Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria]On: 22 December 2014, At: 08:37Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Commonwealth Law BulletinPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rclb20
Strategies to Combat CorruptionCommonwealth SecretariatPublished online: 16 Jun 2008.
To cite this article: Commonwealth Secretariat (2008) Strategies toCombat Corruption , Commonwealth Law Bulletin, 34:2, 335-345, DOI:10.1080/03050710802038437
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050710802038437
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Commonwealth Law BulletinVol. 34, No. 2, 335–345, June 2008
0305–0718 print/1750–5976 online/08/020335–11©2008 Commonwealth SecretariatDOI: 10.1080/03050710802038437
COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT
Strategies to Combat Corruption*
COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT
Taylor and Francis LtdRCLB_A_304011.sgm10.1080/03050710802038437Commonwealth Law Bulletin0365-0718 (print)/1750-5976 (online)Original Article2008Taylor & Francis342000000June [email protected]
Background
1. Commonwealth Heads of Government emphasized their commitment to the tacklingof corruption at their Meeting in Durban in 1999, at which they endorsed the ‘Frame-work for Commonwealth Principles on Promoting Good Governance and CombatingCorruption’.
2. The Aso Rock Declaration in December 2003 (at the Abuja Commonwealth Heads ofGovernment Meeting) urged Commonwealth states to sign, ratify and implement theUnited Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), and saw the convening of anExpert Working Group to examine its provisions and, where possible, to makerecommendations for model legislation. The Group met in 2004 and produced a thoroughreport that continues to be taken forward (as set out below).
3. The UNCAC entered into force on 14 December 2005. The first truly global anti-corrup-tion instrument, the UNCAC addresses a wide range of preventive, detection and enforce-ment provisions and, for the first time in the international arena, sets out comprehensiveprovisions on asset recovery.
4. Meanwhile, Heads of Government (at the 2005 Commonwealth Heads of GovernmentMeeting in Malta) reiterated their commitment to root out, both at national and interna-tional levels, systemic corruption (including extortion and bribery) that undermines goodgovernance, respect for human rights and economic development. They also welcomed theimminent entry into force of UNCAC and urged member states that had not already doneso to become parties to it and to strengthen the fight against corruption by the adoption ofprinciples and policies, as appropriate, that emphasise good governance, accountability andtransparency.
5. Heads of Government accepted the recommendations of the Report of the Common-wealth Expert Group on the Recovery and Repatriation of Assets of Illicit Origin for imple-mentation. They also underscored the importance of maximum cooperation and assistanceby all Commonwealth countries to recover assets of illicit origin and repatriate them totheir countries of origin.
* This paper was originally presented at the Meeting of Law Ministers and Attorneys General of SmallCommonwealth Jurisdictions, organized by the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Division (LCAD) of theCommonwealth Secretariat, on 4–5 October 2007. More information on the work of the LCAD maybe found online: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/subhomepage/38066/.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
336 Commonwealth Secretariat
The Anti-corruption Strategy
6. With that background and mandate in mind, the Legal & Constitutional Affairs Division(LCAD) of the Commonwealth Secretariat initiated an anti-corruption strategy with thefollowing objectives:
(i) to bring about (in Commonwealth states) compliance with, and implementationand enforcement of, UNCAC and to advance the mandate on anti-corruption andasset recovery given to the Commonwealth Secretariat by Commonwealth Headsof Government Meeting 2005 and the principles set out in the CommonwealthFramework;
(ii) to provide Commonwealth states with the legislation and tools to prevent, detect,investigate and prosecute corrupt activity, to trace and confiscate/recover theproceeds of such activity, and to make and execute Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA)requests for the purposes of all relevant proceedings (including confiscation andrepatriation of assets);
(iii) to create and, where existing, consolidate and expand upon specialization amongstpractitioners within Commonwealth states; thereby building their capacity/capabil-ity to undertake effective implementation of anti-corruption measures;
(iv) to encourage coordination internally, and as between states, in anti-corruptionactivity and asset recovery
7. In order to fulfil these objectives, the anti-corruption strategy encompasses the followingcomponents:
(a) the drafting of a legislative and technical guide (including draft legislative provisionsto reflect those requirements of UNCAC that are susceptible to model drafting)aimed at meeting the particular needs of Commonwealth states and complement-ing the guides produced by UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The overallaim of the Commonwealth guide being to provide documentary guidance, bestpractice, legislative options and technical assistance;
(b) providing technical assistance on an individual state, regional and Commonwealth-wide basis on key aspects of prevention (including risk analysis), detection,investigation and prosecution. Such technical assistance is coordinated by theLCAD, supplementing its own specialist input by using:
(i) such other specialists (including those from within Commonwealth Secretar-iat) as may, from time to time, be required; and
(ii) best practices and methodologies developed by individual states, regionalinitiatives and international organisations.
