HELPING COUNTRIES HELP THEMSELVES FIGHT CORRUPTION; UN s Global Programme Against Corruption

Transcription

1 Interpol s 2 nd International Conference on Corruption-related Crime HELPING COUNTRIES HELP THEMSELVES FIGHT CORRUPTION; UN s Global Programme Against Corruption By Dr. Petter Langseth Programme Manager UN's Global Programme against Corruption; Lyon June

2 HELPING COUNTRIES HELP THEMSELVES FIGHT CORRUPTION. UN's Global Programme against Corruption; I Programme Summary The Global Programme against Corruption has been designed by the Centre for International Crime Prevention (CICP), in collaboration with the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI) and other partners, to assist member countries in their efforts to curb corruption. The Programme is composed of three main parts: (i) action learning component (ii) the technical cooperation component and (iii) the evaluation component. The Programme will take place at (i) the international, (ii) the national and at the (iii) sub-national or municipal (local) level. Among the objectives of the Global Programme against Corruption is to provide the member states with anti-corruption tools that would help them to become parties to and implement international legal instruments such as a convention that may be developed in the future. A. Action Learning Component In order to address suitably the causes of corruption, the programme will implement a systematic action learning process, which will identify best practices at three levels: 1. Country Projects CICP will, supported by UNICRI and international experts, test new approaches and anti-corruption tools. The Programme aims to work with 14 member countries by year 2001 from five regions (Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Asia). These member countries would all have requested help from the United Nations and signed an integrity agreement committing them to invite a broad-based group of stakeholders to assess the current situation and come up with an integrated and realistic anticorruption programme for implementation. Through this systematic learning process the most successful tools will be identified by the evaluation process and refined, while less successful or promising tools might be modified or eliminated. Joining UN s Global Programme Against Corruption a member country needs to: 1. Request CICP to Conducting an independent Anti-Corruption Assessment 2. Sign a National Anti-corruption Agreement with the UN 3. Support a participative, inclusive and holistic project design 4. Commission an independent impact evaluation of the project 5. Disseminate the findings 2. Donor participation. Bilateral partners who opt to be part of a process of selfassessment, will pilot test new approaches with a commitment to initiate a dialogue with their development partners on how to improve their working relationships. 3. Program execution. This Programme will be implemented by CICP according to the principles of (i) local ownership, (ii) donor coordination, (iii) integrated approach, (iv) focus on impact and (v) and independent evaluation. A country assessment resulting in a corruption monitoring protocol will be regularly issued to document trends within three main types of corruption: (i) corruption in public administration and street-level corruption (experience of citizens with public administration agencies); 2

3 (ii) (iii) business corruption (especially in medium-sized businesses); and high-level corruption in finance and politics. The main results will be stored into a database accessible through the web pages of UNICRI and CICP. The country assessment will be disseminated widely: (i) (ii) (iii) in regular meetings with the Member Countries; in UN s periodicals and web pages; on the respective web pages of the Member Countries being part of the Global Programme against Corruption will continually disseminate lessons learned (quarterly progress reviews) through the use of web sites which will be linked to each other and to CICP/UNICRI s own web pages. UN s Country Assessment includes 1. Desk review summarizing all available anti-corruption information 2. Public opinion survey with civil society, private sector and service providers 3. Case studies 4. Focus groups to prioritize issues, look for causes and explore possible solutions 5. Assessment of the legal framework 6. Assessment of anti-corruption institutions 7. Assessment of the strength of civil society and the independence/quality of the media The country assessment which is conducted with the help of different national and international partners (UNICRI, Gallup, CIETinternational). The country assessment is primarily a locally requested tool that will be, among other things, be used by the civil society to held government accountable. Important elements of the country assessment are: (a) (b) (c) The desk review which objective is to compile all relevant anti-corruption information. The public opinion surveys are supposed to representative enough to indicate corruption levels, types and coverage across sub national units. As an example in Uganda each of the 46 districts would have survey data comparing their district with the national average. This type of survey was requested by the Inspector General of Government who argued that the only way he can fight corruption is to have information about corruption levels across sub national units. Another diagnostic technique used in the country assessment are the focus groups. These are in-depth discussion held with targeted interest groups in government and society. Using this technique, you can often get detailed information about what people believe about corruption, what they see as the causes and what the government needs to do in order to fight it. These focus groups sessions usually focus on the following questions (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) How big is the problem of corruption? Types and extent of corruption? What is the negative effects of corruption? What are the root causes? 3

