The Role of the Fund in Governance Issues – Review of the Guidance Note – Preliminary Considerations – Background Notes

The Role of the Fund in Governance Issues - Review of the Guidance Note - Preliminary Considerations - Background Notes


The Role of the Fund in Governance Issues - Review of the Guidance Note - Preliminary Considerations - Background Notes

Note II. Governance and Anti-Corruption Initiatives in International, Regional, and Other Fora1

The Fund’s work on governance and corruption has progressed in tandem with a number of initiatives addressing governance and anti-corruption being undertaken by various other international and regional organizations. In addition, there are other initiatives, such as those by the G20 and the Anti-Corruption Summit in London. This Note summarizes some of these initiatives. The Annex outlines the ongoing work of a number of key organizations. While it is difficult to know what impact the various initiatives are having, their very existence, breadth, and variety demonstrate the importance that the international community attaches to promoting good governance and tackling corruption.

A. Overview

1. Strengthening governance and countering corruption is a priority for several international and regional organizations as well as several multilateral groups, such as the G20 and Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Since the 1990s, engagement in this area has been at various levels. International and regional organizations have established treaties, conventions, “soft law2” texts, and capacity development (CD) projects; countries have enacted laws and established anti-corruption agencies; while other multilateral and civil society initiatives have developed anti-corruption and good governance policies, best practices, action plans, and awareness raising activities.

2. Tackling corruption became a growing concern in the early 1990s. Many developing countries were increasingly exposed to a globalized environment where sound macroeconomic policies, transparent and accountable public institutions, and protection of property and investors’ rights became prerequisites for attracting foreign direct investment. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 (FCPA) of the United States (US) that was enacted in the wake of the Watergate scandal and the subsequent Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation was the first to comprehensively address the issue of corruption and, in particular, it criminalized foreign bribery.3 Building on the success of the FCPA, the world’s biggest economies started focusing on corruption, in particular the “supply” side of corruption—the bribery of foreign officials—culminating in the 1997 Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD Convention), which entered into force in 1999. At the same time, the United Nations (UN) adopted an anti-corruption declaration,4 the Organization of American States (OAS) adopted the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption (1996), and the European Commission (EC) issued an anti-corruption Communication to the European Council and the European Parliament (1997). These were followed by, among others, anti-corruption conventions adopted by the European Union (EU),5 Council of Europe,6 the South African Development Community (SADC),7 and the African Union (AU).8

3. The end of the Cold War and the dawn of an increasingly globalized and private sector driven world with the spreading of more open and accountable practices of government brought greater international focus. With globalization bringing about a competitive environment and rising international trade and flows of capital, pressure for transparency, accountability, and good governance increased. During this time, the UN, OECD, EU, the World Bank, and other international organizations established various conventions and policies regarding governance and corruption.

B. Key Initiatives

4. The 2003 United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), which entered into force in 2005, ranks among the most important anti-corruption initiatives. The first international legal instrument on corruption, UNCAC includes obligations on preventive measures, criminalization of corrupt practices, asset recovery, establishment of anti-corruption agencies, enforcement measures, and international cooperation.9

5. Beyond UNCAC, many other initiatives to promote good governance, transparency, and accountability and to address corruption have been undertaken by international and regional organizations, multilateral groups, and nations. Some of these initiatives directly address corruption and bribery, while some others cover transparency and accountability in the management of natural resources; fiscal and financial transparency and management, including public procurement; anti-money laundering measures related to corruption; and guidance and high level principles on matters inextricably linked to corruption, such as transparency of legal persons and beneficial ownership. For example, fighting corruption stands at the heart of the Sustainable Development Goals. Also, the World Bank Group considers corruption a major challenge to its institutional goals of ending extreme poverty by 2030 and boosting shared prosperity for the poorest 40 percent in developing countries.10 The Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (StAR) (with UNODC), the World Governance Indicators, country assessments, and numerous guidelines are some of the World Bank’s initiatives. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the anti-money laundering (AML) standard-setter, included anti-corruption elements in the 2012 revisions to the international AML standard. Another example is the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, launched in 2002 by the United Kingdom, which now includes a standard to be voluntarily adhered to by participating countries and companies. The UN, OECD, EU and G20 have all issued guidelines, recommendations, and guiding principles on transparency, foreign bribery, corruption, and other governance issues.

C. Role of Multilateral and Civil Society Organizations

6. Multilateral groups and some nations have also been instrumental in progressing the anti-corruption agenda. As already mentioned, the G20 and APEC have issued several initiatives (see Annex to this Note). The US’s FCPA inspired the OECD Bribery Convention, which in turn spawned a number of national laws similar to the FCPA. The enactment of strong anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws by countries such as the United Kingdom, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and Singapore were landmark achievements.11 The United Kingdom’s 2016 Anti-Corruption London Summit (London Summit) focused on and highlighted anti-corruption issues and has resulted in forty countries signing to general principles and a global declaration. It also elicited specific commitments by countries and international organizations.

7. Parallel actions by civil society organizations (CSOs) have also been critical. Nongovernmental organizations and other CSOs play a growing role in publicizing issues of corruption; driving good governance, accountability, and transparency initiatives; and assisting in garnering political will and monitoring aid spending. Transparency International (TI, founded in 1993) played a pivotal role in the adoption of the OECD Bribery Convention. Together with the TI, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the Business and Industry Advisory Committee to the OECD, and the Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (TUAC), were critical in raising awareness in the early 1990s and continue to do so. Corruption and governance indicators and assessments are published by TI12 and other organizations, such as the Political Risk Services Group, which publishes the International Country Risk Guides, and the International Institute for Management Development, which publishes the World Competitiveness Reports.13 Others, such as Global Witness, have focused on the extractive industry. In-country CSOs have also contributed to efforts to address corruption and promote governance, transparency, and accountability in specific countries.

D. Parallel and Complementary Work of Sectoral Networks

8. In addition, sectoral networks have also focused on specific areas of governance and corruption. These are global and regional anti-corruption networks and multi-stakeholder initiatives that have focused on specific areas, such as fiscal transparency (global initiative on financial transparency), the business sector (Global Compact, Partnering Against Corruption Initiative), the construction sector (Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, Global Infrastructure Anti-Corruption Centre), the defense sector (International Forum on Business Ethical Conduct for the Aerospace and Defense Industry), and the financial sector (Financial Transparency Coalition).14

E. Broad Conclusions

9. A number of broad conclusions can be drawn from the foregoing discussion of governance and anti-corruption initiatives.