(iii) The tools in (ii) are being developed, identified and disseminated, as the casemay be, by the LCAD with reference to work done and products created byall relevant international and regional bodies;
(c) holding regional and state-specific training courses on UNCAC implementation(including, in particular, asset recovery and international cooperation). To ensuremaximum benefit such training is designed on a ‘component’ basis, delivered to‘targeted’ participants (which,
inter alia
, allows for further cascading), and is highlypractical and interactive in approach;
(d) there is a newly established Commonwealth Judicial Network that assists in iden-tifying within Commonwealth states, and within regions/subregions, individual
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Strategies to Combat Corruption 337
specialists/practitioners who wish to further develop their anti-corruption skills,This enables a line of regular contact between the LCAD and each anti-corruptionspecialist/practitioner to be established, and helps the LCAD to provide timelyguidance, training and ongoing technical assistance when required. Simultaneously,the Network facilitates and supports an increasing day-to-day reliance on the localspecialist(s) within states.
Principal International Initiatives Informing theAnti-corruption Strategy
United Nations Convention Against Corruption
8. The UNCAC has three purposes:
(i) to promote and strengthen measures to prevent and combat corruption more effi-ciently and effectively;
(ii) to promote, facilitate and support international cooperation and technical assis-tance in the prevention of and fight against corruption, including asset recovery;and
(iii) to promote integrity, accountability and proper management of public affairs andpublic property (Art 1). ‘Corruption’, however, is not defined in the UNCAC.
9. The UNCAC is similar to other international and regional instruments in that it dealswith: Prevention (Chapter II, Arts 5–14); Criminalisation and Law Enforcement (Chapter III,Arts 15–42); International Co-operation (Chapter IV, Arts 43–49) and Asset Recovery(Chapter V, Arts 51–62). It also sets out mechanisms for its implementation (Chapter VII).However, it is much more comprehensive than any previous instrument, and provides awide-ranging framework for the anti-corruption response of a State Party.
10. Each State Party undertakes to adopt the necessary measures, including legislative andadministrative measures, in accordance with fundamental principles of its domestic law, toensure the implementation of its obligations under the Convention (Art 65(1)). However,as those State representatives negotiating the text of the UNCAC were unable to agree ona complete set of mandatory requirements, the instrument is a mixture of both mandatoryand non-binding provisions. This is, perhaps, unfortunate, and a missed opportunity, in thatit might be said to inhibit the development of consistent international rules and run the riskof producing a patchwork of differing laws and regulations. In addition, the UNCACcontains a curious mix of approaches, with some Articles providing a detailed set of provi-sions (e.g. on the measures needed to prevent corruption in the private sector and theprovisions relating to mutual legal assistance) whilst others receive minimal comment (e.g.measures to counter corruption in the prosecution service).
11. At the time of writing, the following Commonwealth states are parties to the UNCAC:Antigua & Barbuda, Australia, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Maldives,Mauritius, Namibia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, South Africa, SriLanka, Tanzania, Trinidad & Tobago, Uganda, United Kingdom, and Zimbabwe (currentlysuspended from the Commonwealth) – whilst the following have signed, but have not yetratified: Barbados, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Cyprus, India, Jamaica, Malawi, Malaysia,Malta, Mozambique, New Zealand, Pakistan, Singapore, Swaziland, and Zambia.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
338 Commonwealth Secretariat
12. In addition to the UNCAC, there is full and proper regard to other international andregional instruments including the African Union Convention on Preventing and CombatingCorruption, the Southern African Development Community Protocol on Corruption, theInter-American Convention Against Corruption, and the OECD Convention on the Briberyof Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions
Commonwealth Working Group on asset recovery and repatriation
13. The key recommendations that strategically the Secretariat seeks to take forward are:
(1) Commonwealth countries should sign, ratify and implement the United NationsConvention against Corruption as a matter of urgency.
(2) Commonwealth Heads of State/Government, ministers and other public officialsshould not have immunity from prosecution in domestic courts for alleged criminalactivity. Heads of Government should commit themselves to take active steps toensure the removal of these immunities.
(3) In cases involving allegations of corruption by serving Heads of State/Government,the Commonwealth should have an
ad hoc
peer-review mechanism in place.
(4) Commonwealth countries that have yet to do so should promptly put in place strongand comprehensive legislation and procedures for criminal conviction-based assetconfiscation. This should include a power to confiscate in circumstances where theaccused has absconded or died. Commonwealth countries should also put in placecomprehensive laws and procedures for non-conviction-based asset confiscation.
(5) Mutual legal assistance between Commonwealth countries should be available onthe basis of the Harare Scheme without a requirement for a bilateral treaty.Commonwealth countries that currently require a treaty for mutual legalassistance should consider removing such a requirement.
(6) Commonwealth countries that have yet to provide for restraint and confiscationof assets in response to a foreign request should promptly adopt legislation thatestablishes a direct enforcement system. Commonwealth countries that have anexisting law for enforcing foreign requests for restraint and confiscation shouldreview their legislation and procedures, and amend them as necessary to ensurethat foreign requests for restraint and confiscation can be effectively and speedilyenforced. Where the current law does not provide for the enforcement of non-conviction-based orders, it should be amended to do so.
(7) Commonwealth countries should provide by law, either through a judicial processor executive discretion, for the return of funds minus reasonable expenses to arequesting country:
(a) in cases of misappropriation or other unlawful taking of public funds, or thelaundering thereof;
(b) where the requesting country reasonably establishes its prior ownership ofconfiscated property; or
(c) when the requested country recognises damage to the requesting country.
(8) Commonwealth countries should ensure that the law clearly prescribes howpublic funds may be used including by Heads of State/Government and make clearthat criminal offences exist for any misuse of those funds.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Strategies to Combat Corruption 339
(9) Commonwealth countries should allocate sufficient resources to establish andfund properly central authorities, law enforcement and other agencies dealing withasset confiscation and management.
(10) Commonwealth Heads of Government should keep asset repatriation on theagenda for their meetings and commit themselves to periodic review and discussion(by Heads of Government/Law and Finance Ministers) of the progress onimplementation of the recommendations in the report.
Activities.
Commonwealth Secretariat and Chatham House Anti-corruption Conference
14. The first principal activity under the project took place with financial assistancefrom the UK’s Foreign & Commonwealth Office and Department for International Devel-opment. The overarching theme of the conference was ‘UNCAC Enforcement and Imple-mentation: Meeting the Challenges’. The theme was developed by a focus on key topics andhad particular regard to the needs and circumstances of developing states. At the same time,lessons from developed states were highlighted and the interface needed between thedeveloped and the developing (if anti-corruption strategies are to prove effective) stressed.
15. The topics selected for presentation and discussion were:
●
Monitoring the implementation of the UNCAC: How can monitoring mechanismsbe put in place that will be both effective and affordable? Are country-by-countryevaluations and peer reviews the way forward? Is there scope for a regionalapproach? What are the demands, on government, practitioners and population,of an ‘on-site’ evaluation? Do the well-established peer review procedures of theOECD Working Group on Bribery and of GRECO (Council of Europe) provideany valuable lessons?
●
Criminalization: The demands of the UNCAC and other international instruments.Where are the potential pitfalls? How can legislators stay one step ahead? Whatare the lessons learnt from implementation of the OECD Convention?
●
The Public Servant: Prevention & Detection: Targeted awareness raising as ameans, not an end; making reporting obligations effective, and providing protectionfor those who report; conflicts of interest and declarations of assets; publicservants and public procurement; integrity testing and proactive investigationswith limited resources.
●
Corporations: agents and intermediaries; responsibility for foreign subsidiaries;and procurement and export credits.
●
Asset Recovery and asset repatriation: Has the UNCAC improved the ability ofstates to get assets returned? Is confiscation
in rem
an answer? International coop-eration: Direct versus indirect enforcement. What does the UNCAC demand?
16. About 150 participants, made up of government representatives and officials, anti-corruption practitioners, civil society representatives, corporate representatives, academics,legal professionals and representatives of international organizations, attended. Althoughthere was strong Commonwealth participation (including funded government and civilsociety representatives from East, West and Southern Africa and Asia), the conference wasglobal in outlook and representation.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
340 Commonwealth Secretariat
17. The main aims of the conference were:
●
to advance implementation of the UNCAC (and, in particular, to address the prob-lems faced by smaller and developing states) by identifying the problems, makingrecommendations, drawing up an action plan, for subsequent internalisation byCommonwealth states, with a view to the provision of technical support thereaf-ter to those states to assist in fulfilling action plan objectives;
●
to provide a forum for discussion by state and non-state participants to considereffective monitoring under the UNCAC, with particular focus upon the difficultiesof, and solutions for, smaller and developing states;
●
for Commonwealth states, to take forward the Recommendations of theCommonwealth Working Group on Asset Repatriation. Those Recommendationsinclude: putting in place comprehensive legislation and procedures for both convic-tion and non conviction-based confiscation, MLA on the basis of the HarareScheme without any need for a bilateral treaty, and direct enforcement of restraintand confiscation in response to a foreign request.
18. As to the extent to which these aims have been achieved:
●
a full report of the proceedings of the conference is available for reference on theCommonwealth Secretariat website and has been sent to all participants and otherinterested parties, both governmental and non-governmental organizations;
●
each funded participant (both governmental and non-governmental organiza-tions) was asked to draw up and progress an action plan, with ‘report backs’being given to the Commonwealth Secretariat. This has resulted in ongoingcontact between the LCAD and anti-corruption practitioners in a range ofCommonwealth states;
●
feedback from participants demonstrated that the conference has prompted manyattendees from government to consider afresh aspects of their anti-corruptionstrategy and to evaluate their training needs;
●
requests for training and technical assistance were received from states repre-sented at the conference and have aided in the creation and execution of specifictraining courses in Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria and Swaziland; and
●
the conference assisted some states in determining the steps required to takeforward asset recovery and international cooperation measures and, specifically,the recommendations of the Commonwealth Working Group on Asset Recoveryand Repatriation.
Training courses and workshops.
19. The training component of the project is needs-based and focuses on targeted issues(whether such issues are identified on a country-specific, regional or international basis).
20. Training material and course content have been designed to cover:
●
preventive measures, including targeted awareness raising (particularly achievingmaximum effect with limited resources);
●
accountability and transparency within the public administration (local andnational) and civil service. This will include declarations of assets/conflicts of inter-est, codes of conduct, reporting obligations, and integrity testing;
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Strategies to Combat Corruption 341
●
investigative and prosecutorial difficulties and solutions; including the creation ofspecialist cadres of prosecutors and investigators, the scoping of corrupt activityand the use of intelligence, reactive/proactive investigations, financial investiga-tions, and cooperating defendant programmes in anti-corruption prosecutions;
●
the mechanics and skills required to trace and recover assets;
●
international cooperation, particularly in respect of MLA requests, and assetconfiscation and repatriation.
