Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers
19.7K views | +1 today
Follow
Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers
“(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.
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 10:58 PM

Ten steps for developing an anti-corruption culture

Ten steps for developing an anti-corruption culture within your organisation Dawna Wright and Dean Newlan McGRATHNICOL FORENSIC A common thread running through…
No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 10:32 PM

Developing a culture of Anti-Corruption in small States

Corrupt behaviour has become endemic in certain markets and the sphere of public procurement is no exception. Amid great optimism for constitutional and econom…
No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 7:13 PM

Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies

Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies | Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers | Scoop.it
KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)'s insight:

In recent years, many governments have worked to increase openness and transparency in their actions. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are seen by many as a cost-effective and convenient means to promote openness and transparency and to reduce corruption. E-government, in particular, has been used in many prominent, comprehensive transparency efforts in a number of nations. While some of these individual efforts have received considerable attention, the issue of whether these ICT-enabled efforts have the potential to create a substantive social change in attitudes toward transparency has not been widely considered. This paper explores the potential impacts of information and ICTs – especially e-government and social media – on cultural attitudes about transparency.


1. Transparency, Information, and Society

As an international issue, transparency came to prominence after World War I in the post-war negotiations (Braman, 2006). It took considerable time for many nations to pursue transparency. In the mid-1980s, only 11 nations had freedom of information laws, but by the end of 2004, 59 nations did (Relly & Sabharwal, 2009 and Roberts, 2006). Transparency and the right to access government information are now internationally regarded as essential to democratic participation, trust in government, prevention of corruption, informed decision-making, accuracy of government information, and provision of information to the public, companies, and journalists, among other essential functions in society (Cullier & Piotrowski, 2009, Mulgan, 2007, Quinn, 2003, Reylea, 2009a and Shuler et al., 2010).

Government transparency generally occurs through one of four primary channels (Piotrowski, 2007):

No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 7:06 PM

global priorities/other thematic issues/education/anti-corruption education/general_public

global priorities/other thematic issues/education/anti-corruption education/general_public | Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers | Scoop.it
KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)'s insight:

Corruption deprives people of their dignity and their rights, in the worst case of their right to live. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and other international agreements address the right to take part in government, fair employment, adequate standard of living, education directed toward development of the human personality, and an international environment and order in which all rights can be realized.


Similarly, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) asserts the right of every person to self-determination in order to develop in all three economic, social and cultural fields. It also upholds that every person has the right to an adequate standard of living attained by having access to adequate food, housing, clothing and access to education. These rights are severely violated in situations of corruption, for example when public resources destined to bring health, education or housing to the poor are deviated into private pockets.


Anti-corruption campaigns, human rights and civic education all aim at encouraging civic action and engagement. The growing political apathy in many countries has prompted public and civil society actors alike to attempt to mobilise citizen participation in politics. Populations of transition countries and emerging democracies are undergoing democracy education programmes, but also in well-established democracies citizenship education has become increasingly important in recent years.

Voter education is an aspect of civic education that is particularly relevant in preventing electoral and political corruption. The integrity of the electoral process is an important subject of anti-corruption education.


Civic education deals with broader concepts underpinning a democratic society. These include the respective roles and responsibilities of citizens, government, political parties, interest groups, the mass media, and other stakeholders, as well as the significance of periodic and competitive elections. Civic education is a continual process, and may be carried out through the school and university system, through civil society organizations, and also through state agencies.

A number of international legal instruments recognise citizen participation in public and political life as a prerequisite for effective anti-corruption strategies:


No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 6:29 PM

White House LIVE

White House LIVE | Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers | Scoop.it
Join me in watching it LIVE from the White House
KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)'s insight:

Tune in at 2:30pm ET: President Obama talks with the #USAfrica leaders about governing the next generation → http://t.co/DifhyCDEEA

No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 10:56 PM

The case for an International Anti-Corruption Court

The Case for an International Anti-Corruption Court1 P ublic corruption is endemic at the highest levels of government in many na- tions. Such “grand corruptio…
No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 7:15 PM

Human Rights and anti-corruption

Human Rights and anti-corruption | Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers | Scoop.it
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)'s insight:


In recent years, a number of international documents signed under the auspices of both the United Nations and regional organizations have acknowledged the negative effects of corruption on the protection of human rights and on development. Moreover, the treaty bodies and special procedures of the United Nations human rights system in their examination of states’ compliance with international law have commented on the inability of states to comply with their obligations as a result of corruption.


