Author Archives: Richard Messick

Opportunity for Civil Society Organizations Concerned with Corruption to Provide Input to 4th International Conference on Financing for Development

Posted on by
Reply

The UNCAC Coalition, a global network of close to 400 civil society organizations in over 120 countries committed to furthering implementation and monitoring of the UN Convention against Corruption, urges CSO’s working on corruption to provide input to the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4).

UN Member States will there decide how to resource the pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals, international development, and support reform of the international financial architecture. 

The Conference will take place from 30 June to 3 July 2025 in Spain. The consultation that will inform the negotiations is open until 15 October COB EST (find more details below).For corruption to feature prominently as a cross-cutting issue, it is crucial that as many civil society organizations and other stakeholders as possible make their own submissions.

Continue reading →

Guest Post: First Country Ratifies the Asset Declaration Treaty

Posted on by
Reply

Requiring public official to disclose their assets, income, and other information about their personal finances can be an important tool for curbing corruption — as any number of posts on this blog have shown (examples here, here, and here. The program’s effectiveness depends crucially on the ability to verify the disclosures’ accuracy and in particular the ease with which verifiers can determine if an official has hidden assets abroad. A new Treaty greatly facilitates this task. Its ratification should be at the top of national anticorruption authorities to do list.

GAB is pleased to publish this guest post explaining the Treaty and its origins authored by Tilman Hoppe, an international expert on asset declarations, who played the critical role in the Treaty’s development.

Effective August 23, 2024, North Macedonia has ratified the “International Treaty on Exchange of Data for the Verification of Asset Declarations.” By doing so, North Macedonia has written history. The Treaty is the first and only mechanism for cross-border data exchange for the verification of asset declarations. Three more countries have signed the Treaty and will now have to catch up in ratifying. Other countries are about to sign – any country may join the Treaty, as may the European Union as a bloc.

The Treaty addresses the following gap: Corrupt public officials hide their wealth abroad. At the same time, bodies verifying asset declarations lack access to data abroad. This is the number one reason cited by verification bodies to explain why they can only unlock a fraction of asset declarations’ potential: Following wealth usually stops at domestic borders. Neither the UNCAC nor any other international treaty address this problem.

A significant advance in international efforts to curb corruption, the Treaty emerged from an unlikely set of circumstances:

Continue reading →

UNCAC Coalition Seeks Input on Improvements to UNCAC Implementation Review Mechanism

Posted on by
Reply

GAB just learned of the UNCAC Coalition’s request for comments on a paper recommending ways to strengthen review of state’s compliance with the provisions of the UN Convention Against Corruption. Though the timeline is tight (August 8) and it’s the height of vacation season for Northern Hemisphere readers, please take a moment to examine the paper and offer thoughts. This is an important initiative by one of the NGOs leading the fight to combat corruption in all nations.

The UNCAC Coalition is launching a campaign calling for States to make the UNCAC review mechanism #FitForPurpose. The aim is for the next UNCAC Conference of the States Parties (CoSP) in 2025 to agree on a stronger review mechanism for the next review phase. We want to make sure that our campaign reflects the experiences and views of our global anti-corruption community.

The Coalition’s proposals to strengthen and improve the IRM are described in this Google Doc – please provide your input and thoughts by 8 August, by adding comments there (including your name and organization).

We are seeking your feedback on 

  1. whether there are elements that are missing or could be better formulated, 
  2. whether you agree with the proposed measures, and
  3. which elements should be prioritized.

We will use your input and feedback to refine the priorities of our advocacy over the next one and a half years as States discuss and negotiate what the next phase of the UNCAC IRM will look like. 

There is wide agreement that the UNCAC review mechanism in its current phase has numerous weaknesses that make it ineffective in holding States to account for their anti-corruption commitments, including a lack of transparency and inclusiveness, a lengthy and inefficient review process and no structured follow-up process.

Whistleblowers in Ukraine: Successes and Challenges in Ukraine

Posted on by
Reply

The Anti-Corruption Research and Education Center (ACREC), Kyiv, Ukraine, and the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) are pleased to invite you to the Fourth Annual Conference “Whistleblowers in Ukraine: Successes and Challenges,” which will be held on July 10, 2024, from 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM. Kyiv time.

The event aims to bring together activists, representatives of non-governmental organizations, judges, whistleblowers, authorized officials, employees of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), international experts, political figures, and compliance managers to discuss opportunities for improving Ukraine’s legislation on whistleblowers. The event will feature three panel discussions and two workshops.

