Panel Discussion Report
|
|
- Reginald Powell
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Panel Discussion Report Event: Anti-corruption: Recovering Proceeds of Corruption & Dealing with Government Contracts Procured by Bribes Nina Levarska London Centre of International Law Practice (LCILP) Other Publications, 003/2015 Date: 27/01/2015 This paper is downloadable at: Nina Levarska. All LCILP publications are for non-commercial research use only. Distribution of publications from our website for material interest, profit-making and or commercial gain is strictly forbidden.
2 Anti-corruption: Recovering Proceeds of Corruption & Dealing with Government Contracts Procured by Bribes Nina Levarska 1 Brief intro to event On the occasion of United Nations declared International Anti-Corruption Day, the London Centre of International Law Practice (LCILP) together with Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP hosted a panel discussion on Recovering the Proceeds of Corruption and Dealing with Government Contracts Procured by Bribes. The event took place on 9 December, 2014, at the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) in London. The speakers on the panel were representatives from academia, NGOs and law firms. The panel discussion was divided into three sessions. Nagi Idris and Tim Daniel opened the panel discussion by introducing the London Centre of International Law Practice and by mentioning some anti-corruption cases. One of the cases Tim Daniel talked about was Abacha case that involved recouping the assets of a deceased Nigerian dictator. Session 1 The first panel opened with a close examination of the United Kingdom Bribery Act 2010 ( UK Bribery Act ). The speakers on the panel were Peter Alldridge (Professor of Law at Queen Mary, University of London and Former Specialist Advisor to Joint Parliamentary Committees on draft Corruption Bill (2003) & draft Bribery Bill (2009)) and Nick Maxwell (Transparency UK s Research Manager). The session was moderated by James Maton (Partner at Edwards Wildman and the Head of Asset Recovery). In the end of the session, Comments & Perspectives on the discussed issues were provided by Sabah Al Mukthar (Director at Arab Lawyers Association). Commencing the discussion, Nick Maxwell, briefly explained the global structure of Transparency International. He mentioned that working at the UK division is 1 Nina Levarska is Research Coordinator-International Human Rights and Criminal Justice at the London Centre of International Law Practice (LCILP). 2
3 particularly interesting due to heavy flow of money in and out of the United Kingdom, which makes the UK an ideal test case for an examination of anti-bribery laws. Additionally, the nation is a hotspot for public relations laundering (i.e. the use of public relations specialists to cover-up the illegal conduct of their client companies). Nick Maxwell believes that while in the past anti-bribery law has been an incongruous patchwork, over the last 20 years, public awareness and better legislation have resulted in a UK Bribery Act that is stronger than ever before. Since the adoption of the UN Convention against Corruption, anti-corruption commitment has increased throughout various jurisdictions. Nonetheless, bribery is a unique offence due to the fact that the law is often very strong on paper, but there is lack of enforcement in practice. Regarding the offences that took place before 2011, when the UK Bribery Act was adopted, antiquated pieces of legislation were adhered to, such as the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 or Prevention of Corruption Act of 1906 and However, the UK Bribery Act is not the only anti-corruption guarantee as Transparency International has found 32 different pieces of legislation and over 160 offences. In addition, there are 54 different specialist and enforcement agencies that in some way play a role in anti-corruption enforcement. The UK Bribery Act covers both active and passive bribery in Sections 1 and 2. While active bribery involves promise to give the bribe, passive bribery means requesting or receiving the bribe. Section 6 effectively implements the UN Convention against Corruption and makes it an offence to bribe a foreign public official. Section 7 is dedicated to corporations that fail to prevent bribery within themselves. The Act itself does not effectively distinguish between the public and private spheres of operation, however, the existence of the divide between the public and private spheres is explained in the guidance that relates to the Act. The UK Bribery Act is applicable in four wide-ranging contexts: any function of a public nature, any conduct connected with business, any activity performed in the course of persons employment, and any activity formed by or on behalf of a body of persons. Distinction between public and private offences is only provided under Section 6. It is important to note that there is a notion of extraterritoriality, which gives the UK legislation power that extends beyond the UK territory. While there is a stipulation for the persons or entities against whom allegations are brought to be connected to the United Kingdom, this is not so narrowly construed as to require physical presence in the country. This means that a very broad range of organisations and individuals can be liable under the UK Bribery Act without being aware of it. 3
4 Further, the UK Bribery Act also accounts for the potential of bribery through gifts or excessive hospitality under Sections 6 and 7. The applicability of the Act is, however, guided by the principles for application of the UK Bribery Act and proportionality issued by the Ministry of Justice. Moreover, under Section 14, senior officers or a corporate body can be prosecuted as a legal person and the Section 1 and 2 offences can be applied in such cases. A somewhat more controversial element, which often divides practitioners on the continent from those in the UK, is the deferral option contained within Section 7, providing for the possibility of postponing prosecution, subject to the company agreeing to certain terms of action. In its breadth of coverage, the UK Bribery Act also spans issues of money laundering, proceeds of crime, and disqualification of directors. Moreover, the UK Bribery Act succeeded in getting various companies to implement a sophisticated monitoring system, which enables them to prevent corruption within themselves. While the Act is widely perceived as a sufficient guarantee of protection against instances of bribery, Nick Maxwell acknowledged that it had its limitations. An example of a limitation is the lack of any major prosecutions against corporations to date, which has seen severe criticism levelled against the Serious Fraud Office ( SFO ). On one hand, the time consuming nature of evidence and intelligence building activities explain the years it takes to build and bring a prosecution case. Nick pointed out that the UK Bribery Act is often compared to the American Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ( FCPA ) of 1977, under which there is a large number of prosecutions nowadays. FCPA is, however, much older than the UK Bribery Act and since it takes years to build anti-corruption cases, the UK Bribery Act cannot be expected to trigger any major prosecutions 3 years after its adoption. In addition, the work of the SFO has also been severely constrained by a reduction in its budget and due to the funding required to keep up with the increasing crime rates. Needless to say, this often involves political interference with all the bureaucracy that it entails. James Maton commented on Nick Maxwell s presentation by saying that while the UK Bribery Act seems to be a gold standard of anti-bribery legislation, there is a lack of enforcement activity at the moment. Nevertheless, the Act is a very recent piece of legislation and we will be able to judge its success in the next five years. He said that the fact that companies put a compliance system in place to eradicate corruption from their corporate activities is a significant success. Responding to Nick s summary of the UK Bribery Act, Peter Alldridge commenced with a clarification of central themes and concepts, stressing the distinction between corruption and bribery. He explained that while all forms of bribery are corruption, cases of 4
5 corruption are not limited to bribery alone. He also raised the question of what exactly bribery is as it is disputable whether giving the bribe itself is wrong or if giving the evidence of bribery is the problem. Moreover, he mentioned several limitations of the Act. Firstly, issues such as nepotism, which is dealt with under the United States law, and asynchronous exchanges, defined as favours granted in anticipation of future pay-back, or an unsolicited favour, are not yet covered by English law. Peter Alldridge explained that the reason why it is difficult to convict corporations of bribery is that the Section 7 of the UK Bribery Act only causes them to implement antibribery compliance policy, which might not be followed in practice. Moreover, he said that the availability of deferred prosecution agreements does not make any difference because since it is difficult to convict companies of bribery, there is no plausible threat of conviction and therefore, there is no need to enter into such an agreement. To improve the situation, UK corporate criminal liability law needs to be changed. Although adopting the US criminal corporate liability model would be a step forward, such modification of the law would not be able to solve all the current problems. Furthermore, while there have been some relatively insignificant offences charged as bribery, some other offences that were charged as bribery were wrongly classified. The best example of such an offence is sport fixing, which should be charged as a betting scam or conspiring to commit fraud. He mentioned a cricket case, where there was an element of being disloyal to the employer. However, disloyalty means a breach of employment contract and is not a matter of criminal law. Nonetheless, there have been some positive changes made in terms of economics of bribery since the 70s. They were made in response to the economic rise in countries such as China, the influence of OECD and the creation of the UN Convention against Corruption. Moreover, corporations nowadays deal with bribery as a part of their CSR and the regulatory actions have increased. Apart from the UK Bribery Act, there are other means of combating bribery, such as regulation, more rigorous corporate accounting standards, as part of their CSR, and civil actions by victims and under the Proceeds of Crime Act. According to Professor Alldridge, there is too much focus on tackling money-laundering, which is simply a manifestation of the wider theme of corruption. As a result, not enough attention is paid to understanding and developing mechanisms against the root causes of corruption. Peter Alldridge also pointed out that the Financial Conduct Authority is more effective than the SFO. Therefore, the future of the SFO should be rethought. Either the SFO 5
6 should become properly resourced and focused, with some principles and institutional culture, or it should be replaced by an economic crime agency with better enforcement powers. Peter Alldridge closed his presentation by saying that unless there is properly focused and resourced enforcement, the UK Bribery Act cannot succeed. James Maton added that in the US, the enforcement of the FCPA has led to many settlements. Moreover, the statements of fact are published on the FCPA website. The asset recovery in the US is simple due to the existence of such material and because of the public acceptance of the crime of corruption. At the end of the session, Sabah Al Mukthar commented on the panel discussion by saying, amongst other things, that the biggest problem is the abuse of the system. For instance, in the case of embezzlement by nation leaders, recovery is often not assisted. He agreed that in corruption, there are many ways the goal can be achieved. He gave an example of funding the election campaign of a president without requesting anything in return, even though there is no doubt that pay-back is expected in the future. In relation to the discussion about the past developments, he mentioned that while there were only 7 bribery cases investigated between 2001 and 2010, in 2011, 15 cases of bribery were investigated. Session 2 The second session dealt with mutual legal assistance in corruption cases and the question of where the money raised from bribery convictions goes. The speakers on the panel were Huw Shepheard (Barrister at Malins Chamber and former Attorney General of the Turks and Caicos Islands) and Tim Daniel (Senior Partner at Edwards Wildman). The panel discussion was moderated by Arvinder Sambei (Joint Head, International Human Rights & Criminal Justice at the London Centre of International Law Practice & Director at Sambei Polaine). Arvinder Sambei started the session by introducing the speakers and making the point that the transnational nature of anti-corruption and asset recovery is underpinned by the international cooperation and mutual legal assistance efforts. She also pointed out that this area is least understood by the practitioners on the ground and frustrating for the countries aiming to obtain evidence, recover or freeze assets. After the introductory speech, Tim Daniel started his presentation by addressing the major question of where the money raised from bribery convictions ends up as it does not benefit the victim of the bribe. Therefore, it seems that it is treasurers of the country that 6
7 benefit. He said that there are discussions in the US that might lead to introducing a methodology of returning money raised from fines to victims of bribery. 003/2015 According to the judgment in one case, which had proceedings in Switzerland, the money (half a billion dollars) was supposed to be returned to Nigeria. The question was whom specifically the money was supposed to be returned to. Since it was risky to give it to the government, World Bank was appointed as a trustee to oversee the return of the moneys. World Bank produced a report to demonstrate that the money was used for proper purposes. However, it is questionable whether World Bank s report can be trusted. Tim Daniel continued by explaining the difference between addressing bribery under civil law and addressing it under criminal law. The civil law definition of bribery differs from the criminal test as it stresses the element of secrecy rather than dishonesty ( A commission or other inducement given by a third party to an agent,which is secret from his principal ) 2. He gave an example of a case, in which the wrongdoer did not disclose the fact that he charged commission for his services and therefore, the court held that he was not entitled to it. Under civil law, dishonesty is not required and proving undisclosed benefit is sufficient. He also mentioned that in Switzerland, the burden of proof is on the defendants to prove that they acquired their monies legitimately. For instance, in Abacha case, in order to achieve this, Abacha family was declared a criminal enterprise. After this was established, the burden of proof shifted to Abacha family to prove that they obtained the money innocently. As far as states are concerned, the vice of secrecy causes that the bribery is not a problematic issue as long as it is declared because the state is entitled to expect loyalty and no conflicts of interests. In this respect Tim Daniel mentioned a case that concerned a contract between BAE systems and the government of Saudi Arabia, where a member of the royal family was enriching himself and others without dealing straightforwardly with BAE Systems or the government of Saudi Arabia. Another case described a scenario where the government of Kenya entered into a number of contracts for goods that did not exist or were substandard. The question in such cases often arises as to whom the claim should be made against (e.g. supplier of the goods, the recipient or the briber). 2 Anangel Atlas Compania Naviera SA -v- Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co Ltd, [1990] 1 Lloyd's Reports 167, at