21. The content and emphasis of each course is determined by the needs of the state orregion whose participants are to be trained. However, the overall objectives of the trainingprogramme are intended to be the establishment by states of comprehensive preventivemeasures; effective enforcement and understanding of public servants’ reporting obliga-tions; identifying legislative requirements; the building of specialization amongst, and coor-dination between, investigators and prosecutors; the development of an intelligence-ledapproach in appropriate cases, and the facilitation of international cooperation.
22. The training courses undertaken to date are as follows:
●
Training workshop for the Kenyan Anti-Corruption Commission(KACC) in Kenya with NORAD in March 2006
. This two-day course focusedon the investigation of large-scale corruption cases and on mutual legal assistance.There were approximately 60 participants drawn from the KACC and the Direc-tor of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Office.
●
Regional three-day training workshop for Southern African anti-corrup-tion specialists
(prosecutors, law enforcement and anti-corruption commis-sions). This was held in Swaziland from 9 to 11 January 2007. The 42 participantswere drawn from Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, Swaziland and Zambia. Thecontent and format of the training was based on an earlier needs assessment andscoping visit to Swaziland and by consultation with the other represented states.
The workshop was, deliberately, interactive and practical; an approach thatreceived positive feedback from participants. However, to ensure that everyparticipant had the necessary skill and knowledge base from which to work, thefirst day, in particular, involved a substantial amount of ‘front-end loading’ of infor-mation and detail. Thereafter, the main focus was to encourage participants to useall aspects of their knowledge and experience in tackling and solving real-time andnear-real-time case problems.
Participants were sent the material in advance and were asked to undertakesubstantial pre-course reading. In addition, each participant received a hard-copyset of material (a lever-arch file) for the course and for future reference.
The sessions were presented by the LCAD and by external specialists, includingsenior investigators from the Metropolitan Police Service (London) and a seniorattorney from the KACC (Kenya).
The topics covered included handling intelligence, risk assessment and decision-making, coordination between agencies, reactive and proactive investigative strat-egies, legal issues in anti-corruption prosecutions, the international anti-corruptionframework and international cooperation in criminal matters.
●
Regional three-day training workshop on asset recovery and interna-tional cooperation in anti-corruption investigations for West & EastAfrican Commonwealth States.
This was held in Abuja, Nigeria, from 23 to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
342 Commonwealth Secretariat
25 January 2007. The 79 participants (prosecutors, investigators and financialinvestigators, intelligence officials and other relevant government representatives)were drawn from Cameroon, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Sierra Leone,Tanzania and Uganda. In addition, eight members of the Nigerian Senate’s ‘HouseCommittee on Drugs and Financial Crime’ attended.
The workshop sought to build specialist knowledge once again in a practical andinteractive way. Accordingly, case study sessions were used to reinforce the learn-ing from presentations and to build team-working and the ability to make soundcasework decisions. Working in small ‘break-out’ groups’, an individual member ofthe group was required to make a decision, with reasons, in relation to each aspectof a case study. At the same time, he/she was encouraged to take advice fromother members of the group in reaching that decision.
The topics covered included: practical mechanisms for asset recovery and interna-tional cooperation under the UNCAC and regional instruments; financial intelli-gence and financial investigations (reactive and proactive approaches); forensicaccountancy and analysis; asset tracing and recovery in common law and civil codestates; and mutual legal assistance, jurisdiction and extradition.
●
Training workshop (in partnership with the KACC) for law enforcementofficers, anti-corruption investigators and prosecutors from Kenya andUganda
. This was held in Nairobi, Kenya, on 13 and 14 February 2007.