  • Governance and anti-corruption efforts carried out around the world cover a very wide range of issues and are implemented through a wide variety of tools. International and regional organizations have established treaties, conventions, “soft law” texts, and CD projects, while other initiatives have developed anti-corruption, good governance, and transparency policies, best practices, guiding principles, action plans, awareness raising, and outreach activities.

  • The treaties, conventions, and “soft law” texts include obligations, commitments, and recommendations that cover preventive measures, criminalization of corrupt acts, enforcement action, asset recovery, international cooperation, and relations with the media and civil society.

  • The vast majority of states around the world are legally bound by anti-corruption-specific treaty obligations. For example, UNCAC has been ratified and/or acceded to by 181 countries around the world, while three countries (Barbados, Japan, and Syria) have signed but not ratified the UNCAC.

  • As further outlined in the Annex to this Note, each institution undertakes governance and anti-corruption initiatives that are closely linked to its mandate. The mandate of these institutions, and hence the scope of the initiatives, is very diverse. These mandates include those to address and reduce corruption; promote governance and transparency; strengthen development; reduce poverty and bolster confidence in markets; protect democratic institutions; support economic and social development and governmental stability; promote effective growth; protect human rights, democracy, and the rule of law; and enhance democratic processes and citizens’ confidence in the political system. Most economic-oriented organizations look at governance and corruption from a development perspective.

  • A number of these international and regional organizations have also included internal good governance and transparency rules and procedures, many having done so in the wake of the UN Food for Oil investigations that commenced in 2004. Among these are the World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB), EU, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).

  • The actions of the various international and regional organizations potentially have a much stronger impact when they are anchored into treaty obligations (be it specific anti-corruption treaties or treaties constituting the international institution itself (e.g., a statute).

  • Increasingly, the monitoring and evaluation of implementation of measures are being introduced by international and regional institutions and play an important role in assessing progress and generating greater compliance. Examples include the peer review mechanisms of the EU, Council of Europe’s Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO), and the FATF.

  • Most (if not all) of the international and regional organizations provide—under one form or another—CD to its members.

  • Overall, while it is difficult to know what impact the various initiatives are having, their very existence, breadth, and variety demonstrate the importance that the international community attaches to promoting good governance and tackling corruption.

Annex I of Note II. Compendium of Key Initiatives

International Institutions or Initiatives

This section of the Annex outlines the initiatives of some key international organizations and multilateral institutions that support governance and counter corruption.

The United Nations (UN)

1. The UN covers three main areas: treaty making (and compliance thereto), awareness raising, and capacity development (CD). Key initiatives include the following:

  • United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC):

    • The UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) (2003) is the most comprehensive and global treaty against corruption,1 which also includes a review mechanism. 181 states are parties to it. The Convention’s Implementation Review Mechanism is a peer review process that is now in its second five-year cycle and assesses how countries are implementing the Convention in their legal, institutional, and enforcement systems at the domestic and international level. Designed to assist states in the effective implementation of the Convention, the Review Mechanism is based on principles of transparency, efficiency, and impartiality and provides opportunities to share good practices. It has been recognized, inter alia, for its impact on legislative and institutional reform, for providing a platform for peer-to-peer learning, and for creating a global network of anti-corruption practitioners. The data gathered through the reviews creates the most comprehensive set of legislative and other measures to counter corruption and is available through UNODC’s legal library.

    • UNODC, in partnership with the World Bank, established in 2007 the Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (StAR). StAR works to end safe havens for corrupt funds through country engagements, knowledge development, policy contributions, partnerships and communications. StAR’s comparative advantage is based on its capacity to leverage expertise and high-level political contacts, as well as acting as a neutral third party and technical adviser to facilitate international cooperation. The past two years saw a heightened profile for asset recovery on the international agenda, including with illicit financial flows and asset recovery becoming more prominent in the discussions around development. The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals and the Addis Ababa Agenda for Action bolstered the case for more concrete action on asset recovery. At the UK Anti-Corruption Summit held in May 2016, the crucial importance of asset recovery was further reaffirmed.

    • CD projects to enhance the anti-corruption capacity of states: Through staff at headquarters in Austria and a network of regional anti-corruption advisers based in the field, UNODC provides technical assistance to states to strengthen their legislative and institutional frameworks and to build capacity to prevent, detect, investigate, and prosecute corruption. Such assistance is provided to address technical assistance needs and recommendations emanating from the review mechanism as well as other requests. Regional anti-corruption advisers are perfectly placed to identify specific regional and national needs and to support existing or new regional coordination mechanisms and South-South cooperation. UNODC also works closely with other important stakeholders to ensure a comprehensive response to preventing and combating corruption, including the private sector, civil society, and the academia.

  • The United Nations Development Program (UNDP):

    • UNDP’s involvement in anti-corruption activities includes: (i) the promotion of public sector reform; (ii) the strengthening of governing institutions, such as those related to the judiciary, elections, parliaments, anti-corruption and human rights; (iii) governance in special circumstances (crisis and transition countries); and (iv) strengthening social accountability mechanisms through involvement of women and youth to monitor provision of services.

    • It also encompasses the Global Anti-Corruption Initiative (2014–2016) with its successor global project on Anti-Corruption for Peaceful and Inclusive Societies (ACPIS) 2016–20.

  • Sustainable Development Goals:

    • In September 2015, countries committed to 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aimed at ending extreme poverty, fighting inequality and injustice, and fixing climate change. Goal 16 of the SDGs is dedicated to the promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, the provision of access to justice for all, and the building of effective and accountable institutions at all levels. Targets for Goal 16 include the following: substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms; by 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets, and combat all forms of organized crime; develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels; and broaden and strengthen the participation of developing countries in the institutions of global governance. In addition, addressing corruption is an implicit cross-cutting goal as corruption can impede the achievement of all of the other SDG goals.

  • During the London Anti-Corruption Summit held in May 2016, the UN committed to promote compliance with international standards of integrity and transparency and, in particular, UNODC and UNDP would seek to accelerate the practical implementation of UNCAC and SDG 16. Seventeen (17) specific action plan items were included in the commitment

The World Bank Group (WBG)

2. The WBG confronts corruption through a broad variety of engagements and interventions. At the most basic level, each WBG lending engagement includes an analysis of different types of risk to the potential project, including risks related to corruption. All lending projects contain financial management and procurement rules that are designed to ensure proper oversight and prudence. Those rules are often augmented by special measures to increase oversight and monitoring in those cases where corruption risks are determined to be elevated. The implementation of corruption-related measures is monitored on a regular basis through supervision missions, where progress across all project elements are reviewed.