8 When a state wants to end a contract that is procured by bribery, it can rescind or terminate the contract. Under the former option, the state has to return, or give credit for, the benefits that it has received under the contract. If the contract is terminated, the return of benefits is not required. Governments addressing widespread corruption can decide to continue the contracts in cases where the bribing company refrains from its wrongful conduct. This can happen in the case that ending the contract would cause inconveniences or when the wrongdoing was carried out by particular employees of an otherwise respectable company. Tim Daniel finished his speech by highlighting that the money which is lost is the money bribes have to be paid for and generally spending it means that the price is going to be inflated to cover the cost of the bribe. After Tim Daniel s presentation, Huw Shepheard commenced his speech on the concept of mutual legal assistance in anti-corruption cases. The reason behind the need of mutual legal assistance in such cases is that it is very likely that a person, who has accepted a bribe, hides the money in a foreign country (possibly in an offshore financial centre). In such a case, it is vital that the prosecutor receives relevant information from the country, in which the money is hidden. However, it might be problematic to make the request to the foreign country directly. It is advisable that a specific link to the foreign country is made prior to making a formal request for mutual legal assistance. There are three different bases on which the formal request can be made. The first option is to make the request on the basis of a treaty or a multilateral agreement. This mechanism allows the competent authority in one country to contact a competent authority in another country in order to obtain the information. Moreover, the requested country is obliged under the treaty to perform certain activities. General laws of the country that is requested to assist play an important role. In this respect, UK laws are quite flexible. Crime (International Cooperation) Act 2003, which to some extent superseded Criminal Justice Cooperation Act 1990, enables British investigators to effectively conduct investigation on behalf of the country that is requesting the information. It is important that the requesting party specifies in what form it wants to receive the information. In case there is no treaty in place, it can be adhered to the laws of the country in question. In the case of the UK, the Crime (International Cooperation) Act 2003 lays down a wide range of possibilities. While the standard of the UK laws of mutual legal assistance is high, the British overseas centres might not be as flexible as the British Home Office. This is because the overseas territories either do not have the international cooperation statute or their international cooperation statute is modelled on the Criminal Justice Cooperation Act 1990, which is much more restricted in the scope than the Crime 8
9 (International Cooperation) Act For instance, the Criminal Justice (International Cooperation) Act of Bermuda restricts the availability of information in relation to fiscal offences. The last option is that the request for mutual legal assistance can be made in the absence of a treaty between the countries and even without relying on the general laws of the requested country. The request might not be turned down because the requested countries are aware of the fact that their favour will be rewarded in the future. This is, however, problematic as far as relations between the North American and Caribbean jurisdictions are concerned because North America often refuses the request for mutual legal assistance. It is advisable to contact the central authority (e.g. Attorney General or the Director of Prosecutions) to ask what the scope of their powers is before the formal mutual legal assistance is requested. The reason for this is that it would not be very helpful to ask them to perform an activity that is not within their powers. Moreover, maintaining good relations with the countries, with which cooperation is frequently needed, is vital. Huw Shepheard also mentioned that so called fishing expeditions are not effective as there is always a need of an indication that the proceeds of crime have been in the country in question. The formal request for mutual legal assistance must be in the language of the requesting country accompanied by an authenticated translation. In practice, requests for mutual legal assistance are rarely denied. Finally, since it is usually not the case that the conduct is defined as criminal in both countries, it is sufficient that it is considered to be a criminal act in one of them. Session 3 The third panel discussed the advantages and disadvantages of asset recovery mechanisms as well as funding asset recovery cases. The third session panelists were James Maton (Partner at Edwards Wildman and Head of Asset Recovery), Jamie Humphreys (Associate at Edwards Wildman) and the moderator, Arvinder Sambei. After introducing the speakers, Arvinder Sambei explained that the purpose of the last session was to talk about the real aim of the anti-corruption cases, which is asset recovery for the victim states. She said that the speakers would look at the practical issues, discuss the mechanisms that are available to the state, and explain the way these cases are funded as the states that have been looted might not have the necessary support to get their assets recovered. 9
10 James Maton s presentation highlighted the main differences between the criminal law and civil law methods of asset recovery. He began with describing 4 types of proceeding mechanisms. He said that the traditional method of asset recovery is criminal law method. Domestic criminal conviction is followed by a confiscation order, which can be enforced both overseas and domestically through mutual legal assistance. In the case of domestic civil forfeiture or recovery, enforcement agencies of states are given the statutory power to bring proceedings to recover proceeds of corruption or proceeds of crime in the absence of criminal conviction. Such forfeiture orders can be enforced both domestically and internationally. Another type is foreign criminal or civil forfeiture proceedings, which is typically used in money laundering offences. This kind of proceeding takes place under the circumstances that bribery takes place in one country where there is no realistic prospect of getting the perpetrators convicted. However, if the stolen money is moved to the UK, and dealt with there (e.g. buying properties), the UK authorities can charge the wrongdoers with money laundering and convict them. It is possible to repatriate the money from the country where the conviction took place to the country that the crime was committed. The last type is private civil proceedings, in which the state asks lawyers to bring proceedings to