4 (d) (e) (f) (g) (v) (vi) How effective are current laws and programmes? What are possible solutions. What issues should be dealt with first? A third diagnostic tool applied as part of the country assessment is the case study. Purpose of the case study is to use local experts to describe typical corruption cases in great detail to facilitate a better understanding of how corruption actually is taking place. Well-documented practical case studies are expected to help anti-corruption agencies fine-tune their measurement but also to make the public and potential whistleblowers more aware. A fourth diagnostic tool involves legal assessment. First, it is important to know what the laws and regulations on the books say e.g. what constitutes a corrupt action and what are the sanctions. Secondly, it is important to go deeper and analyze where the legal gaps are and if there are inconsistencies among laws. Certainly anti-corruption provisions can appear in many different laws- criminal and penal codes, civil service laws (standing orders), public procurement regulations and many others.. These should be consistent. Third, the legal assessment looks at how these laws and regulations are implemented and enforced in reality. To what extent are these laws taken seriously? To what extent are sufficient resources invested in their execution? Fourth, it is important to evaluate what official oversight bodies to make governmental officials and agencies accountable for their actions. The fifth assessment technique applied as part of UN s Country assessment involves institutional assessment. Here the objective is to inventory what judiciary, executive and legislative bodies are already doing to fight and prevent corruption and if they have any success. Particular attention will be paid to issue of balancing of powers assessing the independence of the judiciary, legislative and the media (often called the fourth power). It is important to go into greater depth with some of these anticorruption agencies to identify where there are specific problems. To accomplish this, the global programme will use different techniques including process mapping to analyze the functions, procedures, reporting relationships, access to information and incentives in anti-corruption agencies across all three branches of government. The mapping specifies how an organization does its business; what it does efficiently and inefficiently, where there are conflicts of interest and where there are excessive opportunities for extortion (bribe-taking) and bribe giving. The sixth and last technique used is the assessment of the civil society and the media. Key in order for the civil society to hold the government accountable is their access to information and the freedom and independence of press. Different techniques can be used to assess the quality and the vigilance of the media reporting on corruption cases ranging from: (i) systematic content analysis, (ii) the impact of different media types; (iii) the review of who owns and controls the media. Regarding the access to information the country assessment is not only going to assess laws on the books but also to what extent a journalist or a citizen actually can access certain information in a timely and free fashion. 4

5 B. Technical Co-operation Component As corruption tends to be dynamic and has crosscutting dimensions and impact, the most appropriate approach must also be dynamic, integrated and holistic in nature. Emphasis should be equally weighted towards preventive measures as well as prosecution and enforcement. The technical cooperation component will reflect a modular approach consisting of measures or tools that may be implemented individually or as a package in different stages at the international, national and local levels. This set of anti-corruption tools will be tested and refined by the action learning process before being made available to member countries. These approaches and tools will be as comprehensive as possible, allowing flexibility in the adoption of the measures to the particular needs and context of each country/sub-region. Within the Global Programme, technical cooperation will be provided mainly at the international, national and sub national level. At the International Level: The purpose of international measures against corruption is to develop credible and effective tools to increase the risk, cost and uncertainty of: (i) national civil servants misusing public power for private gain; (ii) international civil servants misusing public power for private gain; and (iii) national and international private companies bribing national civil servants. In order achieve this objective the international measures against corruption will aim at facilitating the following conditions: In the member countries through: (i) broad access to information for all; (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) availability of a Comprehensive Assessment of Corruption Situation assessing the types, causes, levels and location of corruption and presenting the National Integrity Strategy and Anti-Corruption Action Plan; inclusion of as many stakeholders in the anti-corruption campaigns as possible focusing on: (a) awareness raising, (b) prevention, (c) institution building and (d) enforcement of rule of law to increase the risk and cost of corrupt people nationally and internationally; independence of the legislative, executive and judicial branches; existence of an independent, free and competent media; a strong, informed and well-organised civil society with a mandate to oversee the state; rule of law enforced by independent, competent and efficient institutions; and access to an independent, credible and efficient complaints mechanism to address complaints about national and international corruption. In the international community through: (i) broad based access to information about international development agencies; (ii) (iii) (iv) establishment of a credible international complaints mechanism to deal with member countries complaints about international civil servants; establishment of internal procedures by international donor agencies to address internal corruption, fraud, conflict of interest and misuse of power; and provision of the legal framework assuring international law enforcement cooperation, mutual legal assistance and extradition regarding the prosecution of corrupt officials and the forfeiture and confiscation of the proceeds. 5