The event will be held online via the Zoom platform, where viewers will be able to actively participate in the conference. Please confirm your participation in the event by filling in this short form: https://forms.gle/DaF6T32Jd5GXMLQa7.

International Parliaments Day June 30.  On It and Everyday Work with Parliaments to Combat Corruption

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday June 30 is the International Day of Parliamentarism, dedicated to the celebration of parliaments around the world, and the work they do for democracy. Today’s Guest Post, by Franklin De Vrieze, Head of Practice Accountability, Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD) and Kristen Sample, Director of Democratic Governance, National Democratic Institute (NDI), reminds that parliaments can and should play an important role in taming corruption.

From June 18 to 21 more than 2,000 civil society activists, journalists, government officials and private sector actors convened at the International Anti-Corruption Conference (IACC) in Vilnius, Lithuania, to discuss lessons learned and good practices for the fight against corruption.

The Conference was an excellent opportunity to highlight the stories of courageous activists and reformers from around the world.  Lithuania’s journey from Soviet subjugation to developed democracy in just a few short decades was an inspiring backdrop for discussions covering transparency, participation, and political integrity.

In an event that was otherwise impeccably conceived and executed, there was one blind spot: the limited discussion about and participation of legislators, an omission that is unfortunately far from the exception.

Continue reading →

Invaluable Guide to Fighting Corruption — at a Bargain Basement Price

Posted on by
Reply

Mark Pyman and Paul Heywood’s Sector-Based Action Against Corruption: A Guide for Organizations and Professionals is not for everyone. If your goal is to improve a nation’s CPI score, attack grand corruption, or realize some other broadly stated, national level objective, stop here.

But if, as the authors explain, you “need to acquire competence in recognizing, analyzing and dealing with corruption” in a particular organization or process, and if you believe that “corruption Is as much a management issue as it is a political one,” download it immediately. (And thank whoever made this must-have book open-source.)

Pyman’s and Heywood’s careers both combine hands-on work helping government agencies and corporations curb corruption with serious engagement with the learning on corruption. And it shows. From the rigor they insist be brought to bear to specify identifiable, tractable corruption problems (corruption due to a non-meritocratic civil service is not one; conflict of interest in hiring is) to the disciplined approach they present for selecting the best measures for remedying them.

They break the process for “recognizing, analyzing, and dealing with corruption” into four steps labeled SFRA:

Continue reading →

Guest Post: From Revolution to Reform — Tracing Armenia’s Anti-Corruption Landscape

Posted on by
Reply

It is now two decades plus since the fight against corruption emerged as a major issue. One that has been a particular challenge in nations still struggling to overcome the legacy of communism. Today’s Guest Post tracks recent progress Armenia, where voters in 2018 traded a deeply corrupt, semi authoritarian government for one promising both less corruption and more democracy. Its authors: Jeffrey Hallock, a PhD candidate at American University researching anti-corruption reform strategies, and a researcher at the Accountability Research Center utilizing open government data to analyze U.S. foreign funding trends, and Karine Ghahramanyan, a senior at the American University of Armenia pursuing a degree in Politics and Governance.

Armenia, a landlocked country of 2.8 million, sits in the middle of a region defined by political uncertainty. Six years after Nikol Pashinyan spearheaded Armenia’s Velvet Revolution with a promise to eradicate systemic corruption, many regard Prime Minister Pashinyan’s efforts as stalling. Although corruption has noticeably decreased since 2018 (here), the government’s initial emphasis on anti-corruption measures has been overtaken by urgent security considerations, its 2020 defeat by neighbor and long-time adversary Azerbaijan followed by unsettling developments in neighbors Georgia, Turkey, and Iran.

Armenia’s burgeoning democracy and recent reforms have helped strengthen its position amid broader volatility, contributing to economic growth and deepening relations with democratic allies. Yet the government is under mounting pressure to recommit to the principles of transparency and accountability that gave legitimacy to the 2018 revolution.

The Pashinyan administration offers lessons on how to capitalize on a window of opportunity to advance consequential anti-corruption gains, as well as insights on when the spark of the revolution fades into the reality of quotidian government reform.

Continue reading →

Towards Preventing Corruption During Ukraine’s Reconstruction: Bilingual Compilation of Ukrainian Procurement Laws

Posted on by
Reply

Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has inflicted massive damage on the country’s infrastructure, a half trillion dollars and growing daily (here). While Ukraine’s government is just beginning the massive task of letting contracts for the reconstruction of schools, hospitals, and other public works destroyed by Russian bombs and artillery shells, reports are already circulating that corruption has infected the procurement of some large works.

Fighting corruption in procurement is about much more than tightening and strictly enforcing laws on what to buy from whom. Rules governing political contributions, gifts to officeholders, conflicts of interest and business practices that facilitate bid rigging are all part of the equation. But preventing and detecting corruption in government contracting starts with what the law does (or doesn’t) say about who makes purchasing decisions and how specifications are drawn, contractors selected, and performance assured.

The fight against corruption in Ukrainian reconstruction just got an important boost. An online data base of some 450 Ukrainian statutes and Cabinet decrees along with English summaries is now available here. Included is everything from the text of ProZorro, Ukraine’s award-winning e-procurement law to statutes on permitting and land use to detailed rules governing the construction of roads and ports. A dropdown menu allows users to search by topic – critical infrastructure, damaged property, public procurement, urban development – or hone in on a specific area such as construction standards, PPPs, or telecommunications.

The database will help frontline corruption fighters – in the Ukrainian government, civil society organizations, and those overseeing reconstruction funding – determine if procurement rules are being observed in a project. Vigorous competition for procurement contracts is perhaps the most important way to curb corruption. By offering a free guide to Ukrainian procurement law, the database reduces the cost to new or foreign firms of preparing bids, increasing the chances more companies will bid on a project and thus spurring competition.

The database is the result of a heroic, pro bono effort by a squad of multilingual lawyers at the international law firm Debevoise & Plimpton aided by Ukraine’s Institute for Legislative Ideas. It was the brainchild of Jennifer Widner, Princeton University professor and director of the University’s Innovations for Successful Societies, and Oksana Nesterenko, head of the Anticorruption Research & Education Centre at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. Both provided guidance and overall direction. Worth MacMurray, president and chief executive officer of the Coalition for Integrity, oversaw Debevoise’s work on behalf of ISS. The project is part of a larger effort by ISS and ACREC to prevent corruption during Ukrainian reconstruction.

Sri Lankan Bill on Proceeds of Crime and Corruption Damage Actions

Posted on by
Reply

A distinguished group of Sri Lankan judges and lawyers recently released draft legislation to recover the proceeds of crime and compensate corruption victims. Prepared at the request of Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, enactment of such a bill is one of conditions of the $2.9 billion International Monetary Fund loan to stabilize the economy and restore economic growth.

While the proposed legislation exceeds the IMF requirement, providing for both criminal and non-conviction-based forfeiture of the proceeds of any crime, its overriding significance is it offers means for recovering the hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars corrupt officials have stolen from Sri Lankan citizens. The bill also establishes administrative procedures for compensating those injured by the corrupt act that generated the confiscated assets and granting anyone harmed by corruption the right to bring a civil action for damages.

The bill is accompanied by a clearly written report spelling out its provisions and explaining their rationale. A very nice diagram illistrates how the various freezing, seizure, and confiscation provisions will operate. Those in other nations struggling to write their own asset recovery or victim compensation legislation will find much of value in the Sri Lankans’ effort. (Text of bill with report and diagram here.)

At the same time, the bill is still in draft. Its authors welcome comments and critiques from Sri Lankans and international observers. Comments can be sent directly to the Ministry of Justice. Or GAB will be pleased to forward them to the appropriate personnel.

UPDATE. GAB just learned that Transparency International Sri Lanka has also posted a request for comments on the bill along with a brief explanation of the bill importance and the need for public input in English, Sinhalese, and Tamil here. The link includes an address to which comments can be sent.

What the Next UK Government Likely to do About Corruption

Posted on by
2

If polls are to be believed, on July 4 the Labour Party will take control of the government of the (still!) United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Professor Robert Barrington (Centre for the Study of Corruption) was one of the architects of the Cameron government’s Anti-Corruption Summit in 2016. Below he reviews a recent speech from Labour MP David Lammy, almost certain to be Foreign Secretary in a Labour government. Given the UK’s role in the international fight against corruption, Lammy’s remarks will be of interest to more than just UK voters.

Somewhat lost in the noise of the UK’s general election announcement was a major speech by Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy at the think-tank IPPR.  It was reported here in the Financial Times, but hardly anywhere else.  As Mr Lammy is likely to be the UK’s new Foreign Secretary on July 5th, anti-corruption experts should be paying close attention to what he said.  Moreover, this is the most significant speech made to date by a senior politician in the opposition party, and so gives the best clue as to what might happen should they win the election.  This analysis contains lengthy quotations, as the speech does not seem yet to be easily accessible.

Continue reading →