Human rights are indivisible and interdependent, and the consequences of corrupt governance are multiple and touch on all human rights — civil, political, economic, social and cultural, as well as the right to development. Corruption leads to violation of the government’s human rights obligation “to take steps… to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the [International] Covenant [on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights]”.


The corrupt management of public resources compromises the government’s ability to deliver an array of services, including health, educational and welfare services, which are essential for the realization of economic, social and cultural rights. Also, the prevalence of corruption creates discrimination in access to public services in favour of those able to influence the authorities to act in their personal interest, including by offering bribes. The economically and politically disadvantaged suffer disproportionately from the consequences of corruption, because they are particularly dependent on public goods.


Corruption may also affect the enjoyment of civil and political rights. Corruption may weaken democratic institutions both in new and in long-established democracies. When corruption is prevalent, those in public positions fail to take decisions with the interests of society in mind. As a result, corruption damages the legitimacy of a democratic regime in the eyes of the public and leads to a loss of public support for democratic institutions. People become discouraged from exercising their civil and political rights and from demanding that these rights be respected.


Electoral fraud and corruption in the funding of political parties are other, more direct corrupt practices related to the enjoyment of civil and political rights. In countries where corruption is pervasive in the rule-of-law system, both the implementation of existing legal frameworks and efforts to reform them are impeded by corrupt judges, lawyers, prosecutors, police officers, investigators and auditors.


Such practices compromise the right to equality before the law and the right to a fair trial, and especially undermine the access of the disadvantaged groups to justice, as they cannot afford to offer bribes. Importantly, corruption in the rule-of-law system weakens the very accountability structures which are responsible for protecting human rights and contributes to a culture of impunity, since illegal actions are not punished and laws are not consistently upheld.

How human rights principles can help in fighting corruption? ...

No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 7:08 PM

Using ICTs to Create a Culture of Transparency: E-government and Social Media as Openness and Anti-corruption Tools for Societies — ACRN

Using ICTs to Create a Culture of Transparency: E-government and Social Media as Openness and Anti-corruption Tools for Societies — ACRN | Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers | Scoop.it
KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)'s insight:


Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are seen by many as a cost-effective and convenient means to promote openness and transparency and to reduce corruption.


E-government, in particular, has been used in many prominent, comprehensive transparency efforts in a number of nations. While some of these individual efforts have received considerable attention, the issue of whether these ICT-enabled efforts have the potential to create a substantive social change in attitudes toward transparency has not been widely considered.


This paper explores the potential impacts of information and ICTs – especially e-government and social media – on cultural attitudes about transparency.

No comment yet.
Scooped by KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)
August 6, 2014 6:54 PM

Fighting corruption in the developing countries - @OECD Observer

Fighting corruption in the developing countries - @OECD Observer | Global Policy, Corruption, Economic Crimes, Fronting, Whistleblowers | Scoop.it

.

KROTOASA RESEARCH-INTENSIVE INSTITUTE (KRII)'s insight:

 

The fight against corruption is not the monopoly of the industrialised countries. Nor can recipes that have worked in OECD countries necessarily be applied to developing ones. Of the 134 countries that attended the 9 th International Anti-Corruption Conference organised by Transparency International in Durban last October, over a hundred were developing countries. More and more of these countries are expressing their resolve to combat corruption, echoing international initiatives, such as the OECD Convention.

 

Despite the real efforts made, there has been little concrete progress to date.

 

In most developing countries today, corruption is widespread and part of everyday life. Society has learned to live with it, even considering it, fatalistically, as an integral part of their culture. Not only are public or official decisions – for instance, on the award of government contracts or the amount of tax due – bought and sold, but very often access to a public service or the exercise of a right, such as obtaining civil documents, also has to be paid for.