6 The 10th Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders was asked to discuss and make suggestions regarding the elaboration and content of a possible independent international legal instrument against corruption, considering in particular the following issues: The particular importance of and need for a global legal instrument addressing the phenomenon of corruption in the broadest possible manner in order to tackle corruption more effectively and efficiently. To help member states build integrity to prevent and fight corruption nationally as well as addressing the challenges of transnational corruption. Corruption is a phenomenon which reaches far beyond the giving, demanding and receiving of bribes of money by a public official. Therefore, future International measures should aim at criminalising all forms of corrupt practices, such as (i) the bribing of auditors and witnesses; (ii) the illegal funding of political parties; (iii) conflict of interest where senior officials use their position to get advantages; (iv) abuse of power where senior government officials and/or politicians actively work against the drafting and/or enforcement of legislation to open up government to increase its accountability to the citizens; (iv) the extortion of money by civil servants demanding bribes for free health, educational or other services; (v) extortion by tax and custom officers for reducing the tax and customs fees to be paid by the public; and (vii) the buying of votes in elections. Furthermore, the sanctioning of illicit enrichment should be considered, in order to overcome problems encountered by law enforcement agencies when trying to produce evidence. The international measures against corruption should provide a legal framework for the forfeiture and confiscation of the proceeds of corruption, evaluating the possibilities of shifting the burden of proof in this particular context. The close connection between corruption and money laundering, as highlighted in the Report of the Expert Group Meeting on Corruption and its Financial Channels, needs to be addressed. It should therefore be borne in mind that money laundering methods are not only being used to disguise the origin of corruption proceeds, but also during the committing of the offence of corruption in order to dissociate the origin of the bribe money from its destination. At the same time corruption is a means to facilitate the laundering of all kinds of criminal proceeds. Moreover an international legal instrument against corruption has to provide a legal framework assuring international law enforcement co-operation, mutual legal assistance and extradition regarding the prosecution of corruption and the forfeiture and confiscation of its proceeds. Future international measures should also contain provisions facilitating the detection and investigation of corruption and its proceeds. Consideration should be given to lifting bank secrecy in cases of suspected corruption, and the possibility of applying forceful tools such as: (i) integrity tests ( sting operations ); (ii) seizure of business and banking records; (iii) protection of witnesses and whistleblowers ; (iv) enactment and enforcement of access to information legislation; (v) credible, independent and efficient complaints procedures administered by an independent and efficient institution (Ombudsman); (vi) external monitoring of the tender process for large international projects; (vii) international independent and credible complaints mechanism for the public and officials to file claims about donors and international civil servants; (viii) mandate for the public to monitor the state performance; (ix) establishment of regulations allowing mitigation of sentences for offenders collaborating with the law enforcement agencies in the investigation of corruption; and (x) provision of access to member countries to investigative competence in large cases of corruption involving international companies. Future international measures should however not be limited to designing a legal framework relating to the issues of criminalisation, prosecution, investigation and detection of corruption. It should also promote preventive measures guarding against corruption such as: (i) code of conducts and declaration and monitoring of assets for senior officials in the executive, legislative and the judiciary; (ii) strengthening tender procedures through increased 6