3. The governance-related aspects of project lending are supported by mechanisms that enable any individual to notify the World Bank of concerns they have regarding corruption in a World Bank-supported project. A special unit of the World Bank, the Integrity Vice-Presidency, reviews complaints of corruption and undertakes investigations of complaints. Each year, the INT VP conducts approximately 60 investigations and debars a substantial number of firms based upon its findings. The World Bank’s project-level oversight is also strengthened by the commitment to beneficiary feedback for all projects where there are specific beneficiaries.

4. The World Bank also has an extensive portfolio of engagements with countries to enhance integrity and confront corruption. Those engagements span from work on establishing anti-corruption agencies to support for the development of systems for financial disclosure to assistance in building more effective judicial and legal systems. Related work supports the strengthening of key institutions that play an important role in accountability from supreme audit institutions to parliament and internal audit. Over the last several years, the WBG has also increased its involvement in increasing openness and transparency through support to the implementation of e-government projects, as well as assistance in introducing Right to Information Laws, and specific initiatives, such as Open Contracting and Open Budgets. The World Bank’s work on tax administration, often performed in conjunction with the Fund, features work particularly on addressing tax evasion and increasing transparency in the provision of tax holidays and in the signing of tax treaties—two areas that are can be distorted through corrupt acts. An expanding program of work in the area of procurement engages countries in every region on efforts to improve procurement effectiveness and reduce corruption.

5. Work on improving governance and addressing corruption at the center is complemented by efforts at the sectoral level to enhance accountability. For example, the World Bank has extensive programs of support for the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). In addition, the WBG offers particular assistance in strategic areas such as the signing of high-value contracts in extractive industries in order to increase transparency and expertise.

6. The WBG also provides specific assistance to countries in identifying money laundering risks and in helping countries recover stolen assets relating to corruption. The World Bank’s StAR Initiative, done in conjunction with the UNODC, has been instrumental in enabling countries to recover large sums of money and in building local capacity to allow mutual legal assistance.

7. During the London Summit, the WBG committed to support integrity in public sector institutions and work with governments, civil society groups, the private sector, and international organizations to support implementation of the UNCAC and compliance with global standards for transparency and accountability. Specific commitments were made, among others, on building capacity, supporting implementation of AML obligations, recovery of stolen assets, and tax and public procurement reform.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

8. The OECD takes a multidisciplinary approach to fighting corruption and promoting good governance in areas such as fighting bribery of foreign public officials, fiscal policy, public sector governance and private sector integrity, and development aid and export credits. Key initiatives include the following:

  • The OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions (opened for signature in 1997 and entered into force in 1999), which is the cornerstone of the OECD anti-corruption efforts. Forty-one states, including non-OECD members, have ratified it and it includes a peer review mechanism;

  • The Network on Governance (GOVNET) of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) —Operates within the OECD as a forum for development agencies and partner countries that aims to improve the effectiveness of donor assistance in support of democratic governance in developing countries;

  • Several other instruments have been adopted by the OECD Council, such as:

    • The 2017 Recommendation on Public Integrity;

    • The 2016 Recommendation for Development Co-operation Actors on Managing the Risk of Corruption;

    • The 2010 Recommendation on Principles for Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying;2

    • The 2009 Recommendation for Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions;3

    • The 2003 Recommendation on OECD Guidelines for Managing Conflict of Interest in the Public Service;

    • The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises,4 and related Decision which requires adherents to set up national contact points to further the effectiveness of the Guidelines and Recommendations on Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains; and

    • The 2006 Recommendation on Bribery and Officially Supported Export Credits.5

  • During the London Summit, the OECD committed to strengthening the impact and effectiveness of its on-going anti-corruption efforts and increasing its capacity to provide strong analytical support and indicators base, establishing an Anti-Corruption Centre, fostering synergies, and supporting governments as well as other stakeholders in addressing corruption. The OECD also made five specific commitments, including supporting the enforcement of foreign bribery laws, countering the misuse of legal persons and arrangements, and promoting integrity and accountability.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF)

9. The FATF, an inter-governmental body established in 1989 by the ministers of its members, sets standards and promotes effective implementation of legal, regulatory, and operational measures for combating money laundering (ML), terrorist financing (after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks), and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. Its focus on anti-corruption stems from the inextricable link between corruption and money laundering. Its main instrument—the FATF Recommendations—is designed to combat ML and terrorist financing, but when effectively implemented, the Recommendations can also help combat corruption. The revised FATF Recommendations of 2012 place a greater emphasis on action against corruption. This is reflected in countries’ obligation to ratify and implement the UNCAC, including corruption and tax evasion as predicate offenses to ML, and in the type of measures that certain private sector firms should take. These firms are required to apply enhanced due diligence not only to individuals who are or have been entrusted with prominent public functions by a foreign country—the so-called “Politically Exposed Persons” or PEPs— (as was the case previously), but also, on a risk basis, to domestic PEPs and individuals who are or have been entrusted with those functions by an international organization and have to report suspicious transactions, including those suspected to be linked to corruption. The FATF Recommendations also require financial intelligence units to transmit to law enforcement information they regard as being linked to crimes, such as ML, TF, and corruption. They also refer to the ability of law enforcement officers to identify, trace, and confiscate assets, a key aspect of the UNCAC.

10. The mutual evaluation or assessment process is among the FATF’s main strengths. In February 2013, the FATF adopted a new assessment methodology which calls for assessment against the entire standard and more focus on the effectiveness of the anti-money laundering/counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) framework. The FATF recently also adopted a best practices paper on the use of the FATF Recommendations to combat corruption. The paper aims at providing policy makers and practitioners with guidance and best practices on how AML/CFT measures can be used to combat corruption. Additionally, in June 2013, the FATF published a guidance paper on how to implement the FATF standards relevant to PEPs. The FATF, jointly with the G20 Anti-Corruption Working Group, also holds an annual meeting which brings together anti-corruption experts and AML/CFT experts to discuss issues of common interest. The FATF meeting held in Paris in October 2016 focused on countries’ experiences in implementing the international standards on transparency and beneficial ownership and the related implications for anti-corruption and AML/CFT efforts.


