The Fight Against Corruption

Introduction

First of all, it must be said that – unfortunately - bribery is a widespread phenomenon.

It raises serious moral, economic and political concerns, undermines good governance, hinders development and distorts competition. It erodes justice, undermines human rights and is an obstacle to the relief of poverty. It also increases the cost of doing business, introduces uncertainties into commercial transactions, increases the cost of goods and services, diminishes the quality of products and services, which may lead to loss of life and property, destroys trust in institutions and interferes with the efficient operation of markets.

Governments – as we wil see - have made progress in addressing bribery through international agreements such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions and the United Nations Convention against Corruption and through their national laws. In most jurisdictions, it is an offence for individuals to engage in bribery and there is a growing trend to make organizations as well as individuals liable for bribery.

Nevertheless, the law alone is not sufficient to solve this problem: corruption is also a global phenomenon, indeed, over the past two decades, large improvements have been rare, if progress is made it is thanks to continuous and difficult work over decades. Drawing on Rose-Ackerman and Palifka, corrupt acts include the following actions (among others):

• •

  Payment of bribes (offered or extorted) to get public services or to evade taxes;

• •

  Embezzlement and public service fraud, even if not involving bribes (for example, officials may steal money from investment funds);

• •

  Nepotism, or cronyism to benefit a particular family or group;

• •

  Buying influence and conflicts of interest, when individuals take advantage of their position in government to extract favors or personal benefits from a government decision. Kleptocracy is the most extreme form of state capture, in which the state is managed to maximize the personal wealth of its leaders.

When corrupt activities are pervasive and deeply concealed in the public sector, it can have significant negative impacts in other areas, including regulatory and judicial State functions. Beyond the leakage of funds, the effects include the negative impact on the quality of public policies; wasted talent and effort in the private sector, to which economic revenues and works are denied in favors to individuals and firms engage in unproductive activities; the curb of economic growth (Krueger, 1974, pp. 291-303).

There are essentially three rationales that underpin criminalization of corruptive behavior and the fight against public corruption in general, both in a domestic and an international context:

• •

  The need to uphold the integrity of the public administration and the confidence of citizens in the public administration;

• •

  Safeguard the proper functioning of the public administration;

• •

  The necessity to safeguard the transparent functioning of the market and fair competition.

The internationalization of the fight against corruption should of course in the first place be explained by reference to the internationalization of the phenomenon of corruption itself, that is that an increasing number of corruption cases involves a foreign element (International Monetary Fund, 2019, pp. 39-41). The Multidisciplinary Group Against Corruption, which was set up by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers in 1994, identified four parameters which are important in distinguishing corruption cases: the persons involved; the service rendered; the undue advantage that is offered; circumstances in which that advantage is offered. Each of these parameters may involve a foreign element, which allows qualifying a corruption case as international, or transnational (Jaeger, 1988, p. 163).