Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International Anti-corruption Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Conflict and Security Law

  • 1518 Accesses

Abstract

Anti-corruption law has been on the agenda of states, international organizations and national prosecutors and regulators for several decades. It has now become an independent force, no longer relying on international law-making, but on initiatives of a variety of stakeholders and cross-stakeholder action. After giving a short introduction into the legal developments leading up to the United Nations Convention against Corruption, this chapter will focus on the concepts of integrity, collective action and compliance as “next generation” approaches to anti-corruption. Its main argument is that we are seeing anti-corruption becoming increasingly submerged into a broader sustainability approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 349.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Thanks to the work of Transparency International, this definition of corruption is currently the most widely used one. Since there is no a priori definition of corruption, the issue is continually in flux and has helped to sharpen our attention to the breadth of corruptive practices.

  2. 2.

    For perspectives on a number of more detailed interrelationships, e.g. corruption-terrorism, please see the literature review at Ferguson 2017, pp. 1–12.

  3. 3.

    Gutterman and Lohaus 2018, p. 241.

  4. 4.

    For more details, see Gorman 2015.

  5. 5.

    OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions. For details see <http://www.oecd.org/corruption/oecdantibriberyconvention.htm>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  6. 6.

    For details, see the commentary by Pieth et al. 2014.

  7. 7.

    See <http://oas.org/juridico/english/corr_bg.htm>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  8. 8.

    See <https://rm.coe.int/168007f3f5>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  9. 9.

    <https://rm.coe.int/168007f3f6>.

  10. 10.

    See <https://au.int/en/treaties/african-union-convention-preventing-and-combating-corruption>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  11. 11.

    The leading example in the Council of Europe system is the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), see <https://www.coe.int/en/web/greco>. Accessed 18 June 2020. UNCAC, by contrast, relies on the Conference of State Parties (Article 63 UNCAC).

  12. 12.

    The various documents are scattered over the various dedicated websites created for every G20 summit. A useful collection is presented by the German Federal Ministry of Justice at <https://www.bmjv.de/DE/Themen/G20/G20_node.html>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  13. 13.

    <https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/anti-corruption-summit-london-2016/about>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  14. 14.

    The Summit was also outside the regular series of International Anti-Corruption Conferences, held every two years by a broad coalition of stakeholders of the anti-corruption movement. For details, see <https://iaccseries.org/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  15. 15.

    Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, S.C. 1998, c 34, see <https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-45.2/page-1.html>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  16. 16.

    See <https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/23/contents>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  17. 17.

    Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, pt 2, ch VIII (Crimes of Embezzlement and Bribery) (adopted at the Second Session of the Fifth National People’s Congress on 1 July 1979, amended 25 February 2011); and Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China Amendment 9 (promulgated 29 Aug. 2015). But see also Tso (2018) on the lack of practical relevance.

  18. 18.

    The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act (2013) No 1 of 2014, India Code (rev 29 July 2016).

  19. 19.

    Law No 12.846 (1 August 2013). The Act took effect in January 2014, and thus is commonly referred to as the 2014 Statute.

  20. 20.

    See <https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000033558528&categorieLien=id>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  21. 21.

    “Principle 10. Businesses should work against corruption in all its forms, including extortion and bribery”.

  22. 22.

    “Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels”.

  23. 23.

    This number has been steadily increasing, with a significant jolt in 2005/2006. See <https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/fcpa/fcpa-cases.shtml>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  24. 24.

    See <https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-47000-foreign-corrupt-practices-act-1977>, last amended in April 2019. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  25. 25.

    <http://www.fcpablog.com/>. For a more academic, yet also highly influential blog, see the Global Anticorruption Blog at <https://globalanticorruptionblog.com/>. Both accessed 18 June 2020.

  26. 26.

    See, in general, Rose et al. 2019.

  27. 27.

    Article 20 UNCAC.

  28. 28.

    Article 26 UNCAC.

  29. 29.

    <https://iccwbo.org/publication/icc-anti-corruption-clause/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  30. 30.

    For guidelines, see the „Toolkit for Arbitrators”, prepared by the Basel Institute on Governance and its Competence Centre Arbitration and Crime, available at <https://arbcrime.org/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  31. 31.

    Fleischer 2014, p. 345.

  32. 32.

    For a discussion, see Fleischer 2014, p. 321; Hauschka 2018, p. 159.

  33. 33.

    Wolf 2014.

  34. 34.

    See, for instance, Whiting 2018.

  35. 35.

    Stephenson and Schütte 2016.

  36. 36.

    See, for instance, Integrity Action 2015.

