The overarching issues under review are: (a) whether the Bank needs to strengthen and/or expand its contractual remedies; and (b) whether and if so how, the exercise/enforcement of remedies by the Bank could be made more consistent and effective.
The issues that the review team is examining include:
Adequacy of Existing Remedies: Is the Bank’s arsenal of remedies too few, too many or just enough?
Consistency in Exercise of Remedies: Should the exercise of remedies be automatic and consistent regardless of country/project circumstances? Is the Bank’s exercise of remedies consistent and uniform?
Concept of Proportionality: Should remedies be proportionate to the "harm" done? If so, how will such proportionality be measured and by whom?
Evidence: The principal Bank remedies for Fraud and Corruption (F&C) in the General Conditions are based on the Bank's determination that F&C has occurred. What standard of proof should be adopted to determine whether evidence of F&C is sufficient to justify the exercise of contractual remedies? Right to Cure and Information Sharing: Since the principal remedies for F&C are predicated on a failure by the borrower to take 'timely and appropriate action', does this mean that the borrower must be given enough information to take such action before the Bank may exercise its F&C-related remedies? If because of confidentiality concerns or otherwise the Bank cannot do this, should the Bank refrain from exercising its F&C-related remedies?