The 40 participants included 30 from Kenya (drawn from the KACC, the DPP’sOffice, the Law Reform Commission and the Kenya Law Society), and 10 fromUganda (drawn from the ranks of specialist investigators).
The workshop included participants from the KACC who had attended the 2006course, and from Uganda who had attended the January workshop in Abuja. Itsapproach, therefore, was to build greater specialist knowledge in investigations andprosecutions, and, in break-out groups, to distil expertise in drafting mutual legalassistance and extradition requests. Feedback from the participants afterwardsindicated that, although successful as a first step in this latter regard, more practicaldrafting training was needed.
●
UNODC training seminar on anti-corruption and international cooper-ation for East African States (including non-Commonwealth States)
.This was held in Mombasa, Kenya, from 4 to 7 March 2007, and was supported bythe Canadian Government.
The 50 participants were drawn from the ranks of investigators, prosecutors andgovernment officials, with the following states being represented: Burundi,Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. In addition, there was also a dele-gation from Liberia and a representative from Botswana.
The input from the Commonwealth Secretariat focused on international cooper-ation and included a whole day devoted to the practical application of the princi-ples of mutual legal assistance and extradition in corruption cases, with practicalexercises in break out once again being the central training delivery tool, coupledwith post-decision debrief sessions.
●
Training workshop for Bangladeshi anti-corruption practitioners
. Thistwo-day workshop was held in Dhaka on 3 and 4 July 2007, and was co-hostedby The World Bank, the Bangladesh Anti-Corruption Commission and theBangladesh Bank. The 28 participants were drawn from senior management and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Strategies to Combat Corruption 343
senior practitioner level from within the Attorney General’s Chambers, the Anti-Corruption Commission, Bangladesh Police, Customs, Revenue Board, BangladeshBank and the intelligence services.
The objectives were to sensitize participants in relation to the practice, procedure,and international framework for asset recovery, and for international cooperationin corruption cases; to highlight the amendments to legislation and the institutionaland procedural changes needed to effectively address corruption and the stealingof assets; and to build team work between law enforcement/Anti-CorruptionCommission staff and prosecutors.
Feedback showed that awareness was raised and that, on the back of theworkshop, participants were keen to take forward the approaches learnt. It isanticipated that this event will, therefore, be a prelude to future activities (seebelow).
It should be noted that the training workshops in Swaziland, Nigeria and Kenya (February2007) have taken place with funding from the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office.
Technical assistance.
23. This component of the project necessarily overlaps with the training activitiesalready discussed. At each training workshop, the LCAD has engaged with the participantpractitioners to discuss and advise upon investigative and prosecutorial tools. In addition,the opportunity has also been taken to discuss with government representatives anddraftspersons (and to comment on, when requested) legislative drafts and policy material.The topics covered have ranged from the mechanisms required for effective covert deploy-ment in anti-corruption investigations, to the legislative provisions needed for the enforce-ment of foreign freezing and confiscation orders for the purposes of asset recovery.
24. Specific activities have included:
●
ongoing advice to the KACC (Kenya) on a range of investigative and prosecutorialissues, including constitutional challenges and securing effective internationalcooperation;
●
the conducting of a needs assessment at the request of the Minister of Justice ofSwaziland (May 2006), the compilation of a full report, and the making of recom-mendations (with key recommendations subsequently being implemented by Swaziauthorities); and
●
attending and presenting to the Pacific Islands’ representatives a framework fordelivery of the anti-corruption component of the Commonwealth Pacific Gover-nance Programme (Suva, Fiji, May 2006).
Participation at other events.
25. The LCAD recognizes that, if anti-corruption strategies are to be effective, theymust complement (but not duplicate) activities being carried out by other organizations, andmust ensure that Commonwealth states are made aware of, and obtain maximum benefitfrom, the full range of anti-corruption ‘tools’ and ‘products’ developed internationally andregionally.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
344 Commonwealth Secretariat
26. With those aims in mind, it has,
inter alia
, made the following contributions to otheractivities.