7 transparency and the involvement of international observers in larger projects; (iii) credible, free and independent media; (iv) black listing of international companies involved in bribing; and (iv) lifting of the bank secrecy act in larger cases with clear evidence of corruption. All member states will be encouraged to incorporate a participative inclusive process, which involves all key stakeholders (legislative, judiciary, executive, private sector, civil society, youth, labor unions, anti-corruption agencies, media) reaching consensus around a National Integrity Strategy and an Anti-corruption action plan. The implementation of the Action Plan will be monitored periodically through a transparent assessment of measurable performance indicators such as: (i) economic, social and moral costs of corruption; (ii) levels of corruption, as perceived by civil society and external investors; (iii) public awareness of and confidence in anti-corruption strategy and agencies; (iv) the risk of being caught, as perceived by the public; (v) number of complaints received; (vi) number of corruption reports received; (vii) number of people prosecuted; (viii) conviction rate; (ix) number of civil servants disciplined; (x) number of corruption training sessions; and (xi) number of people reached through the education program. Conducting a rapid assessment surveying citizens, private sector, service providers (civil servants) and potential external investors about levels, types, extent and location of corruption and what, in their opinion, should be done to improve the situation would strengthen this process. To ensure optimal implementation, future international measures against corruption need to foster international co-operation. In particular, developing countries and countries with economies in transition must be provided the necessary technical assistance to meet their needs for effective and timely implementation of the international measures. In this regard, increased political and financial support should be considered for international agencies active in the field of anti-corruption work, particularly the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme within which the Centre for International Crime Prevention (CICP) provides a holistic approach to developing anti-corruption measures in such areas as criminal justice, money laundering, organised crime and corruption. Moreover, the adoption of other international instruments against corruption should be promoted, including: the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; the Inter-American Convention against Corruption by the Organisation of American States; the Principles to Combat Corruption in African Countries of the Global Coalition for Africa; and the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption by the Council of Europe. At the National Level: (i) assessing existing national measures against corruption; (ii)providing advice on drafting/revising relevant legislation and strengthen rule of law.(iii) providing advice on establishing/ strengthening anti-corruption bodies; (iv)developing preventive measures (such as public awareness campaigns and codes of conduct); and (v)providing training on newly introduced anti-corruption measures to policy makers, judges, national media, prosecutors, anti-corruption agency staff, law enforcement personnel, the private sector, banking and financial organisations, and non-governmental organisations. At the Sub-national/Local Level. Experience has shown that it is easier to build momentum and less complicated to curb corruption at the grassroots or sub-national level than at the national level. Therefore member countries will be advised to place equal emphasis on the initiation of anti-corruption programmes as close to the customers as possible. At the sub-national level the anti-corruption programme could: (i) assess existing sub-national measures against corruption; (ii) provide technical assistance in implementing relevant regulatory and procedural measures; and (iii) facilitate adoption and implementation of national initiatives and preventive measures at the local level. 7

8 II Progress Report for the Global Programme Against Corruption A. Important Meetings Organized Spring 2000 The concept of systematic action learning lies at the very heart of CICP s implementation strategy. This process has been designed to improve technical assistance activities and anticorruption tools over time in order to identify best practices. In this context CICP organised under the framework of the 10 th United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and the Treatment of Offenders an Expert Group meeting on the 13 and 14 April 2000: - To review, complete and improve a anti-corruption tool-kit containing a variety of approx. thirty measures in the areas of prevention, institution building, enforcement and awareness raising which has been developed by the Global Programme against Corruption. - To give expert advise on the Global Programme s Implementation Strategy. The meeting was highly successful and contributed significantly to the credibility of the Programme. The inputs received were extremely helpful and all the experts committed themselves to support the Global Programme with the completion of the Anti-Corruption Tool Kit. For this purpose CICP established a internet driven network that enables all experts to add ulterior comments and experiences as the elaboration process continues. The team of the Global Programme against Corruption is currently revising its Anti- Corruption Tool-kit based on the papers presented by the experts in order to transform them into practical measures which can be applied in the course of technical co-operation projects. Once finished this task the single tools will be sent out to the experts for final comments. It is expected for the Anti-Corruption Tool-kit to be posted on our web page and become a UN- OCCCP publication before the end of the year Furthermore, the meeting confirmed the Global Programme s Implementation Strategy as a sound approach to help countries help themselves fighting corruption through measures at the national and international level. Finally, it gave CICP an opportunity to identify candidates with the relevant background and access to high level in Government that are suitable to serve as CICP long term consultants. These technical experts will be selected based on: (i) their access to senior policy making levels in governments and judiciaries, (ii) their experience giving policy advice and expert leadership on the overall strategy and the single technical assistance activities, and their proven track record assisting countries with the implementation of various anti-corruption projects. B. Projects under implementation In 1999 the Government of Hungary requested assistance form CICP in the development of an anti-corruption project to support its efforts to prevent, detect and fight corruption, and promote transparency, accountability and the rule of law within the country. To achieve the above goals, the following activities were agreed to be undertaken: a) developing and carrying out a rapid assessment of the corruption situation in Hungary; b) developing and carrying out a comprehensive analysis of the corruption situation in Hungary; and c) adoption of the transparency and monitoring mechanisms of public sector contracts and international commercial transactions. The Funding for this project is provided almost completely by the United States of America. 8

