Core Laws to Fight Corruption

 

Laws, implemented by institutions, play an important role in the fight against corruption. In this context, this section addresses three main topics:

  Anticorruption Laws

  Access to Information

  Control of Administrative Discretion

Anticorruption Laws

Enforcing Income and Asset Declaration Laws

While many nations have enacted laws requiring public servants to disclose their income and assets, effective enforcement has often been a challenge. Detecting when a public servant's lifestyle is inconsistent with his or her disclosure statement is time-consuming and difficult, and public prosecutors may not have either the resources or skills to conduct such investigations. This gap can sometimes be filled by civil society groups, As the attached document explains, a researcher for the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism made onsite inspections of tax officials' home (or homes) and other tangible assets and compared their value against what the official earned as a tax collector.

Income and Asset Disclosure Laws in Bank Client Countries

Requiring public servants to periodically disclose their income and assets is an important tool for combatting corruption. It demonstrates a leaders commitment to anti-corruption. It helps the public to hold the government accountable, can be used effectively to curb conflicts of interests, and warns against illicit enrichment. The study summarizes the income and asset disclosure requirements of heads of state and governments of 147 World Bank client countries - disclosure being required in 101 countries, 31 of which are public, and 70 non-public. The relevant laws that set out the requirements, and the agencies responsible for the disclosures are also listed. This is a living document, corrections, updates and forms would be greatly appreciated. Please send updates and corrections to Law and Justice TG, Mail Stop 4-416, World Bank, 1818 H Street, N.w., Washington, D.C. 20433.

Using Non-criminal Laws to Combat Corruption

Although criminal law is most commonly invoked to attack corruption, often prosecution is not the only, or even the most effective way, of deterring or punishing those who take or pay bribes or otherwise corrupt the governmental process. Prevailing in a criminal case can be very difficult. To protect the rights of the accused, the laws of most nations set a very high standard of proof in criminal cases. In corruption case, this burden can be particularly difficult to meet because the acts are clandestine and there is no obvious victim ready to present evidence. Moreover, even a successful prosecution does not guarantee that the beneficiaries of corruption will have to disgorge their profits. One alternative are the remedies found in the civil (noncriminal) laws of many nations. The standard of proof is often lower than in criminal cases, and the remedy almost always includes recovery of the proceeds of the crime. In the United States, the False Claims Act provides that any citizen may bring a lawsuit against those alleged to have defrauded the federal government, and if the plaintiff succeeds, he or she is entitled to keep a percentage of the amount recovered. In South Africa, a Special Investigating Unit has been established to use the civil laws to combat corruption.

US False Claims Act

South Africa’s Special Investigative Unit

CORIS -- The Corruption Online Research Information System

CORIS is Transparency International's web-based initiative to meet the research needs of anti-corruption practitioners in accessing both published and grey literature on corruption and governance. It includes the texts of laws on subjects such as freedom of information and whistleblower protection laws.

  

Anticorruption Law: Amnesties, Money Laundering, Burden of Proof,
and Whistleblower Protection

To promote compliance with new anticorruption measures, some countries have experimented with provisions that forgive past offenses. Others have enacted new laws 1) banning money laundering, 2) requiring officials accused of corrupt behavior to explain the sources of their wealth, and 3) protecting public servants who disclose the corrupt acts of other government workers. This Anticorruption toolkit from the OECD discusses the issues raised by each of these initiatives and includes examples and case studies of how such provisions have been implemented.

 

Writing an Effective Anticorruption Law

The success of anti-corruption legislation depends crucially on the caliber of the agency that will enforce it. Where enforcers are themselves open to bribery or subject to political manipulation, the law should leave them little or no room to exercise discretion.

 

The OECD Convention on Combating Bribery

The OECD Convention requires nations adhering to it to make it a crime to offer, promise or give a bribe to a foreign public official in order to obtain or retain international business. A related text effectively puts an end to the practice of according tax deductibility for bribe payments made to foreign officials. The Convention commits signatory countries, which include the world's largest economies, to adopt common rules to punish companies and individuals who engage in bribery.