●
Attended and contributed to discussions at the Eighth Meeting of the InternationalGroup for Anti-Corruption Co-ordination held in January 2006 in New York. Theresult of this meeting was an agreement re coordination measures for interna-tional organizations and technical assistance in implementing the UNCAC.
●
Attended and participated in the High Level Regional Conference on UNCAC forEast and Southern African States held by UNODC in Pretoria in February 2006, atwhich training needs, capacity-building and technical assistance were scoped forthe region.
●
A podium speaking slot for the LCAD at the International Bar Association (IBA)Anti-Corruption Conferences held in London (May 2006) and Paris (May 2007),and at the annual IBA Conference 2007 held in Chicago (September 2007).
●
Attended the UNCAC First Conference of States Parties and hosted a ‘side-meet-ing’ for Commonwealth states (Jordan, December 2006)
●
Attended and participated in the International Co-operation Expert Workshop onTechnical Assistance for Implementation of UNCAC hosted by UNODC and theGovernment of Uruguay (Montevideo, Uruguay, 30 May–1 June 2007).
Intended future work.
27. The aims and components of the strategy remain the same. However, the workalready undertaken has highlighted specific training/technical assistance requirements thatthe LCAD wishes (i) to bring to the attention of Senior Officials and (ii) to take forward aspart of the ongoing strategy:
●
Training: plans are presently being made to undertake:
(i) a training workshop for anti-corruption practitioners from South Asia (to beheld, it is hoped, in India in late 2007);
(ii) a training workshop on asset recovery and international cooperation forSouthern African states (to be held in late 2007/early 2008); and
(iii) a training workshop for the Namibian Anti-Corruption Commission (date tobe arranged); and a regional training workshop on anti-corruption investiga-tions and international cooperation for the Pacific Islands (to be held in thefirst quarter of 2008).
●
The work already undertaken has revealed a need for detailed, practical trainingfor those investigators and prosecutors involved in the making/receiving of mutuallegal assistance and extradition requests in corruption/asset recovery cases.Training will be either country specific or regional, depending on the statesinvolved, and will dovetail with activities being carried out as part of the LCAD’sinternational cooperation activity.
●
There is a general recognition amongst states that corruption is a particularly diffi-cult offence to detect and investigate, and that investigation is rendered even moredifficult if a state’s investigators do not have covert and intrusive means at theirdisposal. Accordingly, it is suggested that draft legislative provisions addressing‘special’ (or covert) investigative means should be produced for Commonwealth
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Strategies to Combat Corruption 345
states and that these should be supplemented by a manual or guide aimed at lawenforcement and prosecutor practitioners, and addressing such issues as humanrights considerations, authorisation and entrapment.
●
Articles 5 and 6 of the UNCAC provide, respectively, that State Parties mustimplement and maintain effective anti-corruption policies and have in place adedicated anti-corruption body (to take forward the policies). It is suggested thata specific additional component is added to the strategy that will see the LCADgiving technical assistance and training to states: (i) in putting together, implement-ing and monitoring national anti-corruption strategy; and (ii) establishing effectiveanti-corruption bodies (which may either be free-standing commissions or special-ist units within existing ministries with guaranteed independence).
Commonwealth legislative and technical guide to the UNCAC.
28. A legislative and technical guide, supplemental to the guides produced by UNODCand ith Commonwealth states’ particular needs in mind, has been drafted to reflect thewide-ranging requirements of the UNCAC. An Expert Working Group was formed and athree-day technical meeting was held in London in December 2006 in advance of theFirst Conference of States Parties. It is anticipated that the guide, based on the discussionsof, and input from, the Expert Working Group, will be circulated to states following itsconsideration by Senior Officials.
29. Senior Officials are invited to recommend the above to Law Ministers for consideration.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UN
AM
Ciu
dad
Uni
vers
itari
a] a
t 08:
37 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