9 Three expert meeting were convened by the Government of Hungary inviting CICP, UNICRI and the Gallup Institute to elaborate, discuss and agree upon the methodology and concrete instruments to assess the extent and nature of corruption and anti-corruption measures in Hungary. The rapid assessment was carried out, including the completion of surveys, a focus group and a case study, and the results were evaluated by CICP, UNICRI and the government of Hungary on 15 December. Currently the Anti-corruption country assessment is being conducted in close collaboration with UNICRI. It will be presented during a National Integrity Meeting in September to a broad based group of stakeholders including representatives from the executive, legislative, judiciary, private sector, media, and various NGOs. A National Integrity Committee has been established with the mandate to conduct the National Integrity Meeting (NIM) and to oversee the implementation of the National Integrity Strategy and the AC action plan resulting from the NIM. CICP has also received a request by the Minister of Justice of Hungary to design a second phase of the project as a follow up to the ongoing project, including the establishment of an integrity pact between international investors and the Ministry of Justice in Hungary.. In 1998 upon a request of the Lebanese Government, a technical assistance project was designed in collaboration with CICP and UNICRI to provide the country with legislative and institutional capacity to prevent and control corruption and related aspects of organised crime. This project foresees to: a) examine and amend the provisions of domestic law relating to illicit gains in order to ensure effective implementation; b) strengthen the capacity for action of the bodies responsible for controlling corruption by improving the training provided for magistrates, law enforcement officers and public officials; c) equip the justice system to combat corruption by establishing a special investigation unit; and d) alert all sectors of society to the dangers of corruption by means of a national integrity meeting, as well as information and advocacy campaigns. In July 1999 upon the request of the Prime Minister the project was revised. A second phase was incorporated into the project to assess the nature of corruption at the city and country levels through the completion of a comprehensive country assessment analysis and by conducting a national integrity meeting of all key stakeholder groups to draft and recommend a national integrity strategy and anti-corruption action plan. A workshop on Law Standardisation and Modernisation for the Parliamentary Committees, particularly the Committees on Finance and Budget, was held in June 1999 to evaluate their role and responsibilities with respect to measures to prevent and control corruption. In October and November 1999, working groups with the Office of the Minister of State for Administrative Reform and relevant NGOs were organised to support the elaboration of a public awareness campaign on anti-corruption measures. In November a series of three workshops on the Nature of Corruption and its implications on the financial, economical and administrative levels was organised between November for members of the supervisory bodies, magistrates, officers of the criminal police, public service officials with decision-making power, persons responsible for the direction of financial services, and NGOs. The Programme Manager attended and addressed the participants of these workshops. In December 1999 the methodology of the country assessment has been agreed upon. In March 2000 a National Steering Committee has been appointed with the mandate to conduct the National Integrity Meeting (NIM) and to oversee the implementation of the National Integrity Strategy and the AC action plan resulting from the NIM. Furthermore an Anti-corruption country assessment is currently being conducted in collaboration with UNICRI and local partners. 9