11. Reducing corruption remains a top priority for the G20, as corruption is a severe impediment to economic growth and a significant challenge for developed, emerging, and developing countries. As major trading nations, the G20 members have a special responsibility to prevent and tackle corruption, to establish legal and policy frameworks that promote a clean business environment, and to continue to assist G20 countries in their capacity building efforts to combat corruption.

12. Since 2010, the work of the G20 Anti-Corruption Working Group (ACWG) has been guided by two-year action plans. So far, the G20 has issued Principles on Denial of Safe Haven (2012), Asset Disclosure by Public Officials (2012), Combatting Solicitation (2013), Mutual Legal Assistance (2013), Enforcement of the Foreign Bribery Offence (2013), Beneficial Ownership Transparency (2014), Corruption and Growth (2014), Private Sector Transparency and Integrity (2015), Open Data (2015), Integrity in Public Procurement (2015), and Cooperation on Persons Sought for Corruption and Asset Recovery (2016).

13. The G20 Anti-Corruption Action Plan 2017–2018 and the more detailed Implementation Plan 2017–2018 specifically focus on the following areas:

  • Practical cooperation • Beneficial ownership

  • Private sector integrity and transparency

  • Bribery

  • Public sector integrity and transparency

  • Vulnerable sectors

  • International Organizations

  • Capacity building.

14. In line with the Action and Implementation Plans, in 2017, the ACWG will focus on developing High Level Principles on the Liability of Legal Persons for Corruption Offenses as well as on Organizing Against Corruption. This will involve structuring the public administration to detect and minimize corruption risks. The ACWG will further focus on combating corruption related to the illegal wildlife trade and on corruption in sports.

15. The ACWG cooperates with other G20 tracks. It addresses issues closely related to the G20 anti-corruption agenda and continues to support and cooperate closely with the work of relevant international organizations, including the OECD, the UNODC, the FATF, the World Bank, and the Fund. The ACWG will continue to reach out to businesses and civil society, their support being essential for successfully fighting corruption.

The Commonwealth Secretariat

16. The Commonwealth Secretariat has assisted governments in tackling systemic corruption by supporting the sharing of best practices, training and capacity-building, and policy research. Its anti-corruption work encompasses strengthening governance and the public sector, reinforcing the rule of law, improving transparency in natural resources, and supporting integrity in sports.

17. The Commonwealth Secretariat has worked to provide targeted assistance to Commonwealth nations. The Secretariat has been active in providing practical training and development support for national anti-corruption agencies, with a focus on Africa and the Caribbean. This has built on its long-standing support to establish regional networks. Among such networks are the Association of Anti-Corruption Agencies in Commonwealth Africa (linking national agencies across 18 African member countries) and the Commonwealth Caribbean Association of Integrity Commissions and Anti-Corruption Bodies (supporting 12 Caribbean member nations). These networks promote collaboration and learning by brokering the exchange of best practices and helping to benchmark agencies’ capabilities, while also facilitating peer reviews and secondments between members. The Commonwealth Africa Anti-Corruption Center, established in 2013 as a partnership with the Government of Botswana, continues to host many training courses coordinated with the Commonwealth Secretariat. The center’s programs are designed to address capacity constraints at all levels within the 18 Commonwealth Africa national agencies, from heads of agencies to operational staff.

18. The Secretariat has been active in research as well, undertaking a diagnostic and benchmarking survey to identify gaps in anti-corruption policies and procedures in national agencies in Commonwealth Africa. It has also helped to identify weaknesses in how agencies manage exhibits and proceeds of crime and has developed a Commonwealth standard operating framework to help agencies make improvements.

19. In partnership with the Fund and UNODC, it also launched new Model Legislative Provisions on Money Laundering, Terrorism Financing, Preventative Measures and Proceeds of Crime.

20. During the London Summit, the Commonwealth committed to the following: create a new Commonwealth Office of Civil and Criminal Justice Reform, update the Commonwealth model laws, develop a Commonwealth Standard to tackle corruption, and expand the Commonwealth Anti-Corruption Networks.

Regional Institutions and Organizations

This section of the Annex covers initiatives by regional institutions to support governance and counter corruption. While their actions are limited by the geographical composition of the respective organizations and by their mandates, the depth and breadth of these actions make these organizations relevant partners and key players in the global governance and anti-corruption agenda.6 Some key initiatives are set out below.


The African Union (AU)

21. The member states of the AU adopted the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption on July 11, 2003, and the Convention entered into force on August 5, 2006. To date, thirty-seven (37) countries have ratified the Convention and are parties to it.

22. The African Union Advisory Board on Corruption was created on May 26, 2009 under Article 22 (1) of the Convention. This Board bases its work on the provisions of this legal instrument and is mandated by the AU to deal with corruption and related themes in Africa.7 Amongst others, the mission of the Board is to:

  • Promote and encourage adoption and application of anti-corruption measures on the continent;

  • Collect and document information on the nature and scope of corruption and related offenses in Africa;

  • Develop methodologies for analyzing the nature and extent of corruption in Africa, and disseminate information and sensitize the public on the negative effects of corruption and related offenses;

  • Advise governments on how to deal with the scourge of corruption and related offenses in their domestic jurisdictions;

  • Collect information and analyze the conduct and behavior of multi-national corporations operating in Africa and disseminate such information to national authorities; and

  • Develop and promote the adoption of harmonized codes of conduct of public officials.8

African Development Bank (AfDB)

23. The AfDB Group views corruption, fraud, and other similar practices as highly inimical to the achievement of its mandate. The AfDB considers combating corruption as pivotal to efforts by regional member countries (RMC) to promote good governance and achieve sustainable economic growth and development Among others, the Integrity and Anti-Corruption Department (PIAC) and the Economic Governance Coordination Office (ECGF) spearhead the AfDB’s efforts to promote integrity, transparency, accountability.

24. The AfDB’s Integrity and Anti-Corruption Office under the Presidency (PIAC) has the mandate to:

  • Develop preventive measures to promote integrity and to proactively reduce the potential for misconduct, fraud and corruption within Bank Group financed operations. These responsibilities include mainstreaming anti-corruption and good governance into Bank Group operations; the development of tools to enhance due diligence practices and the recommendation of measures for institutional reforms to address loopholes and ensure compliance with Bank Group policies and applicable international conventions.