  37. 37.

    OECD 2017a.

  38. 38.

    Weber 1904/05.

  39. 39.

    Tsang 2002.

  40. 40.

    Bulgarella 2019.

  41. 41.

    Ibid.

  42. 42.

    See <https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/action/anti-corruption-collective-action>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  43. 43.

    World Bank Institute 2008.

  44. 44.

    See <https://www.baselgovernance.org/collective-action>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  45. 45.

    See <https://www.collective-action.com/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  46. 46.

    OECD 2017b.

  47. 47.

    Silva and Aiolfi 2018.

  48. 48.

    Open Society Justice Initiative 2013.

  49. 49.

    See <https://www.opengovpartnership.org/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  50. 50.

    See <https://www.opengovpartnership.org/process/joining-ogp/open-government-declaration/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  51. 51.

    See <https://eiti.org>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  52. 52.

    See <https://eiti.org/document/eiti-standard-2019-0>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  53. 53.

    See <http://infrastructuretransparency.org>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  54. 54.

    See <https://www.oecd.org/g20/topics/anti-corruption/48972967.pdf>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  55. 55.

    Article 22 Criminal Law Convention: “Each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to provide effective and appropriate protection for: a) those who report the criminal offences established in accordance with Articles 2 to 14 or otherwise co-operate with the investigating or prosecuting authorities; b) witnesses who give testimony concerning these offences”.

  56. 56.

    See <https://rm.coe.int/16807096c7>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  57. 57.

    COM(2018)218 final.

  58. 58.

    Article 19(3) ICCPR. See also the slightly different wording of Article 10(2) ECHR.

  59. 59.

    In summarizing his criticisms, the UN Special Rapporteur referred to his earlier report to the UN General Assembly in the context of whistleblowing. See UN General Assembly Doc. A/70/361 of 8 September 2015.

  60. 60.

    See <https://freedex.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/2015/files/2019/03/OL-OTH-11.2019-1.pdf>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  61. 61.

    Article 3(2) Draft Directive.

  62. 62.

    Article 15(1) b) Draft Directive.

  63. 63.

    According to the OECD, this is 12 % of GDP in the OECD countries. See <http://www.oecd.org/gov/public-procurement/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  64. 64.

    Ibid.

  65. 65.

    For a background, see Silveira 2019.

  66. 66.

    WTO, Agreement on Government Procurement [GPA], Art. XIV (7)(b) (1994).

  67. 67.

    See <https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/memobs_e.htm>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  68. 68.

    Lo 2015; Schefer 2013. See also Anderson et al. 2011.

  69. 69.

    Lo 2015, p. 40.

  70. 70.

    Jenkins 2016.

  71. 71.

    See e.g. <https://www.adb.org/publications/uniform-framework-preventing-and-combating-fraud-and corruption>, accessed 18 June 2020. Participating institutions include the African Development Bank Group, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, European Investment Bank Group, International Monetary Fund, Inter-American Development Bank Group and the World Bank Group.

  72. 72.

    See, e.g., <https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/32774/files/cross-debarment-agreement.pdf>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  73. 73.

    For details, see Dubois et al. 2018, p. 139.

  74. 74.

    See the interview with Stephen Zimmermann, Senior Advisor to the Governance Global Practice Group, World Bank, at <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-0CEp6_bRk&list=PLYRnhpCcnLP_7VAlWBv24_BAbj_1HMxlU&index=5> at 2:07. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  75. 75.

    European Investment Bank 2019, p. 20.

  76. 76.

    <https://iaccseries.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/High-Level-Joint-Statement-IACC-2018.pdf>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

  77. 77.

    See <https://sseinitiative.org/>. Accessed 18 June 2020.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. King’s College London, London, UK

    Thomas Kruessmann

  2. Global Europe Centre, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK

    Thomas Kruessmann

Authors
  1. Thomas Kruessmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

    Sergey Sayapin

  2. School of Law, KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

    Rustam Atadjanov

  3. National Law School of India, Pune, India

    Umesh Kadam

  4. Law and Social Sciences, University of Derby, Derby, UK

    Gerhard Kemp

  5. School of Law, KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

    Nicolás Zambrana-Tévar

  6. Bristol Law School, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK

    Noëlle Quénivet

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kruessmann, T. (2022). International Anti-corruption Law. In: Sayapin, S., Atadjanov, R., Kadam, U., Kemp, G., Zambrana-Tévar, N., Quénivet, N. (eds) International Conflict and Security Law. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-515-7_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-515-7_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-514-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-515-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation