“(1) In its resolution 55/61 of 4 December 2000, the General Assembly recognized that an effective international legal instrument against corruption, independent of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (resolution 55/25, annex I) was desirable and decided to establish an ad hoc committee for the negotiation of such an instrument in Vienna at the headquarters of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The text of the United Nations Convention against Corruption was negotiated during seven sessions of the Ad Hoc Committee for the Negotiation of the Convention against Corruption, held between 21 January 2002 and 1 October 2003. The Convention approved by the Ad Hoc Committee was adopted by the General Assembly by resolution 58/4 of 31 October 2003. The General Assembly, in its resolution 57/169 of 18 December 2002, accepted the offer of the Government of Mexico to host a high-level political signing conference in Merida for the purpose of signing the United Nations Convention against Corruption. In accordance with article 68 (1) of resolution 58/4, the United Nations Convention against Corruption entered into force on 14 December 2005. A Conference of the States Parties is established to review implementation and facilitate activities required by the Convention.
(2) First International Forum on Tax and Crime ∙ Oslo ∙ 21-23 March 2011. Issues related to greater inter-agency co-operation were discussed by more than 150 delegates from 54 delegations who participated in the first tax and crime forum on 21-23 March 2011 in Oslo hosted by the Norwegian government. The conference brought together representatives from a range of OECD and non-OECD governmental agencies, including Tax Administrations, Finance and Justice Ministries, Financial Intelligence Units, Central Banks, FATF, International Organisations, as well as business and NGOs. Second International Forum on Tax and Crime ∙ Rome ∙ 14-15 June 2012. This Forum brought together senior policy makers from different government agencies including the tax, anti-money laundering and anti-corruption communities, as well as private sector representatives, NGOs and other interested stakeholders. Participants examined best practice approaches to closer inter-agency co-operation at the domestic level and explore how to improve international cooperation. The conference also showcased specific key risks in the tax and crime area, allowing countries to target resources and learn from the experience of others. Building on previous events in Oslo and Rome, the Third Forum on Tax and Crime provided an opportunity for senior government officials from tax and customs administrations, anti-money laundering and anti‑corruption authorities, police and law enforcement, public prosecutors, financial regulators and government Ministries, as well as international organisations and NGOs, to discuss current issues and country experiences on key policy and operational topics in combating all forms of financial crime.
(3) The 4th Joint African Union Commission/United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (AUC/ECA) Conference of African Ministers of Finance, Planning and Economic Development was held in 2011. This Conference mandated ECA to establish the High Level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows from Africa. Illicit financial flows out of Africa have become a matter of major concern because of the scale and negative impact of such flows on Africa’s development and governance agenda. By some estimates, illicit flows from Africa could be as much as US $50 billion per annum. This is approximately double the official development assistance (ODA) that Africa receives and, indeed, the estimate may well be short of reality as accurate data does not exist for all transactions and for all African countries.
Fronting means a deliberate circumvention or attempted circumvention of the South African B-BBEE Act and the Codes. Fronting commonly involves reliance on data or claims of compliance based on misrepresentations of facts, whether made by the party claiming compliance or by any other person. Verification agencies, and /or procurement officers and relevant decision-makers may come across fronting indicators through their interactions with measured entities. The B-BBEE Commission may also approach a court of law to restrain any breach or for any appropriate remedial relief, which may include setting aside the transaction or initiative. The B-BBEE Commission will not discuss the merit or the details of its investigative process, but the findings will be published as required in the B-BBEE Act.
The world’s second-biggest bank by assets has had a terrible week. It started with the publication of damaging details about alleged tax evasion by wealthy clients at HSBC’s Swiss private bank.
Private companies often get away with tax evasion because they can afford better lawyers than government, former president Thabo Mbeki has said. “The problem is that private companies or large comp...
Over the past fifty years or so, Africa has received about a trillion dollars in Official Development Assistance (ODA) from OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors. If you look at the ex...
BEIJING (AP) — Chinese authorities say a former vice chairman for the country's top political advisory body has been expelled from the Communist Party and stripped of all government positions because of bribery.
Xi Jinping’s huge anti-graft campaign has continued with the execution of a mining billionaire. Its effect is now so widespread that some warn daily work is grinding to a halt
The Worst Trade Deal You Never Heard Of The Trans-Pacific Partnership, now headed to Congress, is a product of big corporations and Wall Street, seeking to circumvent regulations protecting workers,...
We know that bribery and corruption exist across all industries. But the engineering, construction and real estate sectors are particularly at risk, given the size, complexity and strategic importance of major infrastructure and development projects in both advanced and emerging economies. Colliers International was the first professional services firm and the first commercial real estate firm to sign the World Economic Forum’s Partnering Against Corruption Initiative three years ago. As a leader in the commercial real estate industry, we want to stand up for what’s right and take action to break the corruption chain.
Corruption’s pervasive myths
The recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Foreign Bribery Report finds that, in corruption cases involving the construction sector, bribes amounted to about 4 percent of the entire transaction value (not including indirect costs and negative external costs caused by corruption), which illustrates the burden on the industry — and the potential great benefit if we could eliminate this unacceptable siphoning of critical resources.
The OECD report also reveals that senior business officials, including C-suite executives, often know about and even engage in corrupt practices, debunking a pervasive myth that incidents are typically isolated or committed by a small group of rogue employees. In a recent industry survey, 92 percent of respondents believed that corruption impacts the brand of a company, while a similar percentage indicated that it has negative impact on the entire industry. A substantial proportion of business leaders — 86 percent — said corruption imposes additional costs of business and negatively impacts profitability. Beyond the ethical imperative to address corruption head-on, these represent very compelling business reasons for strong CEO-level engagement to ensure that the negative effects of corrupt practices are understood and addressed at all levels of the company.
Corruption everywhere inhibits economic growth and hinders the development of the private sector. Research conducted by the World Economic Forum (WEF) shows that 67 of 144 states have named corruption as one of the three major obstacles to doing business in their countries. In developing economies, the level of corruption is generally higher than in developed countries, and this prevents the former from effectively implementing strategies to reduce poverty and leads to an increase in social inequality. In addition, corruption repels investors and reduces the investment attractiveness of the country, which generally has a negative impact on the economy. It is estimated that the cost of corruption (in other words, losses caused by the spread of corruption) amounts to more than 5% of world GDP (or $2.6 trillion, according to WEF data).
Transparency International, an international NGO that fights corruption, provides a standard definition of corruption that applies to both the private and public sectors: "abuse of power for private gain." Analysts from the World Bank emphasize the destructiveness of corruption in the private sector due to the fact that it disrupts the allocation of public and private capital for constructive investment and hinders tendering and other open transactions.
It is very difficult to provide a total figure for the losses due to corruption schemes, which include money laundering and tax evasion. That is why leading economic institutions and independent experts tend to focus on particular forms of corruption or sectors where it is pervasive. Thus, according to the latest figures from the World Bank, each year bribes amounting to $1 trillion are paid around the world. This is a huge number, but the real price of corruption is actually much higher. That $1 trillion figure does not include factors that are the consequence of corruption: lost investments, inhibited development of the private sector, impeded economic growth, increased infant mortality, poverty, and rising inequality. If we consider all the losses associated with these negative consequences, then the amount would be much greater than $1 trillion.
Experts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) have studied the impact of corruption on the private sector by analyzing enterprises that employ five or more employees. This study was conducted in 105 developing countries, which account for only 22% of global GDP. But even such a narrow sample of countries has provided some very impressive figures. It turned out that in 2012, corruption cost the private sector in developing countries $500 billion, which is 3.7 times greater than the amount of Official Development Assistance (ODA).
What are the losses sustained by the global economy, the state, and private investors from corruption?
First of all, let′s consider the issue from the perspective of harm to the business. It must be emphasized that bribes and any "overtures" to them add an additional cost to all business deals. Secondly, the need to resort to corrupt practices carries big risks for private businesses, since they may be subject to prosecution, heavy fines, be included on a "blacklist of manufacturers" and sustain irreparable damage to their reputation. And thirdly, even if the necessary official is bribed, a business can never be sure whether an issue will be resolved in their favor, insofar as a rival company can always be found that can pay a bigger bribe and thus tip the scales in their favor. These issues are relevant for both local and foreign investors who wish to expand their business to developing markets. One study of foreign direct investments estimates that for foreign investors, corruption is the equivalent of a 20% tax.
Now let us consider the macro level. Corruption distorts market mechanisms, prevents fair competition, and discourages domestic and foreign investment. At the same time, it suffocates production and economic growth. IMF research shows that corrupt countries receive almost 5% fewer investments than countries that are relatively free of corruption. According to WEF estimates, corruption increases the cost of doing business by an average of 10%. The African Union back in 2002 estimated that 25% of the combined GDP of African countries (up to $148 billion) is lost annually due to corruption.
A number of studies have shown a negative correlation between corruption and the quality of public capital investments, services, and regulation. It is quite noteworthy that countries with high levels of corruption have one-third more child mortality than societies with low corruption, while infant mortality rates are almost twice as high. Indicative in this respect is another study conducted by Transparency International, which revealed that in 2006 approximately 35% of births in the rural areas of Azerbaijan took place at home and without medical supervision. According to the report, poor people simply could not afford to pay high fees for health services that in fact should be provided for free in these countries. Such a situation is also typical of the educational sector in many developing countries. Where bribery is widespread, students are expelled five times more often. And this is unlikely due to their actual levels of achievement. If you do not have enough money for a bribe and super abilities, then you are expelled.
The leaders of many of the countries affected by this disease have become fully aware of the need to reduce corruption. The clearest example is the policy of "zero tolerance" towards corruption, which is now being implemented in China, where ordinary officials and security agencies, as well as the mighty bosses of the energy industry, have come under attack. China may be assured success in this struggle not only due to the growing popularity of President Xi Jinping and the Communist Party, but also because of the slowing pace of economic growth. In addition, the elimination of corruption, according to the World Bank, in the long term can quadruple per-capita income and add 3% annual growth for all businesses. It turns out that a country with a per-capita GDP of, say, $2,000, that has started a campaign against corruption can expect per-capita income to increase to $8,000 over the long term. This is a good incentive to start taking action.
Who is Abu Shuaibu? That is a question reporters from PREMIUM TIMES and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists have battled for months to unravel. They haven’t succeeded. The man...
Rolls-Royce has been accused of involvement in a multibillion-dollar bribery and kickback scheme at Petrobras, Brazil’s state-controlled oil producer, as more foreign companies are dragged into the country’s largest corruption scandal.
Entrepreneur Paul Bloomfield, who arrange the finance for the new Wembley stadium in 2003, did not submit any returns or pay a penny in tax for more than two decades, it was claimed.
Problems caused by a police investigation into bribery accusations at Brazil’s state-controlled petroleum giant Petrobras are putting the capital markets and other companies at risk.
President Goodluck Jonathan had said during one of his media chat few months ago that stealing isn't corruption.During his most recent media chat last Wednesday, Jonathan was asked to clarify what
"Although, we've seen the indictment and conviction of foreign companies and their top executives in Europe and America, Nigeria’s own government has not taken action in the very country in which the corruption took place.”...
http://www.weforum.org/ "If we in the business community agree on certain things, if we help each other, if we engage in what I call a cartel of the good, th...
To get content containing either thought or leadership enter:
To get content containing both thought and leadership enter:
To get content containing the expression thought leadership enter:
You can enter several keywords and you can refine them whenever you want. Our suggestion engine uses more signals but entering a few keywords here will rapidly give you great content to curate.