  • Conduct of investigations into allegations of fraud and corruption and other sanctionable practices in AfDB financed operations. The outcome of these investigations are handled under mechanisms elaborated under the AfBD’s sanctions process.

  • The conduct of investigations into allegations of fraud, corruption and misconduct involving Bank Group Staff with regard to AfDB operations, corporate procurement or administrative budgets and the misuse of Bank resources and to investigate all other staff misconduct The outcome of the investigations involving AfDB staff are transmitted to the President and administered under the AfDB’s disciplinary framework.

25. The mandate of the Office of PIAC is implemented through collaborations and initiatives with key stakeholders. These include anti-corruption commissions, civil society, media, and the private sector in regional member countries. Thus, the office has a MOU with Anti-Corruption Regional Associations for a structured relationship.

26. The ECGF anti-corruption efforts focus on:

  • Assisting RMCs in the area of Economic Governance and Management including their efforts to fight corruption and money laundering and tackle illicit financial flows;

  • Supporting research on the nature, origin, development and impact of corruption on African societies; and

  • Raising awareness and supporting actors such as civil society and parliaments to enhance demand side accountability.

27. One key initiative of the AfDB in the area of anti-corruption is the AfDB/OECD Joint Initiative to Support Business Integrity and Anti-Bribery Efforts in Africa. Launched at the end of 2008, the Initiative seeks to assist African countries in their fight against bribery of public officials in business transactions and to improve corporate integrity and accountability, while sustaining growth through an environment conducive to attracting foreign investment. The overall objectives of the Joint Initiative are:

  • to increase the capacity for effective anti-bribery enforcement;

  • reinforce global anti-bribery efforts;

  • enhance public sector integrity; and

  • contribute to the opening of a new era of transparent and accountable business in Africa.

Southern African Development Community (SADC)

28. The SADC Protocol Against Corruption9 aims to promote and strengthen the development within each member state of mechanisms needed to prevent, detect, punish, and eradicate corruption in the public and private sector. The Protocol further seeks to facilitate and regulate cooperation in matters of corruption amongst member states and foster development and harmonization of policies and domestic legislation related to corruption.10 SADC established an Anti-Corruption Committee which held its first meeting in July 2015. Its work is expected to “contribute to SADC efforts to fight corruption in the region and in the operationalization of the Protocol Against Corruption.”11


Asian Development Bank (ADB)

29. ADB was the first multilateral development bank to adopt in 1995 a special policy on governance, and in 1998 it adopted an anti-corruption policy to strengthen its governance work.12 Governance is a core strategic objective under ADB’s Strategy 2020.13 ADB’s governance efforts include helping governments operate more efficiently and equitably, as well as strengthening stakeholders’ capabilities to achieve their development goals. 14 15

30. ADB manages, jointly with the OECD, the ADB-OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific (Initiative). Launched in 1999, the Initiative supports the 31 member economies’ anticorruption efforts by fostering policy dialogue, policy analysis, and regional knowledge sharing.16

31. ADB’s Office of Anticorruption and Integrity (OAI)17 helps ensure that finite development funds entrusted to ADB are not lost to corruption or other integrity violations.18 OAI is mandated to (i) investigate integrity violations;19 (ii) conduct proactive project integrity reviews known as Project Procurement-Related Reviews (PPRRs);20 (iii) conduct integrity due diligence (IDD); (iv) provide knowledge solutions to address integrity violations; and (v) promote ADB’s Anticorruption Policy and Code of Conduct. Its head reports directly to the president and quarterly to the Audit Committee of ADB’s Board of Directors. OAI’s multi-pronged approach reflects a balance between both enforcement and prevention.

  • I. Enforcement: Investigations and Sanctions

    • ADB imposes sanctions for violations of its Anticorruption Policy. Pursuant to the 2010 Cross Debarment Agreement between participating international financial institutions (IFIs),21 ADB cross-debarred22 eleven entities debarred by other IFIs. In 2016, ADB sanctioned 47 firms and 31 individuals and cross-debarred 83 firms and 45 individuals.

  • I. Prevention: Outreach and Awareness-Raising

    • OAI provides capacity building and anti-corruption awareness seminars for government staff, civil society organizations, and other participants in ADB projects. Since 2011, OAI has also been conducting awareness-raising activities for its iACT to fight corruption! campaign to emphasize each ADB staff’s responsibility to fight corruption. In 2016, OAI conducted seven iACT learning events and 31 anti-corruption training seminars.

      OAI’s IDD unit supports project teams in assessing integrity and reputational risks and conducts employee screening. In 2016, OAI completed 255 screenings. OAI also regularly conducts PPRRs on a number of ongoing ADB-financed projects to identify integrity risks and safeguard project funds. In 2016, OAI conducted seven PPRRs.

  • II. Tax Integrity, Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT)

    • ADB recently updated its 1998 Anticorruption Policy to take into account issues of tax integrity at the country and project levels.23 ADB has also increased its technical support to developing member countries on these issues as well as AML/CFT.24

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)

32. ASEAN’s anti-corruption initiatives are set out in the ASEAN Political-Security Community Blueprint (APSC), which was adopted in November 2015. The APSC Blueprint 2025 comprises several key characteristics that are interrelated and mutually reinforcing and which member countries should pursue in a balanced and holistic manner.25 Amongst others, the APSC is aimed at strengthening ASEAN unity and cohesiveness to build a more democratic, transparent, just, rules-based, and inclusive community that shares the values of tolerance and moderation. Combating corruption is included in one of the elements of the rules-based, people-oriented and people-centered community, which requires member countries to do the following:

  • A.2. Strengthen democracy, good governance, the rule of law, promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as combat corruption. This is achieved, inter alia, by requiring member countries to do the following:

    • A.2.3. Instill the culture of integrity and anti-corruption and mainstream the principles thereof into the policies and practices of the ASEAN Community:

      • i. Fully implement the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Cooperation for Preventing and Combating Corruption signed on December 15, 2004;

      • ii. Promote ASEAN cooperation to prevent and combat corruption, among others, by utilizing the Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters 2004 (MLAT);

      • iii. Promote ASEAN cooperation in implementing the United Nations Convention Against Corruption;

      • iv. Strengthen the implementation of domestic laws and regulations against corruption and of anti-corruption practices in both the public and private sectors within ASEAN, including through capacity building programs;

      • v. Intensify cooperation, in the framework of applicable national and international laws to combat corruption, in the area of asset recovery and in denying safe havens to those found guilty of corruption;

      • vi. Encourage the strengthening of the South East Asia Parties Against Corruption network to enhance regional cooperation on anti-corruption and at the national level through relevant bodies or agencies;

      • vii. Promote the sharing of experiences and best practices and the exchange of views on ethics, values, and the culture of integrity to strengthen anti-corruption activities, including through the ASEAN Integrity Dialogue; and

      • viii. Enhance and encourage cooperation among financial intelligence/authorized units of ASEAN member states in the areas of collection, analysis, and dissemination of information regarding potential money laundering.


