This manifesto contains 39 recommendations to address corruption in our country and the UK’s role in facilitating corruption globally. These five priority actions, building on past government announcements, deserve cross-party support, and could be introduced swiftly.
The aim of the Pharma Integrity Principles for Latin America is to provide a framework for good business practices and risk management strategies for promoting integrity in the pharmaceutical sector. They are intended to assist companies and industry associations across the region in:
• eliminating bribery and related conflicts of interest;
• demonstrating their commitment to doing business with integrity; and
• making a positive contribution to improving business standards of integrity, transparency
and accountability.
The Pharma Integrity Principles combine anti-bribery principles of general applicability developed by Transparency International with more specific guidelines for preventing conflicts of interest in the pharmaceutical sector in relation to prescribing practices by healthcare professionals and interactions with healthcare institutions, patients and patient organisations.
“Faulty Towers: Understanding the impact of overseas corruption on the London property market” assessed 14 new landmark London developments, worth at least £1.6 billion. It found 4 in 10 of the homes in these developments have been sold to investors from high corruption risk countries or those hiding behind anonymous companies. Less than a quarter had been bought by buyers based in the UK.
Corruption Cable is Transparency International UK’s quarterly newsletter. This edition includes features on: Rolls Royce & Deferred Prosecution Agreements; Health Corruption in Armenia; Why the UK Needs a World Class Anti-Corruption Strategy; and The 77th Brigade. Also featuring media mentions and upcoming events.
It is well established that companies based in the UK’s Overseas Territories (OTs) and Crown Dependencies are widely used in money laundering and grand corruption cases.1 The absence of any public information about them allows corrupt beneficial owners to buy luxury goods and property with anonymity and enjoy their ill-gotten gains with impunity. Journalists, citizen investigators and businesses looking to find out who’s behind these anonymous corporate entities hit a brick wall whenever they encounter them, and rely almost entirely on periodic leaks like the Panama Papers to unveil who really owns them.2 Their use is so problematic that the UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA) has openly cited their opacity as a strategic risk to the UK.3
At the Anti-Corruption Summit held in London in May 2016, 42 governments made more than 600 commitments across a range of issues. From anti-money laundering regulation to open data to public sector integrity, ambitious ideas for tackling corruption were central to the Summit.1 Transparency International evaluated the commitments made at the Summit and found many to be significantly new (generated by the summit), ambitious (strong steps in the context of the country they are coming from) and concrete (actionable and measurable). But without any formal mechanism in place for follow up, the commitments are at risk of being forgotten or left behind.
Open Government Partnership Action Plans have offered a key means of implementing and monitoring Anti-Corruption Summit pledges. In fact, the Anti-Corruption Summit communiqué2 states:
Our new publication focusing on corrupt wealth in London property. Using multiple data sources, this report finds that there is no data available on the real owners of more than half of the 44,022 land titles owned by overseas companies in London whilst nine out of ten of these properties were bought via secrecy jurisdictions
Spring Cleaning” a new report from Transparency International UK (TI-UK) analyses the role of the UK in providing a safe haven for corrupt wealth from Middle Eastern rulers. In Syria Egypt and Libya, amongst others, corruption played a major role in igniting the “Arab Spring”, with mass protests decrying the misuse of power by political establishments.
Local governance reform continues apace around the globe, with an ever increasing trend towards the transfer of powers and responsibilities from central government to the sub national level. Although decentralisation processes can help strengthen accountability by bringing government closer to the people, corruption is a problem at all levels and decentralising services can also simply decentralise corruption. For example, local officials may have greater vested interests based on family, friendships and business ties that can influence decision-making;remuneration at the local government level is, in many cases, low in comparison to the national level; and the institutions that are designed to hold public officials to account at the local level are not always adequate. Monitoring by the media and civic institutions can also be weak. Contact between local government officials and the public is highest at the local level, which increases the opportunities for corruption. Conversely, it also provides more chances for citizens to hold governments to account. Thus, decentralisation provides both significant opportunities which can be leveraged in the fight against corruption, but also presents particular challenges which must be addressed.
People in positions of power — often called Politically-Exposed Persons (PEPs) — may abuse their entrusted role for their own personal gain, feeding grand corruption. Banks provide one of the stopping places for these ill-gotten monies. Until now, financial institutions and their regulatory authorities have failed to prevent them from being a safe place for the corrupt. Now is the time to close this loophole.
Topic:
Corruption, Crime, International Trade and Finance, and Reform