either domestic or overseas civil courts. Generally, there is no best mechanism of asset recovery. The circumstances of the case dictate the most appropriate route. James Maton said that political will is the biggest obstacle to successful asset recovery cases. Another problem is when the state is willing to bring the case but it chooses a wrong mechanism. Selecting the most appropriate method of addressing anticorruption cases is crucial as choosing the less suitable approach can jeopardize the prosecution. Moreover, it is important to note that there is a great public interest in corruption cases. In the cases of serious criminal behaviour, the public wants to see the criminals convicted. In the process of deciding between a criminal and civil law approach, it would be advisable that a number of issues are considered. For example, both the fact that convictions should be realistic and the efficiency and fairness of the court system need to be taken into account. The ability of obtaining evidence should also be considered as private practice lawyers do not have the same capacity as police to gather evidence. Other issues that need to be kept in mind are the fact that law enforcement has a lower threshold for freezing money and that the civil law balance of probabilities standard of proof is more straight-forward than the criminal law beyond reasonable doubt standard. Furthermore, the concept of admissibility of evidence is less common in civil 10
11 law than in criminal law proceedings. It should be also noted that settling criminal cases is more problematic than settling civil law cases. In terms of the amount recovered, civil law allows claims against third parties, which may lead to recovering more assets. James Maton mentioned a number of methods that could be implemented to improve the overall situation worldwide. For instance, extending the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court to cover asset recovery cases could, in theory, help the current situation. Another possibility would be to create a specialised International Corruption Court or giving universal jurisdiction to domestic courts. Another way to tackle the issue would be to create freezing mechanisms that are deployed in terrorism cases or to establish mutual legal cooperation in civil law cases. He also mentioned methods such as making public asset declarations or permitting civil society groups to bring claims. Following James Maton s analysis of civil law and criminal law approaches to anticorruption cases, Jamie Humphreys delivered a presentation on funding a civil recovery action. He mentioned that various financial institutions offer funding for all kinds of civil action including asset recovery claims. Nonetheless, such institutions are willing to fund only claims that are likely to succeed. Moreover, some international organisations (e.g. The African Development Bank, the World Bank) also offer asset recovery programmes. In the course of his speech, Jamie Humphreys also touched upon the topic of difference between criminal and civil law in corruption cases. He pointed out that the cost of the criminal law process is different from the cost of civil law process. Apart from the obvious reason why the cost should be taken into account, Jamie Humphreys mentioned that an expensive asset recovery process could negatively affect public opinion. At the end of the session, Nagi Idris added that mutual legal assistance requires that the central government requests assistance. However, in many cases there is no central government to make the request. Moreover, he agreed with James Maton that extending the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court or establishing a specialised International Corruption Court would be a step forward. He also raised the question of who has the right to bring a corruption case. In the absence of the central government, it could be the people who have some interest in the case that could bring the claim against their ruling leaders or corrupt regime. His last point was that it is not enough to tackle corruption in corporate transactional context for bribery actions. Such system only functions in countries that have mature corporate market, where it is possible to trace a corporate transaction. Q & A 11
12 The first comment concerned a scenario where the state does not have the political will to pursue corruption claims and there are no individuals who would bring the action. A possible solution to such a situation would be to have an NGO bring the claim on behalf of the victims of corruption. As an example, a case was mentioned in which 3 African dictators were involved. Transparency International took the action in this case and succeeded in recovering the assets. The question was raised as to where the money raised from this successful case went. James Maton answered that a credible NGO in that particular victim country has been appointed to ensure that the money was spent for good purposes. This mechanism is supervised and audited by the Department of Justice to oversee the return of the money to the victims. However, it is questionable how this will work in practice. Another question related to the pressure UK companies are under due to the fact that they are expected to fight their commercial activities in market areas with their hands tied behind their back as they are subjected to the strict anti-corruption measures, while their competitors are not. James Maton said that the answer to that question cannot be to reduce enforcement of the UK and US companies. Moreover, he mentioned that there are some companies that have an increase in sales due to the fact that their country of origin is perceived to be corruption clean. 12
Civil and criminal mechanisms to recover the proceeds of corruption laundered to foreign states: a guidance note by Edwards Wildman 1
28 June 2013 Civil and criminal mechanisms to recover the proceeds of corruption laundered to foreign states: a guidance note by Edwards Wildman 1 Overview and introduction Corruption cases are typically
More informationTo: All contacts in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland
Briefing 11/32 July 2011 Bribery Act 2010 To: All contacts in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland Key issues New offences created to replace previous bribery crimes Both the private and public
More information29 September To Our Clients and Friends:
THE DRAFT BRIBERY BILL 29 September 2009 To Our Clients and Friends: At a moment when the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has announced its first ever successful prosecution for corporate bribery in the
More informationBRIBERY ACT 2010: JOINT PROSECUTION GUIDANCE OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
BRIBERY ACT 2010: JOINT PROSECUTION GUIDANCE OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Contents Introduction The Act in its wider context The legal framework Transitional
More informationThe Bribery Act Frequently Asked Questions WHAT IS THE BRIBERY ACT 2010? WHO MUST COMPLY WITH THE UKBA?
The Bribery Act 2010 Frequently Asked Questions WHAT IS THE BRIBERY ACT 2010? The Bribery Act 2010 ( UKBA ) is the primary anti-corruption law in the United Kingdom. It came into force in July 2011 and
More informationINTERNATIONAL TRADE ALERT
January 14, 2004 INTERNATIONAL TRADE ALERT THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION Bribery and other corrupt practices, such as money laundering, once tolerated by many national governments and
More informationAnti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Response Policy. Telford and Wrekin Clinical Commissioning Group
Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Response Policy 2018 Telford and Wrekin Clinical Commissioning Group The Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Policy for Telford and Wrekin Clinical Commissioning Group
More informationRevealing the true cost of financial crime Focus on the Middle East and North Africa
Revealing the true cost of financial crime Focus on the Middle East and North Africa What s hiding in the shadows? In March 2018, Thomson Reuters commissioned a global survey to better understand the true
More informationBERMUDA BRIBERY ACT : 47
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA BRIBERY ACT 2016 2016 : 47 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Citation Interpretation Preliminary General bribery offences Offences of bribing another
More informationRenishaw Group Anti-Bribery Policy
1. Zero Tolerance Statement Renishaw Group Anti-Bribery Policy Renishaw plc and its subsidiaries ( the Group ) have a zero tolerance approach to all forms of bribery and corruption and this global Renishaw
More informationA Guide to the UK s Bribery Act 2010 Martin Polaine. London Centre of International Law Practice. Anti-corruption Forum, 007/ /02/2015
A Guide to the UK s Bribery Act 2010 Martin Polaine London Centre of International Law Practice Anti-corruption Forum, 007/2015 16/02/2015 This paper is downloadable at: http://www.lcilp.org/anti-corruption-forum/
More informationRECENT MULTILATERAL MEASURES TO COMBAT CORRUPTION. Cecil Hunt *
September 2006 RECENT MULTILATERAL MEASURES TO COMBAT CORRUPTION Cecil Hunt * Prepared for the American Law Institute-America Bar Association Program Going International: Fundamentals of International
More informationANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY UK ENGINEERING RECRUITMENT LTD
Page 1 of 5 Contents: ANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY 1. Definitions 2. Introduction 3. Purpose and scope of this policy 4. The Bribery Act 2010 5. The risks of not acting with integrity 6. The benefits
More informationPolicy Summary. Overview Why is the policy required? Awareness and legal compliance with Bribery Act is required to minimise risk to UHI and its staff
Policy Summary Overview Why is the policy required? Purpose What will it achieve? Scope Who does it apply too? Consultation/notification Highlight plans/dates Implementation and monitoring (including costs)
More informationUK Bribery Act: impact on companies and what to expect
UK Bribery Act: impact on companies and what to expect GADENS BRIEFING PAPER OCTOBER 2015 UK Bribery Act: impact on companies and what to expect 1. Introduction what to expect The UK Bribery Act 2010 (the
More information1.3 The required standards of integrity confer a level of personal responsibility upon individuals. This Policy thus applies to:
ANTI-BRIBERY POLICY 1. Introduction 1.1 The University has an absolute commitment to acting ethically, lawfully and with integrity in all its dealings, wherever it operates in the world. As part of this
More informationCommunity Development and CSR: Managing Expectations & Balancing Interests
Community Development and CSR: Managing Expectations & Balancing Interests The 8 th Risk Mitigation and CSR Seminar Canada-South Africa Chamber of Business Tuesday, October 16, 2012 Introduction OBJECTIVE:
More informationStocktaking report on business integrity and anti-bribery legislation, policies and practices in twenty african countries
Joint AfDB/OECD Initiative to Support Business Integrity and Anti-Bribery Efforts in Africa Stocktaking report on business integrity and anti-bribery legislation, policies and practices in twenty african
More informationTHE INTERNATIONAL IMPACT OF FRAUD THE UK BRIBERY ACT RAISING THE BAR ABOVE THE FOREIGN CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
THE INTERNATIONAL IMPACT OF FRAUD THE UK BRIBERY ACT RAISING THE BAR ABOVE THE FOREIGN CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT The UK Bribery Act has an effective date of April 2011. Prior to this act, the U.S. Foreign
More informationEFFECTIVE MEASURES FOR COMBATING CORRUPTION
EFFECTIVE MEASURES FOR COMBATING CORRUPTION Pinthip Leelakriangsak Srisanit I. INTRODUCTION Corruption has been considered a major and widespread problem in many nations. Particularly, corruption causes
More information2. WHY IS COMBATING CORRUPTION SO IMPORTANT FOR COMPANIES AND INVESTORS?
ANTI-CORRUPTION 1. INTRODUCTION 2 2. WHY IS COMBATING CORRUPTION SO IMPORTANT FOR COMPANIES AND INVESTORS? 3 3. ADVICE FOR FUND MANAGERS 4 4. FURTHER RESOURCES 6 1. INTRODUCTION CDC defines corruption
More informationI. STATEMENT OF COMMITMENT AGAINST CORRUPTION, BRIBERY & EXTORTION
CITY DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED ANTI-CORRUPTION POLICY & GUIDELINES* (*All employees of CDL are required to read the full version of the CDL Anti-Corruption Policy & Guidelines, which is available on CDL s intranet,
More informationFirstRand anti-bribery policy
FirstRand anti-bribery policy - 1 - table of contents 1. DEFINITIONS 3 2. POLICY CONTEXT 4 2.1 Ensuring integrity in all business dealings 4 2.2 What is bribery? 4 2.3 Purpose of the policy? 5 2.4 How
More informationConference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption
United Nations CAC/COSP/IRG/I/4/1/Add.37 Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption Distr.: General 6 April 2016 Original: English Implementation Review Group
More informationAnti-Corruption Guidance For Bar Associations
Anti-Corruption Guidance For Bar Associations Creating, Developing and Promoting Anti-Corruption Initiatives for the Legal Profession Adopted on 25 May 2013 by the International Bar Association 1 Contents
More informationDirector of Customer Care & Performance. 26 April The Board is asked to consider and approve the attached draft
To: From: Subject: Status: Date of Meeting: BSO Board Director of Customer Care & Performance Anti Bribery Policy For Approval 26 April 2012 The Board is asked to consider and approve the attached draft
More informationUK Bribery Act. Document Reference: EXT008
UK Bribery Act Document Reference: EXT008 Version: 2 First approved: September 2009 Last reviewed: May 2015 Date of next review: December 2015 Review History Date of Review September 2009 March 2015 Comments
More informationFutures & Options Association Bribery Act Checklist
Futures & Options Association Bribery Act Checklist Berwin Leighton Paisner LLP Adelaide House London Bridge London EC4R 9HA Tel: +44 (0)20 3400 1000 Fax: +44 (0)20 3400 1111 Contents Clause Name Page
More informationANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION
ANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION VOLCOM COMPLIANCE MANUAL 1. Introduction... 3 2. Application... 3 3. Oversight and Governance... 3 3.1 Responsible Parties... 3 3.2 Risk Assessment... 4 3.3 Monitoring... 4 4.
More informationFirstRand Suppliers Code of Conduct
FirstRand Suppliers Code of Conduct - 2 - table of contents 1. WHY DOES FIRSTRAND HAVE A SUPPLIERS CODE OF CONDUCT POLICY? 3 2. POLICY SCOPE 3 2.1 Who does the policy apply to? 3 2.2 Who is a supplier
More informationISO 37001:2016 Anti-Bribery Management Systems
with the technical support of presents: ISO 37001:2016 Anti-Bribery Management Systems A great opportunity for the public and private organisations 15 October 2016 Eng. Ciro Alessio STRAZZERI (Asso231
More informationANTI-BRIBERY POLICY Rev Date Purpose of Issue/Description of Change Equality Impact Assessment Completed
ANTI-BRIBERY POLICY Rev Date Purpose of Issue/Description of Change Equality Impact Assessment Completed 1. 29 th March, 2012 Initial Issue 2. 5 th October 2015 Review and approval by Compliance Task Group
More informationIt is the responsibility of all Fletcher Personnel to understand and comply with this Policy, including any reporting requirements set out below.