The Council of Europe (CoE)

33. The CoE sees strengthening governance and combating corruption as a key element to achieving its statutory aims to protect and promote democracy, human rights, and the rule of law and to support social and economic progress. The approach of the CoE to fighting corruption has always been multidisciplinary and consists of three interrelated elements: the setting of norms and standards, the monitoring of compliance with and effective implementation of the standards, and capacity building offered to individual countries and regions through technical assistance programs. The CoE has adopted numerous instruments (binding and non-binding) against corruption. These include the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (1999) ratified by 44 states (including non-European states) and its additional protocol, the Civil Law Convention on Corruption (1999, ratified by 35 states). Others are the 20 Guiding Principles Against Corruption, Recommendation No. R (2000)10 on codes of conduct for public officials and Recommendation No. R (2003)4 on common rules against corruption in the funding of political parties and electoral campaigns. The CoE’s anti-corruption body, the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), is the peer review mechanism which monitors, on the basis of mutual evaluation and peer pressure, the effective implementation of the CoE anti-corruption standards in GRECO’s 49 members (47 CoE member states, Belarus, and the United States of America).

The European Union (EU)

34. The EU’s mandate to promote governance and counter corruption is both internal and external. Internally, action against corruption is established in its constituting Treaty (Article 29). The EC issued a 1997 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the European Council (EC) (updated in 2011) and an EU policy against corruption. In 2003, the EU adopted the Framework Decision on Combating Corruption in the Private Sector that aims to criminalize both active and passive bribery. The EU adopted the Convention to Fight Corruption Involving European Officials or National Officials of Member States of the European Union and the Convention on the Protection of the European Communities’ Financial Interests. In addition, in June 2011, the Commission set up a mechanism for the periodic assessment of EU States’ efforts in the fight against corruption.26 During the London Summit, the EC committed to expose corruption by taking further action on beneficial ownership, the extractive industries, tax, public procurement and fiscal transparency and by preventing the facilitation of corruption; to punish corruption by preventing corrupt bidders from winning contracts, promoting asset recovery and return; and to drive out the culture of corruption by supporting various programs.

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)

35. The EBRD has been working for over two decades in countries where corruption is a serious concern, addressing the policy, legal, economic, and corporate aspects of governance. By fostering transparency and accountability in the countries where it invests, the EBRD supports their successful transition to market economies.

  • At the level of its investment operations, the EBRD’s anti-corruption and governance focus is primarily centered on ensuring that all activities of the EBRD are in accordance with international best practice. The EBRD’s Office of the Chief Compliance Officer (OCCO) promotes good governance and ensures that the highest standards of integrity are applied to all investment activities of the EBRD in accordance with international best practice. Anti-corruption is addressed through training, a rigorous ex ante due diligence process to review the suitability of prospective clients, and ongoing project monitoring. OCCO produces an annual Integrity and Anti-Corruption Report, which describes in greater detail the EBRD’s strategy to promote integrity and prevent fraud and corruption and highlights the most recent measures taken.

  • All EBRD staff have an obligation to report suspected incidents of corruption and external parties may report allegations of corruption through the EBRD’s website. OCCO’s Investigations Unit investigates, inter alia, allegations of corruption in EBRD-financed activities and, where appropriate, recommends companies and individuals for sanctions to the EBRD’s Enforcement Commissioner. The EBRD, along with four multilateral development banks, is a signatory to the Uniform Framework for Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption and the Agreement for Mutual Enforcement of Debarment Decisions.

  • The EBRD applies its procurement policies and rules to all EBRD-financed operations. While these rules are primarily to ensure that contracts placed represent best value for money and that conditions are in the best interest of the client, they are also constructed to minimize the scope for corruption through stringent procurement procedures and EBRD oversight.

  • At the policy dialogue level, the Investment Climate and Governance Initiative (ICGI) consolidates the EBRD’s policy efforts to improve the investment climate. This is done in selected recipient countries committed to fighting corruption, strengthening state institutions, and implementing reforms to attract investments. In the context of ICGI, the EBRD established a Business Ombudsman Institution in Ukraine, which aims to create a level playing field and to act as a recourse mechanism for businesses with legitimate claims against state or sub-state entities that infringe on their rights. Similar bodies are being considered for establishment in Central Asia and the Caucasus.

  • In the Western Balkans, the EBRD is partnering with UNODC to build the capacity of civil society organisations. Such works aims to improve oversight on the enforcement of the UNCAC and to work collaboratively with the private sector on anti-corruption issues.

  • The EBRD, jointly with the OECD, is leading a programme on “Business Integrity in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.” This work is aimed at enhancing knowledge about business integrity risks and supporting policy reform through expert seminars, technical assistance to relevant stakeholders, and advocacy through a framework for regular monitoring of progress and cross-country peer pressure.

  • The EBRD also actively participates in various international bodies. Among these bodies are the OECD Anti-Corruption Network, FATF, MONEYVAL, and Transparency International’s Steering Committee on the Business Principles for Countering Corruption. Such involvement includes participation in expert field missions when carried out in the EBRD’s countries of operation.

Western Hemisphere

The Organization of American States (OAS)

36. The OAS has the following principal instruments in this area:

  • The Inter-American Convention against Corruption (1996). This Convention has been ratified by 33 countries (of the 35 independent states of the Americas), which reflects its importance for the American Hemisphere, being one of the most ratified inter-American treaties in comparison to the OAS Charter itself. It contains measures for the prevention, detection, and investigation of acts of corruption, for the punishment of those who commit them, and for the recovery of the proceeds of such acts. It also has provisions on the necessary international cooperation for the effectiveness of such measures.