10 The anti-corruption project in Romania, signed in 1998, aims at strengthening the institutional capacity of Romania to fight corruption through the establishment of an integrated and centralised approach to both legislation and infrastructure. The main aim is to put in place the necessary processes and procedures that will help eliminate corruption within the public service as a whole. To achieve this goal, the initial objectives of the project were to assist in: (i) drafting appropriate provisions, norms and regulations related to corruption for adoption by the legislature; (ii) establishing and supporting a functioning National Anti- Corruption Commission which will co-ordinate national efforts and strategies; (iii) improving the skills and capacity of the judiciary and law enforcement personnel through training programmes and study tours; (iv) establishing a central database to gather relevant information on corruption; and (v) organizing public information campaigns to increase the awareness of the detrimental effects of corruption to promote the knowledge of specific actions which can be taken by individuals to prevent/ publicize corruption. The project has been supported by the Governments of the United States of America, Greece, and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The first stage of the public awareness campaign was completed in June 1999 and a legislative amendment to create a legal basis for a National Anti-Corruption Commission within the General Prosecutor s Office is being proposed. By the end of 1999 three study tours and seven regional seminars have been conducted training over 200 judicial and governmental officials on theoretical and practical issues relating to: public corruption, draft laws, task force organization, investigative techniques, and inter-institutional co-operation The first stage of a public awareness campaign has been completed in June 1999, which consisted of the selection of an implementing public relations/advertising agency. The second stage is underway with the launching of a press release followed by the organization of a round table and press conference chaired by the Minister of Justice. C. Projects in the phase of development The project for Uganda is aiming at strengthening the integrity, effectiveness and efficiency of the governmental institutions fighting corruption by providing those institutions with the necessary legal and practical tools to detect, investigate, prosecute and convict corruption within and outside of the institution and to empower the civil society and the media by raising the public awareness about the costs and the negative effect of corruption as well as the efforts undertaken by the government in order to fight corruption. At the same time, the project is designed to provide Uganda with analytical instruments to collect, analyze and monitor trends in corruption and the efficacy of adequate anti-corruption measures. To achieve the above mentioned goals, the following activities will be undertaken within this project: a) Enhance transparency, integrity and the public s trust in the various branches of the criminal justice system (Police, Directorate of the Public Prosecutor, Judiciary) by introducing Codes of Conduct, the declaration and monitoring of assets and credible and responsive complaints mechanisms; (b) Strengthen the Inspector General of Government (IGG) in its role as an independent anti-corruption agency, particularly improving the processing of complaints, the educational programme, the investigative professionalism and its internal and external monitoring and evaluation capacities, and increase the Parliament s capacity to monitor and evaluate the Government s Anti-corruption strategy in general and the work of the IGG in particular; (c) Improve the effectiveness of the legal framework facilitating the detection, investigation, prosecution, conviction and sanctioning of corrupt practices and the forfeiture, confiscation and reallocation of the proceeds of corruption; and (d) Raise the awareness within the various stakeholder groups and the general public, in 10