POLICY: ANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION 1. POLICY STATEMENT AND PURPOSE Fletcher Building Limited ( Fletcher Building ) is committed to complying with the law in all jurisdictions in which we operate, as well
More informationFORENSIC. Doing business under the UK Bribery Act. Survey kpmg.com/in
FORENSIC Doing business under the UK Bribery Act Survey 2012 kpmg.com/in Executive summary Following several law commission papers, a first draft of the Bribery Bill was published in March 2009. After
More informationTHE BRIBERY ACT 2010 POLICY STATEMENT AND PROCEDURES
THE BRIBERY ACT 2010 POLICY STATEMENT AND PROCEDURES DECEMBER 2011 CONTENTS Page 1. Introduction 2 2. Objective of This Policy 3 3. The Joint Committee s Commitment to Action 3 4. Policy Statement Anti-Bribery
More informationAnti-Bribery Policy. Anti-Bribery. Policy. Working Together. January Borders College 15/2/ Working Together.
Anti-Bribery Working Together Policy January 2016 Borders College 15/2/2016 1 Working Together History of Changes Version Description of Change Authored by Date 1.1 New Policy approved at Audit Committee
More informationThe UK Bribery Act An overview of the Act. David Alexander Director, Forensic Services, Smith & Williamson Ltd
The UK Bribery Act An overview of the Act David Alexander Director, Forensic Services, Smith & Williamson Ltd Disclaimer This seminar is of a general nature and is not a substitute for professional advice.
More informationThe Bribery Act 2010 and what it means for CIMA members and businesses worldwide
The Bribery Act 2010 and what it means for CIMA members and businesses worldwide Bribery is a serious crime that destroys the integrity, accountability and honesty that underpins ethical standards both
More informationAnti-bribery and corruption policy & guidelines. December 2011
Anti-bribery and corruption policy & guidelines December 2011 Progressio s organisational statement : Progressio seeks to operate to a high standard in all it does. It works with integrity, accountability
More informationRegional Anti-Corruption Action Plan for Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Ukraine.
Anti-Corruption Network for Transition Economies OECD Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs 2, rue André Pascal F-75775 Paris Cedex 16 (France) phone: (+33-1) 45249106, fax: (+33-1)
More informationANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY
Table of Content 1. Purpose... 2 2. Scope... 2 3. Responsibility... 2 4. General principles... 3 a. What is Bribery?... 3 b. Bribery of Government Officials... 4 c. Commercial Bribery... 6 d. Preventing
More information2010 UK Bribery Act. A Briefing for NGOs
2010 UK Bribery Act A Briefing for NGOs June 2010 2010 UK Bribery Act A Briefing for NGOs 1. Introduction On April 8 th 2010, a new Bribery Act received Royal Assent one of the last bills to pass into
More informationRegional Anti-Corruption Action Plan for Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Ukraine.
Anti-Corruption Network for Transition Economies OECD Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs 2, rue André Pascal F-75775 Paris Cedex 16 (France) phone: (+33-1) 45249106, fax: (+33-1)
More informationAnti-Bribery and Corruption Policy
Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy 1. Policy Statement In accordance with the highest standards of professional practice and good governance, the University does not tolerate bribery or corruption of any
More informationANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY
ANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY 0 Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy 1 Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy Introduction This policy applies to Portmeirion Group PLC and its subsidiaries, (including Wax
More informationThis guidance applies to all members of the University including all employees and independent members of Council and its Committees.
UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER ANTI- BRIBERY GUIDANCE 1. Introduction This guidance applies to all members of the University including all employees and independent members of Council and its Committees. 2. Position
More informationAnti-Corruption Policies in Asia and the Pacific Self-Assessment Report Nepal
ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific The Secretariat Anti-Corruption Policies in Asia and the Pacific Self-Assessment Report Nepal Over the last decade, societies have come to realize
More informationGUIDANCE NOTE. Bribery Act June 2011
GUIDANCE NOTE Bribery Act 2010 June 2011 This Guidance Note outlines the offences that will be introduced by the Bribery Act 2010 ( the Act ) which comes into force on 1 st July 2011 and the penalties
More informationConference of States parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption. St. Petersburg, Russian Federation 2-6 November 2015
Conference of States parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption St. Petersburg, Russian Federation 2-6 November 2015 Anti Corruption Reform in Small Islands: Opportunities and Priorities
More informationThe Bribery Bill and how it will impact construction companies (when it becomes law)
The Bribery Bill and how it will impact construction companies (when it becomes law) The construction industry received a sharp reminder of how costly corrupt practices can be when 103 construction firms
More informationPOLICY AGAINST BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION. Introductory Guidance. This policy has been introduced in response to the Bribery Act 2010 ( the Act )
POLICY AGAINST BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION Introductory Guidance This policy has been introduced in response to the Bribery Act 2010 ( the Act ) The Act creates four key offences:- Active bribery (the offence
More informationANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY
ANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY THIS POLICY APPLIES TO MILLFIELD, MILLFIELD PREP SCHOOL, MILLFIELD PRE-PREP SCHOOL (INCLUDING EYFS) AND MILLFIELD ENTERPRISES, TOGETHER REFERRED TO IN THIS POLICY AS
More informationCivil Society Statement for the Global Forum on Asset Recovery
Civil Society Statement for the Global Forum on Asset Recovery On the occasion of the first Global Forum on Asset Recovery co-hosted by the United States and the United Kingdom in Washington D.C., USA,
More informationBest Buy Anti-Corruption Policy
Best Buy Anti-Corruption Policy 1. Scope 2. Policy Statement 3. Prohibited Conduct and Obligations 4. Definitions 5. Transparency 6. Communication and Reporting 7. Business Partners and Commercial Intermediaries
More informationHYDRATIGHT GROUP ANTI-BRIBERY AND ANTI- CORRUPTION POLICY 11 MAY 2016
HYDRATIGHT GROUP ANTI-BRIBERY AND ANTI- CORRUPTION POLICY 11 MAY 2016 CONTENTS SECTION 1. Our commitment to ethical performance... 1 2. Who is covered by the policy?... 2 3. What is bribery?... 2 4. Gifts
More informationANTI- CORRUPTION POLICY
ANTI- CORRUPTION POLICY CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ZERO TOLERANCE TOWARDS CORRUPTION The anti-corruption policy provides guidance for how Institute employees must react when faced with corruption and corrupt
More informationANTI-BRIBERY POLICY AND PROCEDURES
ANTI-BRIBERY POLICY AND PROCEDURES For use by: All Society employees; Members undertaking activities on behalf of the Society; agents, consultants and contractors acting for the Society. Owner Director
More informationBRIBERY AND PROCUREMENT POLICY BUCKSBURN STONEYWOOD PARISH CHURCH OF SCOTLAND SC017404
BRIBERY AND PROCUREMENT POLICY OF BUCKSBURN STONEYWOOD PARISH CHURCH OF SCOTLAND SC07404 Policy statement. Further to the work and mission of the Church of Scotland and the terms of the Bribery Act 200
More informationLittle Rascals Pre-school Anti-Bribery Policy
Little Rascals Pre-school Anti-Bribery Policy Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish controls to ensure compliance with all applicable antibribery and corruption regulations, and to ensure
More informationAnti-Bribery Policy. November 2018
Anti-Bribery Policy November 2018 UCPS Anti-Bribery Policy Review Frequency Two years Review date November 2020 Governing Committee Responsible Finance Resources and Buildings Governor Approval (date)
More informationTHE BRIBERY BILL 2010 AN OVERVIEW
THE BRIBERY BILL 2010 AN OVERVIEW This article provides an overview of the Government s recent strategy to fight bribery and corruption, particularly overseas corruption. The article analyses a centre-plank
More informationInternational Anti-Corruption Champion: What is the strategy?