  • The Mechanism for Follow-Up on the Implementation of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption (MESICIC). The MESICIC was established in the framework of the OAS on June 4, 2001, to support its states parties (currently 31) in the implementation of the provisions of the Convention through a process of reciprocal evaluation, based on conditions of equality among the states. On the basis of that evaluation, reports are adopted, including specific recommendations for improving and strengthening the legal and institutional instruments that the states have in place for tackling corruption, filling gaps, and remedying any shortcomings detected in that process.

37. The Mechanism is composed of the Conference of States Parties, the political body, as well as the Committee of Experts, the technical body. It is supported by the OAS Department of Legal Cooperation which serves as Technical Secretariat for the Mechanism. The review process carried out by the MESICIC Committee of Experts draws on information provided not only by the member states, but also by civil society, the private sector, professional associations, academics, researchers, and other social actors. Onsite visits are part of this process, which allows for an “on the ground” evaluation of the actions with which the countries are implementing the provisions of the Inter-American Convention and the recommendations of the MESICIC.

  • The Anticorruption Portal of the Americas, developed by the Department of Legal Cooperation of the Secretariat for Legal Affairs, provides information regarding transparency in public administration and anti-corruption cooperation. This encompasses developments within the MESICIC framework and technical cooperation efforts, as well as links to the web pages of the member states’ agencies with responsibilities in this area. It also provides access to cooperation tools to combat corruption, such as model laws, legislative guidelines, and best practices in this area.

Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)

38. Transparency and anti-corruption are important instruments for the IDB to achieve its goal to reduce poverty and inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean. In 2001, the IDB adopted the document “Strengthening a Systemic Framework against Corruption for the Inter-American Development Bank.” In this document, the IDB emphasized its commitment to promote transparency and integrity, dealing with three separate but closely related areas:

  • Ensuring that IDB staff act in accordance with the highest levels of integrity and that the institution’s internal policies and procedures are committed to this goal;

  • Ensuring that activities financed by the IDB are free of fraud and corruption and executed in a proper control environment; and

  • Supporting programs that will help the borrowing member countries of the IDB strengthen good governance, enforce the rule of law, and combat corruption.

39. The first commitment to strengthen integrity and transparency begins with IDB’s own staff. IDB employees adhere to strict ethical standards laid out in the 2012 Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. The Board of Executive Directors is subject to its own Code. The IDB’s ethics officer investigates ethical violations by IDB staff and ensures compliance with financial disclosure requirements. The IDB has strong mechanisms to protect whistleblowers.

40. The second commitment is fulfilled by ensuring the IDB’s operations are safeguarded from the risk of fraud and corruption and are conducted following the highest integrity standards. The Sanctions System is made up of the Office of Institutional Integrity (OII), the case officer, and the Sanctions Committee. OII investigates allegations of wrongdoing and conducts prevention activities, while the case officer and the Sanctions Committee review the OII’s investigative findings and have the authority to sanction parties for wrongdoing. The list of sanctioned parties is published on the IDB’s website.

41. The third commitment is fulfilled by supporting member countries. IDB helps members to increase their own transparency and accountability practices with projects that contribute to the strengthening of public policies. It also assists with building the institutional capacity of both local and national governments with the objective of improving access to information, targeted transparency, control, and auditing units. Within the strategic framework that defines the Action Plan to Support Countries’ Efforts to Combat Corruption and Foster Transparency (PAACT, GN-2540), and upon the request of borrowing member countries, the IDB provides support at the institutional and sectoral level and at the national and subnational levels of government. The IDB contributes to the improvement of public policies and national plans for preventing and combating corruption and strengthening the institutional capacity of governments by improving access to information, promoting targeted transparency in strategic sectors, modernizing agencies of supreme, external and internal control, and enhancing the oversight role of legislative bodies.

42. A key strategic component of IDB’s third commitment is the Transparency Trust Fund (AAF). In recognition that corruption is a serious threat to economic development and social equity and undermines efforts to promote good governance and enhance service delivery, the IDB signed, on March 19, 2007, an agreement with the government of Norway for the establishment of the AAF. The AAF’s objective is to strengthen the IDB member countries’ institutional capacity to prevent and reduce corruption by improving governance and transparency. In 2011, the IDB made a US$1 million contribution to the Fund. The Government of Norway renewed its support in 2012 and 2013. In 2014, the Government of Canada made a one-time contribution and the MasterCard Corporation joined the AAF as new donors. The AAF plays a critical role in catalyzing greater transparency and anti-corruption interventions.

43. Since 2007, and as of December 1, 2016, the AAF has financed 46 technical cooperation projects for a total of approximately US$16 million and leveraged approximately US$ 800 million in loans. These loan operations represent long-term commitments from countries to work on transparency and anti-corruption reform efforts in partnership with the IDB. Based on country demand, regional priorities, and the IDB’s own technical expertise, the AAF’s work has been structured along four main pillars: 1) Control Systems; 2) Financial Integrity (AML/CFT and FATF compliance); 3) Open Government; and 4) Natural Resource Governance.

Other Multilateral Initiatives

This section of the Annex highlights other significant multilateral initiatives that also seek to address corruption and governance issues.

Anti-Corruption Summit 2016 (London Summit)

44. Building on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development to “substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms” and to “strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets,” the May 2016 Anti-Corruption Summit in London, organized by the United Kingdom, sought to galvanize a global response to tackle corruption. Forty countries issued a communique, signed general principles and a global declaration against corruption, and made specific country commitments. International organizations such as the Fund, World Bank, EC, OECD, UN, and the Commonwealth Secretariat also made specific commitments.

The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)

45. Following the APEC Leaders’ commitment to implement general and area-specific APEC Transparency Standards in Los Cabos in 2002 and in Bangkok in 2003, an Anti-Corruption and Transparency Experts’ Working Group (ACTWG) was established to institutionalize its anti-corruption and transparency work. Since 2004, the ACTWG has been serving as the framework within APEC which facilitates the coordination of anti-corruption commitments by taking appropriate steps consistent with the implementation of the UNCAC, the Santiago Commitment to Fight Corruption and Ensure Transparency (2004), the APEC Course of Action, and the APEC Transparency Standards; by implementing concrete actions in accordance with the fundamental principles of each economy’s legal system; as well as by promoting cooperation in areas such as extradition, legal assistance, and law enforcement; asset penalization and recovery; and anti-money laundering. In 2014, APEC leaders highlighted the Beijing Declaration on Fighting Corruption, the APEC Principles on the Prevention of Bribery and Enforcement of Anti-Bribery Laws, and the APEC General Elements of Effective Voluntary Corporate Compliance Programs as useful instruments that support the commitment to work together against corruption and deny safe haven for corrupt officials and their illicitly-acquired assets.