11 particular by increasing the quantity and quality of press coverage regarding the levels, the locations, the costs of corruption and the public s role in combating it. An assessment mission was conducted in February 2000 to discuss the project proposal with the concerned Ugandan Government authorities and other stakeholders. The project will be submitted for approval by the end of this week. Promising negotiations regarding possible funding have taken place with the British Department for International Development and the Norwegian Development Agency NORAD. The project of the Government of South Africa is foreseeing to: a) carry out a country assessment of the corruption situation and anti-corruption based on the Corruption Monitoring Protocol; b) facilitate a national anti-corruption conference with a participation of a broad based group of stakeholders to, having discussed the country assessment, prioritise issues and refine national anti-corruption strategy as well as an anti-corruption action plan, to be followed by a donor meeting to present the strategy and action plan and seek coordinated international assistance; (c) create a framework for transparent and accountable public sector contracts and international commercial transactions; (d) provide advice on best practice in curbing corruption through civil, administrative and criminal law actions; (e) advise on establishing, strengthening and coordinating of anti-corruption bodies and on introduction or strengthening of credible and efficient complaints mechanisms in executive, legislative and the judiciary; (f) advise and facilitate prevention and awareness activities among the public and mass-media; and (g) provide capacity and integrity training for criminal justice officials. An assessment mission was conducted in collaboration with UN-ODCCP Regional Office for Southern Africa in February 2000 to discuss the project proposal with the concerned South African Government authorities and other stakeholders. The Project proposal is currently being finalized by the regional UN-ODCCP Office. Promising preliminary negotiations regarding possible funding have taken place with USAID and DFID. Another country project is currently being elaborated in collaboration with the Government of Benin focusing on: (a) increasing the awareness of the Governmental and nongovernmental stakeholders regarding the nature and negative impact of corruption in Benin; (b) strengthening the institutional framework responsible for combating corruption, (c) supporting the Government in the development of a National Anti-Corruption Action Plan. To initialize the process of a knowledge-based anti-corruption strategy CICP in collaboration with UNICRI will carry out a rapid assessment. An assessment mission has been conducted to Benin to discuss and agree upon the project proposal with the concerned Government authorities. The project proposal is currently being finalized. Funding has been promised by the Government of France. Further assessment missions are planned to Nicaragua and Bolivia in June 2000 in order to discuss and agree upon project proposals that have been prepared by the Global Programme against Corruption. Judicial independence and judicial accountability are crucial in the fight against corruption and in upholding the rule of law. With this in mind, CICP in collaboration with Transparency International, London, organzied a preparatory meeting on the Strengthening of Judicial Integrity in Vienna on 15/ 16 April. Attending the meeting were chief justices from Karnataka (India), Bangladesh, Tanzania, and Nigeria, Justice Pius Langa of South Africa, and Justice Ben Odoki of Uganda (Sri Lanka's Chief Justice was unable to get there but expressed a strong wish to be a part of the group). They met under the chairmanship of former 11

12 World Court Judge Christie Weeramantry with Justice Michael Kirby of Australia acting as rapporteur. Uniquely, they have formed a "peer group" who will share action plans and experience. They will meet again in December to assess the progress being made. The group - all from predominantly common law countries - are anxious to see a similar "leadership" group established involving countries from the continental legal tradition The feedback received so far has been extremely positive. Mary Robinson, UN-Human Rights Commission, for instance, offered to provide funding in the event that a future meeting be organised in Geneva. Dato Param Cumaraswamy, the UN s Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, concluded that It was an excellent programme and we are committed to follow up. The Chief Justice Meeting resulted in a series of outcomes that will directly influence the Global Programme s future work. Among others, the following steps were agreed upon that may require the Global Programme s assistance: To assist the development of an survey instrument to assess the levels of judicial corruption in each of the participating countries. To collect best practice examples of initiatives and strategies already employed to combat judicial corruption. To ensure the broad dissemination of the survey instrument and the best practices through the internet. To analyze existing judicial codes of conduct and report to the Group within six months on the core considerations which recur in such codes and the optional and additional considerations which occur in some, but not all, such codes and which may or may not be suitable for adoption in particular countries. Furthermore, the team of CICP s Global Programme against Corruption has been requested to by the head of the International Association for Prosecutors (IAP), Nick Cowdery, to coorganise an integrity segment at IAP s annual meeting held in Cape Town, 3-8 September C. Conference participation of CICP staff in 2000 CICP staff have participated in the following meetings in year 2000: 1. UN-Economic Commission for Europe organized a workshop on Delivering Solutions for Tomorrow, Geneva, March The workshop was attended by CICP s Programme Manager who delivered a paper on Helping countries to fight corruption. 2. Regional Conference for Central and East European Countries on The Judiciary, Law Enforcement and Society in the Fight against Corruption, Bucharest, March CICP s Programme Manager delivered a speech on International Cooperation; Its Role in Preventing and Combating Corruption and in the Creation of Regional Strategies 3. High level working conference on Corruption organized by the World Bank in collaboration with the Dutch Government, Maastricht, May The Programme Manager presented the UN-Global Programme against Corruption 4. Conference on Corruption and Crime; Challenges of the Millennium in Nigeria, May The Programme Manager presented two papers: one on the Global Programme and the other on national and international measures to fight corruption. In this occasion he facilitated also a follow up meeting to the Judiciary Integrity Meeting in Vienna, in April 2000, of Nigerian High Level Judges to draft an action plan to strengthen integrity within the judiciary. 4. Crime Expo 2000 in Budapest. The Officer in Charge of CICP made a key not speak and the Programme Manager of the Global Programme made a presentation at the Corruption Workshop on May 24 th