Fostering Institutions to Combat Corruption

Implementing anti-corruption measures requires an institutional framework. But endemic corruption is a systemic disease that can only be controlled with a systemic cure—no single institution will do. Effective and durable corruption control requires multiple, reinforcing, and overlapping institutions of accountability. And where corruption is endemic, these institutions need to be of three kinds: horizontal accountability, vertical accountability, and external accountability.

Notes on Conflict of Interest, Gifts, Illicit Enrichment, and Outside Employment

Among the subjects an anticorruption law should address are situations where a public servant 1) faces a conflict of interest, 2) is offered a gift, 3) is suspected of illicit enriching himself, or 4) holds a second job in the private sector. This paper discusses the questions policymakers must consider when drafting laws governing conduct in these areas.

Model Code of Conduct for Government Employees

Codes of conduct or ethics code for public servants serve a variety of purposes. They can state norms of behavior, such as the duty to treat citizens courteously, that enhance respect for government. They can also ban the receipt of gifts, conflicts of interest, the hiring of relatives, or other acts that may corrupt government operations. The legal effect of such codes can also vary. Some are voluntary while violations of others can subject the offender to administrative or criminal penalties. Below is a model code of conduct for public officials developed by the Council of Europe. It is accompanied by an explanatory memorandum and an article-by-article analysis of its provisions.

 Council of Europe Code of Conduct, English Version

 Council of Europe Code of Conduct, French Version

World Bank Anticorruption Website

The World Bank Anticorruption website focuses on preventing corruption in Bank projects, helping countries to reduce corruption, mainstreaming anticorruption measures in Bank projects, and supporting international efforts to reduce corruption.

Asset Disclosure by Public Officials

Many countries require public officials to declare their assets and wealth to reduce corruption. The purpose of obtaining public officials’ declarations is to identify what wealth is not fairly attributable to income, gifts, or loans. The World Bank's Administrative and Civil Service Thematic Group has compiled laws from 18 countries to illustrate the wide range of approaches to restraining officials’ undesirable conduct. Knowing how others countries have approached this issue can help those who are drafting officials' asset declaration laws, or making changes to existing ones.

back to top

Access to Information

A Model Freedom of Information Law

This draft law incorporates the nine principles developed by Article 19. It also includes language that would establish a commissioner to review government compliance with requests for information.

 

Defining Defamation

The free flow of information can be retarded by laws that protect the reputation of those who work for government or who are involved in public activities. Different nations will strike the balance between protecting the reputation of these individuals and providing journalists and citizens the freedom to write and speak about their actions differently, but policymakers concerned about maximizing information flow will want to review whether the balance their nation strikes reflects the public interest in information access. This paper suggests a set of principles to guide those wishing to ensure the maximum degree of information flow while still protecting individuals' reputation.

Considerations When Drafting a Whistleblower Protection Law

A government employee or other individual privy to non-public information about governmental wrongdoing may alert prosecutors, the media, or others not formally entitled to the information to deter future acts or see that past acts are sanctioned. To protect such individuals from reprisals and encourage others to come forward, several nations have enacted Whistleblower protection laws. This paper describes the common situations that give rise to whistleblowing, reviews the recent United Kingdom law extending protection to whistleblowers, and suggests a model whistleblowing law.

Strengthening Access to Information and Public Participation in Government Decision Making in Transition Countries

All governments face the challenge of controlling administrative discretion, of reconciling technocratic knowledge with the concerns of ordinary citizens and thus giving effect to democratic values in circumstances where hierarchy and expertise cannot be avoided. Developed countries exercise control through a mix of parliamentary oversight, review by courts or specialized tribunals, and less formal means involving pressure on the bureaucracy through consultative mechanisms, lobbying, and other forms of citizen activism. This paper argues that legal reformers in transition countries have paid insufficient attention to control of administrative discretion and that there are a variety of mechanisms, some more formal than others, that offer promising avenues for channeling civil society oversight and giving more effective voice to citizen activism, particularly in countries with effective, contested government.

 

back to top

Control of Administrative Discretion

Administrative Procedures and the Supervision of Administration in Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, and Albania

This paper addresses administrative law and institutions in five Eastern European countries. The first part of the paper looks at administrative procedures. The second section addresses the various forms of judicial and non-judicial supervision of the countries' administrations, including ombudsmen, inspectorates and special commissions, the prosecutor, and parliamentary committees.

 

 

back to top