Parliamentary Briefing Governance and Corruption International Anti-Corruption Champion: What is the strategy? Corruption is a manifestation of poor governance and is a major challenge to development and
More information2. Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy
2. Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy This document sets out the policy of Canary Wharf Group plc and its group of companies (the Group ) in relation to bribery and corruption. It may be amended by the
More informationANTI-CORRUPTION & BRIBERY
Page 1 of 11 ANTI-CORRUPTION & BRIBERY Page 2 of 11 CONTENTS CLAUSE 1. Policy statement... 3 2. Who is covered by the policy?... 4 3. What is bribery?... 4 4. Gifts and hospitality... 5 5. What is not
More informationConference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption
United Nations CAC/COSP/2015/NGO/5 Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption Distr.: General 29 October 2015 English only Sixth session St. Petersburg, Russian
More informationOrange group anti-corruption policy
Orange group anti-corruption policy Hello, We have chosen to build tomorrow s digital world as a responsible and trustworthy company. We are committed to conducting our activities soundly and with integrity,
More informationAnti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Policy and Response Plan
Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Policy and Response Plan Ref: Finance 2.1 Version: 3.0 Supersedes: Author (inc Job Title): Ratified by: (Name of responsible Committee) 2.1 Anti-Bribery Policy and Procedure
More informationConference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption
United Nations CAC/COSP/2017/5 Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption Distr.: General 30 August 2017 Original: English Seventh session Vienna, 6-10 November
More informationIMPLEMENTING THE OECD ANTI-BRIBERY CONVENTION. Phase 1bis Report. Liability of Legal Persons. Slovak Republic
IMPLEMENTING THE OECD ANTI-BRIBERY CONVENTION Phase 1bis Report Liability of Legal Persons Slovak Republic In June 2016, the OECD Working Group on Bribery agreed that the Slovak Republic should undergo
More informationUnoficial translation BASIC GUIDELINES NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR CORRUPTION PREVENTION AND COMBATING
Unoficial translation BASIC GUIDELINES NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR CORRUPTION PREVENTION AND COMBATING 2004 2008 2 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...3 2. CURRENT SITUATION...3 3. PROBLEMS IN PREVENTING AND COMBATING
More informationANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY
GABRIEL RESOURCES LIMITED ANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Board of Directors of Gabriel Resources Ltd. 1 (the Company or "Gabriel") has determined that, on the recommendation of
More informationThe Bribery Act 2010:
The Bribery Act 2010: Government Guidance on Adequate Procedures Introduction to the Bribery Act 2010 The Bribery Act came into force on 1 July 2011. The Act updated the UK law on bribery and brought it
More informationCollecting Foreign Evidence
Collecting Foreign Evidence Prepared by: Lawyers Without Borders March 2016 Outline I. Collecting Evidence from Foreign Entities II. Types of Assistance III. What is Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA)? IV.
More information3.1 A bribe is an inducement or reward offered, promised or provided in order to gain any commercial, contractual, regulatory or personal advantage.
ANTI-BRIBERY POLICY Last review October 2016 Next review October 2018 It is Canoe Wales policy to conduct all of our business in an honest and ethical manner. Canoe Wales takes a zero-tolerance approach
More informationAnti-Bribery and Corruption Policy
Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy CONTENTS CLAUSE 1. Policy statement... 1 2. Who is covered by the policy?... 1 3. What is bribery?... 2 4. Gifts and hospitality... 2 5. What is not acceptable?... 3
More informationThe Bribery Act Adequate procedures.
October 2010 The Bribery Act 2010. Adequate procedures. We set out in this note our suggestions as to the adequate procedures that a company may consider adopting as part of its process of updating compliance
More informationBribery Act Presenter: Nigel Moore. Date: 13 June 2011
Bribery Act 2010 Presenter: Nigel Moore Date: 13 June 2011 Older Law PUBLIC BODIES CORUPT PRACTICES ACT 1889 PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACTS 1906 and 1916.. now swept away International Pressure UK/Europe
More informationSimply Media TV Limited: Anti-corruption and bribery policy. DATED JUNE 2013 ANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY
Simply Media TV Limited: Anti-corruption and bribery policy. DATED JUNE 2013 ANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY CONTENTS CLAUSE 1. Policy statement... 1 2. Who must comply with this policy?... 1 3. What
More informationBUILDING INTEGRITY IN UK DEFENCE PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO REDUCE CORRUPTION RISK POLICY PAPER SERIES NUMBER FIVE
BUILDING INTEGRITY IN UK DEFENCE PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO REDUCE CORRUPTION RISK POLICY PAPER SERIES NUMBER FIVE Transparency International (TI) is the world s leading nongovernmental anti-corruption
More informationANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY
ANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY Date Approved by Governors March 2017 Review Date March 2019 On behalf of Governors signed Print name On behalf of Governors signed Print name Principal s signature All
More informationThis policy and Code of Conduct will form part of the induction of new EMPLOYEES (as defined below).