46. The APEC Network of Anti-Corruption Authorities and Law Enforcement Agencies (ACT-NET) was established in 2014. Since then, it has been developing as an inter-economy network connecting anti-corruption and law enforcement officers to enhance informal cross-border cooperation between agencies responsible for investigations and prosecutions of corruption, bribery, money laundering, and illicit trade as well as on the identification and return of the proceeds of those crimes.

47. The APEC Pathfinder Dialogue on Combating Corruption and Illicit Trade is an initiative that started in 2013. It gathers together law enforcement and anti-corruption authorities, customs bureaus, and sectoral authorities with the purpose of combating illegal wildlife trafficking in the Asia-Pacific region. It does so by going through an overview of strategic drivers, practical examples of threat convergence, and key elements of multi-agency and international cooperation to combat corruption. Further, it helps in exchanging information on strengthening customs and border security practices. The mechanism also seeks cooperation with representatives from the private sector in keeping supply chains free of products obtained by corruption, fraud, and other illicit means, and by developing best practices for combating corruption in the environment to include wildlife trafficking, illegal logging, illegal mining, and illegal fishing.

Open Government Partnership (OGP)27

48. The OGP is a multilateral initiative that aims to secure concrete commitments from governments to promote transparency, empower citizens, fight corruption, and harness new technologies to strengthen governance. In the spirit of multi-stakeholder collaboration, the OGP is overseen by a Steering Committee including representatives of governments and civil society organizations. To become a member of the OGP, participating countries must endorse a high-level Open Government Declaration, deliver a country action plan developed with public consultation, and commit to independent reporting on their progress going forward. The OGP formally launched on September 20, 2011, when the eight founding governments (Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Norway, the Philippines, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States) endorsed the Open Government Declaration and announced their country action plans. Since 2011, the OGP has welcomed the commitment of 67 additional governments to join the Partnership. In total, 75 OGP participating countries have made over 2,500 commitments to make their governments more open and accountable.


Prepared by Cecilia Marian (LEG) and Murna Morgan (SPR).


Soft law refers to guidelines, policy declarations, or codes of conduct which set standards of conduct and behavior. However, they are neither strictly binding in nature nor directly enforceable.


In the wake of the Watergate scandal, an investigation into illegal contributions to President Nixon’s re-election campaign led to the discovery of cash slush funds in hundreds of US corporations. The SEC revealed that 400 American companies had spent hundreds of millions of dollars bribing everyone from prime ministers to police overseas (


UN Declaration Against Corruption and Bribery in International Commercial Transactions (December 1996).


EU Convention on the Fight Against Corruption Involving Officials of the EU Communities or Officials of Member States of the EU 1999.


Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on Corruption 1999 and Additional Protocol 2003.


South African Development Protocol Against Corruption 2001.


African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption 2003.


181 countries are parties to the UNCAC.


See UK 2010 Bribery Act. The basic models for anti-corruption agencies (ACAs) are the Singapore Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (established 1952) and the Hong Kong Independent Commission Against Corruption (established 1974). To date, 131 countries have agencies responsible for anti-corruption; in most cases, these are dedicated anti-corruption agencies. There appear to be four traditional anti-corruption functions and anti-corruption agencies are empowered to cover some but not all of these: “prevention, including education and public awareness (82 percent); investigation of corruption cases (78 percent); prosecution of corruption cases (58 percent); and policy, research and coordination (52 percent).” As most ACAs do not have sole or comprehensive responsibilities for all four, they must coordinate with other public institutions. (Recanatini (2011))


TI’s Corruption Perception Index.


See Note III on indicators.


The UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) (2000) also contains specific provisions on anti-corruption, among others. 187 countries are parties to it.


The 10 Principles focus on 4 main areas: building an effective and fair framework for openness and access; enhancing transparency; fostering a culture of integrity; mechanisms for effective implementation, compliance and review.


The Recommendation was adopted by the OECD in order to enhance the ability of the States Parties to the Anti-Bribery Convention to prevent, detect and investigate allegations of foreign bribery and includes the Good Practice Guidance on Internal Controls, Ethics and Compliance.


These Guidelines cover all areas of business ethics, including information disclosure, transparency, and the fight against corruption.


The 2006 OECD Recommendation is much more specific in terms of the actions that members must take.


With the exception of the Council of Europe, which opened its anti-corruption instruments to non-European countries. As such, the US is, for instance, a member of the Council of Europe’s Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO).


The protocol was adopted in 2001 and came into force in 2005.


ADB’s Strategy 2030 is under preparation. It identifies governance, through the promotion of transparency and accountability of public systems, as a strategic priority under consideration.


This is led by ADB’s governance thematic group (GTG), Sustainable Development and Climate Change Department. The GTG’s activities are primarily targeted at assisting ADB’s developing member countries (DMCs) improve governance standards.


OAI has 28 staff, utilizes the services of consultants, and has a budget to engage specialized investigative services.


Includes fraudulent, corrupt, collusive, coercive, and obstructive practices, abuse, and conflict of interest.


These reviews identify non-compliance issues, irregularities, and integrity concerns in procurement activities, fund disbursements, and delivery of project outputs.


African Development Bank Group, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Inter-American Development Bank, and the World Bank Group.


Debarment renders the entity/individual ineligible to participate in ADB-financed, supported, or administered projects in any manner.


In 2016, ADB approved a US$1 million Technical Assistance (TA) program to protect DMCs against base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) and support DMC participation in BEPS initiatives. ADB also approved the concept note for a US$2 million TA project to develop the capacity of DMCs to become members of the Global Forum. For AML/CFT, ADB approved a US$2 million TA program to help domestic banks keep pace with global financial developments and Financial Action Task Force requirements.


See European Commission Decision of June 6, 2011 establishing an EU Anti-corruption reporting mechanism for periodic assessment (“EU Anti-Corruption Report”).

The Role of the Fund in Governance Issues - Review of the Guidance Note - Preliminary Considerations - Background Notes
Author: International Monetary Fund