13 D. Future use of International Measures against Corruption With regards to a possible future international legal instrument against corruption the Global Programme is currently collecting and elaborating measures that should be considered in a preparatory report of the secretary. Such as: The particular importance of and need for an global legal instrument addressing the phenomenon of corruption in the broadest possible manner in order to tackle corruption more effectively. It will help member states to fight corruption as well as on all levels inside their countries as addressing the challenges of transnational corruption. Taking into account that corruption is a phenomenon which reaches far beyond the giving or receiving of bribes by a public official, future international measures against corruption should criminalize all forms of corrupt practices, such as the bribing of auditors and witnesses, the illegal funding of political parties and the abuse of public power and funds. Furthermore the sanctioning of illicit enrichment should be considered, in order to overcome problems encountered by law enforcement agencies when trying to produce evidence. Future international measures should provide a legal framework for the forfeiture and confiscation of the proceeds of corruption, evaluating the possibilities of shifting the burden of proof in this particular context. Furthermore alternative instruments such as independent confiscation procedures such as administrative or civil confiscation and property penalty should be taken into consideration. The close connection between corruption and money laundering, as it has been stressed in the Report of the Expert Group Meeting on Corruption and its Financial Channels needs to be addressed. It should therefore be born in mind that money laundering methods are not only being used to disguise the origin of corruption proceeds but also during the committing of the offence of corruption in order to dissociate the origin of the bribe money from its destination. At the same time corruption is a means to facilitate the laundering of all kinds of criminal proceeds. Moreover an international legal instrument against corruption has to provide a legal framework assuring international law enforcement cooperation, mutual legal assistance and extradition regarding the prosecution of corruption and the forfeiture and confiscation of its proceeds. Future international measures against corruption should also contain provisions facilitating the detection and investigation of corruption and its proceeds. Member states should therefore consider the lifting of bank secrecy in cases of suspected corruption, the possibility of integrity tests (e.g. sting operations), the seizure of business and banking records, the protection of witnesses and whistleblowers and the establishing of regulations allowing mitigation of sentences for offenders collaborating with the law enforcement agencies in the investigation of corruption. The importance of information and transparency as the natural enemies of corruption as it has been pointed out by the US-Vice President Al Gore during the Global Forum against Corruption must be taken into account. Therefore any legal instrument against corruption should ensure the access to information by the public in order to empower the civil society to control government performance. In this perspective member states should agree into conducting regularly integrity and corruption surveys and disseminate the results. Member states should be invited to establish efficient complaints procedures administered by credible and independent institutions (Ombudsman). Besides member states should be encouraged to base their national anti-corruption strategies on a broad basis of governmental and non governmental stakeholders. Future international measures against corruption should however not limit itself to come up with a legal framework dealing with the issues of criminalisation, prosecution, investigation 13

14 and detection of corruption but also promote the application of preventive measures guarding against corruption, such as codes of conduct, the declaration and monitoring of assets and second occupations for (senior) public officials in the executive, legislative and judiciary, increasing the transparency and accountability within the public procurement and tendering procedures and the involvement of international observers in large scale government projects. To ensure its optimal implementation, future international measures against corruption needs to foster international cooperation. In particular developing countries and countries with economies in transition must be provided the necessary technical assistance to meet their needs for effective and timely implementation of the international measures against corruption. In this regard Member states should be obliged to consider increasing their political and financial support of international agencies active in the field of anti-corruption work, particularly of United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme. Promote the adoption of other international instruments against corruption, including the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Inter- American Convention against Corruption by the Organsation of American States, the Principles to Combat Corruption in African Countries of the Global Coalition for Africa and the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption by the Council of Europe. 14