It was rooted in rigorous evidence, focused on the lived experience and directed towards influencing policy and practice. More than 40 years after her assassination by the apartheid government, her methodology offers vital lessons for confronting one of South Africa’s most corrosive contemporary crises — systemic corruption. Her approach has recently been described as “activist research” by Saleem Badat and Vasu Reddy, authors of a new edited volume called Research and Activism: Ruth First and Activist Research.

Today’s anti-corruption landscape is paradoxical. South Africa has a strong constitutional framework, independent oversight bodies and a vocal civil society. Yet corruption scandals in procurement, public enterprises and political party funding continue to erode public trust, drain resources and entrench inequality. 

Even the most exhaustive inquiries, such as the Zondo commission on state capture, undertaken at great public cost, ring hollow when they do not result in prosecutions for high-profile, politically connected people; and there are no credible consequences for wrongdoing. The task for anti-corruption advocates is not simply to expose wrongdoing, but to mobilise evidence, ideas and communities in ways that shift both political will and public consciousness toward integrity. This is where First’s research ethos can serve as a guide.

One of the enduring concepts associated with her work at Mozambique’s Centre for African Studies was “critical support”. First believed that research should align with the overarching objectives of a liberation project but not become uncritical cheerleading. Support meant commitment to the cause. Criticality meant honest evaluation to strengthen effectiveness. 

In anti-corruption advocacy, this balance is equally relevant. Civil society organisations, investigative journalists and policy advocates often work alongside government departments and political leaders who claim to share their goals. 

Proximity can create either complacency or self-censorship. Drawing on First’s example, advocates should affirm progress where it exists while interrogating gaps and failures. The credibility of anti-corruption work depends on this ability to praise and criticise in equal measure, ensuring that advocacy does not drift into legitimising superficial reforms.

Equally important is First’s insistence that finding the right question often matters more than finding the right answer. In Mozambique, this meant asking why agrarian policy prioritised state farms over small-scale agriculture, even when politically sensitive. 

In South Africa today, anti-corruption work often focuses on “who stole” rather than “why systems enable theft” and “how those systems can be dismantled”. Scandal-driven responses tend to chase symptoms, while the structural enablers remain untouched, including political financing rules that incentivise patronage, procurement loopholes, weak whistleblower protection and community disenfranchisement that allows corrupt networks to thrive. Asking the deeper, systemic questions can redirect advocacy towards reforms that change incentives and close avenues for abuse.

First also championed a collective approach to research, exemplified by the Centre for African Studies development course, which brought together students, officials and communities. Research was conducted, not on people, but with them, combining different experiences and forms of expertise. In South Africa’s anti-corruption context, this could mean building investigative and monitoring collaborations that unite whistleblowers, journalists, honest officials, reform-minded business figures and affected communities. 

Corruption manifests differently across contexts, from municipal service delivery to national infrastructure projects and understanding these variations requires multiple perspectives. Reports emerging from these collaborations, like those produced under First’s leadership, would be methodologically rigorous and politically actionable.

Her rejection of South African exceptionalism is another valuable lesson. First understood that national political economies are shaped by regional interconnections. Labour migration, trade flows and shared infrastructure linked the fate of Mozambique to that of its neighbours. Corruption, similarly, is rarely contained within borders. Cross-border illicit financial flows, procurement cartels operating across jurisdictions and transnational organised crime demand a regional lens. 

Anti-corruption advocacy that draws on her approach would foster partnerships across Southern Africa, sharing data, coordinating investigations and jointly advocating for stronger asset recovery mechanisms.

First’s career also speaks to the balance between objectivity and political involvement. She rejected the pretence of value-free research, arguing instead for objectivity rooted in methodological rigour, transparency and openness to challenge. 

In today’s political climate, where corruption allegations can be weaponised for factional battles, this insistence on credibility is crucial. Advocacy that can demonstrate rigorous methodology and verifiable data stands a better chance of influencing both public opinion and policy. Maintaining this standard also means challenging false or unfounded claims, even when they come from allies, to protect the integrity of the anti-corruption cause.

As we mark Women’s Month, we must recognise that corruption is not gender-neutral; it disproportionately harms women and girls, particularly in marginalised communities. When public funds are siphoned off or mismanaged, it is often women who bear the brunt of failing services. Mothers are unable to get their children to school because roads are impassable. Caregivers struggle without access to clean water or functioning clinics. Young women’s futures are compromised when textbooks are dumped in rivers while contractors are still paid in full. 

These failures not only deepen poverty but also entrench gender inequality, denying women and girls the opportunities and resources they need to thrive. An anti-corruption agenda informed by First’s activist research would make it clear that integrity in governance is not an abstract ideal but a prerequisite for women’s empowerment and the fulfilment of their rights.

Finally, First understood that political work is a long game and that endurance matters. She worked relentlessly but also valued rest, conversation and joy as strategic resources for sustaining struggle. 

In the anti-corruption field, where burnout, threats and disillusionment are real risks, this is more than a personal wellness issue, it is about movement resilience. Whistleblowers like Babita Deokaran, a brave woman who was murdered for her courage in exposing corruption, need protection and psychosocial support. Investigative teams need solidarity networks. Campaigns must celebrate wins, however small, to keep morale alive and sustain the fight for integrity.

First’s activist research was never just about producing knowledge. It was about shifting the terms of debate, empowering those on the front lines and insisting that truth-telling is a form of solidarity. In South Africa today, where corruption corrodes trust and undermines development, adopting her principles could reinvigorate advocacy. 

The battle against corruption is not only legal and technical, but also political, cultural and moral. It requires evidence that speaks to courts and commissions, communities and consciences. By fusing the rigour of research with the urgency of activism, anti-corruption advocates can honour First’s legacy and help shift South Africa toward a more accountable and just future.

Good Governance Africa’s work, as the convening partner for Africa, to raise awareness and support for the establishment of the International Anti-Corruption Court is rooted in the same belief that guided Ruth First’s activism. Entrenched corruption requires both local action and international solidarity. The court would serve as a court of last resort, stepping in when countries are unwilling or unable to prosecute their own leaders and high-level officials for grand corruption. 

Ruth Kolevsohn is the executive director of Good Governance Africa’s group governance programmes.