ANTI CORRUPTION POLICY STATEMENT OF COMMITMENT RICHLAND GROUP (as defined below) is fully committed to conduct our business with utmost integrity and with the highest ethical standards, and in compliance
More informationFIA INSTITUTE ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY
! FIA INSTITUTE ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 As indicated in Article 8 of the Internal Regulations of the FIA Institute, we take a zero tolerance approach to bribery and corruption
More informationGLOBAL NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PORGRAMME ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY [DRAFT]
GLOBAL NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PORGRAMME ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY [DRAFT] 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 We take a zero tolerance approach to bribery and corruption and will uphold all laws relevant to countering
More informationGAC Anti-Corruption & Bribery Policy. January 2018
GAC Anti-Corruption & Bribery Policy January 2018 1.1 This Anti-Corruption and Bribery policy complements the GAC Code of Ethics. The GAC Code of Ethics emphasises that the values promoted in the Code
More informationWarrego Energy Limited Level 6, 10 Bridge Street, Sydney NSW 2000 T: E: warregoenergy.com ABN
Warrego Energy Limited ACN 125 394 667 WARREGO ENERGY LIMITED ANTI-CORRUPTION & BRIBERY POLICY Contents SECTION 1. Warrego s commitment to ethical performance 1 2. Who is covered by the policy? 2 3. What
More informationGAC Anti-Corruption and Bribery Policy. November 2015
November 2015 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 This Anti-Corruption and Bribery policy complements the GAC Code of Ethics. The GAC Code of Ethics emphasises that the values promoted in the Code must underlie all
More informationThe UK Bribery Act 2010 How Will It Impact the Life Sciences Industry and How Does It Compare With the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act?
The UK Bribery Act 2010 How Will It Impact the Life Sciences Industry and How Does It Compare With the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act? 1 February 2011 Angela Hayes Andrew Legg Lynn Neils Partner, London
More informationNORTHERN IRELAND SOCIAL CARE COUNCIL
NORTHERN IRELAND SOCIAL CARE COUNCIL BRIBERY POLICY FINAL SEPTMBER 2012 1. INTRODUCTION The Bribery Act 2010 (the Act) introduces a new, clearer regime for tackling bribery that applies to all commercial
More informationANTI-BRIBERY POLICY. (Covering all employees) Contents
ANTI-BRIBERY POLICY (Covering all employees) Contents 1. Introduction 2. Scope 3. Compliance 4. What is Bribery? 5. What is HITRANS Position on Bribery? 6. Preventing Bribery Adequate Procedures 7. Employee
More informationAnti-Bribery and Corruption Policy
Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy Policy # BW-GRP- ABC-01 Effective Date 30 September 2017 Email hilaryw@barloworld.com Version V2.2 Contact Hilary Wilton Phone 011 445 1168 Purpose... 1 Scope... 1 Regulatory
More informationANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY - INCLUDING CODE OF PRACTICE ON BUSINESS GIFTS AND HOSPITALITY
ANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY - INCLUDING CODE OF PRACTICE ON BUSINESS GIFTS AND HOSPITALITY Policy Number 5 July 2015 This Document is for the use of Scotmid Employees and their advisors only. No
More informationThis Policy sets out Sewtec s position on any form of bribery and corruption and provides guidelines aimed at:
ANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY Introduction Sewtec Automation Limited ( The Company ) is committed to promoting and maintaining the highest level of ethical standards in relation to all of its business
More informationLEGISLATIVE CONSENT MEMORANDUM CRIMINAL FINANCES BILL
LEGISLATIVE CONSENT MEMORANDUM CRIMINAL FINANCES BILL Background 1. This memorandum has been lodged by Michael Matheson MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Justice, under Rule 9B.3.1(a) of the Parliament s Standing
More informationTSB CONSTRUCTIONS LTD
BRIBERY PREVENTION 86 Stockwell Road Handsworth Birmingham, B21 9RJ West Midlands www.tsbconstructionsltd.tsbpvtltd.com constructions@tsbpvtltd.com Management System ANTI-CORRUPTION POLICY STATEMENT As
More informationCHURCH OF SCOTLAND CONGREGATION SC[INSERT CHARITY NUMBER]
BRIBERY AND PROCUREMENT POLICY OF [INSERT NAME] CHURCH OF SCOTLAND CONGREGATION SC[INSERT CHARITY NUMBER] (N.B. WHEN COMPLETING THE POLICY, WHERE THE ALTERNATIVES [KIRK SESSION/CONGREGATIONAL BOARD] ARE
More informationCAYMAN ISLANDS. Supplement No. 1 published with Extraordinary Gazette No. 25 of 27th March, PROCEEDS OF CRIME LAW (2018 Revision)
Proceeds of Crime Law (2018 Revision) CAYMAN ISLANDS Supplement No. 1 published with Extraordinary Gazette No. 25 of 27th March, 2018. PROCEEDS OF CRIME LAW (2018 Revision) Law 10 of 2008 consolidated
More information1. An outline of the domestic asset recovery regime; 2. An overview of the way in which the UK can assist overseas
12727Page 1 of 27 THE UK ASSET RECOVERY REGIME Introduction This presentation is divided into two parts: 1. An outline of the domestic asset recovery regime; 2. An overview of the way in which the UK can
More informationBartington Instruments Ltd. Anti-Bribery Manual. The copyright of this document is the property of Bartington Instruments Ltd.
Anti-Bribery Manual The copyright of this document is the property of Bartington Instruments Ltd. DCN 1109 DO0067 Issue 2 Page 1 of 10 Contents 1. Introduction to this manual... 3 2. Who is covered by
More informationTURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME ORDINANCE Arrangement of Sections CONFISCATION. Interpretation for this Part. Confiscation Order
TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME ORDINANCE 2007 Arrangement of Sections SECTION PART I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS AND INTERPRETATION 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation 3. Definition
More informationBribery Act CHAPTER 23. An Act to make provision about offences relating to bribery; and for connected purposes.
Bribery Act 2010 2010 CHAPTER 23 An Act to make provision about offences relating to bribery; and for connected purposes. [8th April 2010] BE IT ENACTED by the Queen s most Excellent Majesty, by and with
More information