Several mechanisms help to spread corruption and make it normal practice in these countries. Civil servants who refuse to toe the line are removed from office; similarly, businessmen who oppose it are penalised vis-à-vis their competitors. Furthermore, an image of the state has grown up over the years according to which the civil service, far from being a body that exists to implement the rights of citizens – rights that mirror their duties – is first and foremost perceived as the least risky way of getting rich quickly. All of which helps to make corruption seem normal.

 

In practice, it is the environment in which public servants and private actors operate that causes corruption. Public administration in developing countries is often bureaucratic and inefficient. And a large number of complex, restrictive regulations coupled with inadequate controls are characteristic of developing countries that corruption helps to get around.

 

But to understand corruption, institutional analysis is not enough. A political and economic analysis is important too. Whether it be in Benin, Bolivia, Morocco, Pakistan or the Philippines – five countries examined in a study by the OECD Development Centre and the UN Development Programme – corruption is closely linked to the type of government involved.

The link between political and economic power can be direct. There is patrimonialism, as in Morocco, where access to political power ensures access to economic privileges. The link can be indirect too, as in the Philippines, where political power, such as a privileged position in a patronage-based system, can be bought and sold. In short, the process of allocating political and administrative posts – particularly those with powers of decision over the export of natural resources or import licences – is influenced by the gains that can be made from them. And the political foundations are cemented as these exchanges of privileges are reciprocated by political support or loyalty.

Feeding underdevelopment

Another feature common to the countries studied is their underdevelopment, which is conducive to corruption. In fact, underdevelopment encourages corruption. How is this? First of all, low wages in the civil service encourage petty corruption, and the imbalance between the supply of, and demand for, public services likewise creates opportunities for corruption. Also, individuals tend to invest in a career in the public service, given the shortage of opportunities in the private sector, thus increasing the likelihood of their involvement in corrupt practices. Another reason is that the low level of education found in underdeveloped countries maintains citizens in a state of ignorance of their rights, barring them from participating in political life.

 

Institutional analysis of corruption indicates where the remedies lie. Greater transparency, accountability and merit-based human resource management in public administration are principles which, if implemented, make it possible to curb corruption. Simplification of state intervention in economic activity also helps. A study of the customs administration in Senegal found, using econometric tests, that a reduction in import taxes, simplification of their structure, implementation of reforms reducing the discretionary powers of customs officials and computerisation of procedures helped to reduce the level of fraud by 85% between 1990 and 1995.

 

But identifying the direction that reforms should take is only part of the task. The main difficulty lies in implementing them. This requires a strategy that really is operational. Two kinds of obstacles are usually encountered. The first is economic. While underdevelopment does not inevitably generate corruption, underdeveloped countries do not have the same means as more advanced ones to escape it. It is difficult to replicate the strategy adopted in Hong Kong, for instance, which involved the creation of an investigative agency with a large staff and plentiful funds (see box). The fight against corruption must therefore be based on the development process itself.

The second kind of obstacle is political. Many politicians owe their careers and status to corruption and few of them, if any, will take a stand against it, either for fear of upsetting their own careers or the political status quo generally.

 

Civil society and the media can help by denouncing corruption and putting pressure on the government. But the real impediments to the fight against corruption are as much the interests of the politico-administrative apparatus as the fatalism and ignorance of the victims, maintained by a culture of fear nurtured by those who benefit from corruption. But before one can act, it is necessary to be informed. That is why research into the incidence of corruption and its effects is so important. Only on that basis can action by civil society and aid agencies be guided.

 

The private sector can also make an important contribution to the fight against corruption, by policing its own codes of conduct and sticking to high standards of governance. International and regional organisations can also help, as can bilateral aid agencies, via programmes to strengthen institutional capacity, and of course by ensuring the transparency of the projects they support.

 

One thing is sure: the problem of corruption in the developing countries cannot be solved simply by applying anti-corruption structures that work in OECD countries. The experience the latter countries have acquired in terms of legislation, public procurement codes and control procedures, for example, is valuable, but it is just a technical element in a much more complex process of change. A reduction in corruption depends on economic development. It is thus for each country concerned to draw up its own strategy, by which it can then lead to a virtuous circle of development and good governance.

No comment yet.