The UN Convention Against Corruption, which came into force on September 29, aims to address corruption in both the public and private sectors. It covers issues of criminal law, transparency, technical assistance and preventive measures. In respect to the business community, the Convention proposes a non-mandatory code of business ethics (Article 11), as well as measures to prevent off-the-book accounting (Article 12) and to criminalise the giving or receiving of bribes (Article 32). Steps to combat money laundering, bank secrecy and the return of illegally obtained assets are also included in the Convention, which governments are set to sign officially on December 9. The legislation builds on the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime in 2000. Contact Anne Thomas, UNIS on 00 43 1 260 604 448 (http://www.unis.unvienna.org)
Editorial Comment
What makes this Convention significant if the role it passes to the private sector to help in the fight against corruption. There are clear reasons for business to do so. Not least is the avoidance of fines, litigation and civil and criminal sanctions. Controlling direct and indirect costs that add to the cost of capital represent another obvious business driver major business driver. Throw into the mix the preservation of brand image, a check against internal corruption and the development of new consumer markets, and anti-corruption measures by the private sector make sense.
So why the need for a UN Convention? Most obviously, there’s a need to close some significant loopholes. Most obvious is the prohibition against paying bribes to public officials, but no to political parties or party officials. The Convention also serves to provide a framework for worldwide co-operation, where corruption issues such as money laundering and asset recovery stretch across international boundaries.
For the best companies, the Convention provides an authoritative global benchmark with which to pressurise governments where corruption is endemic. For the worst companies, however, the question must be asked whether the Convention has the teeth to succeed where the business case has failed. Most promising in this respect are the provisions to tighten accounting and auditing standards, which will make off-the-books payments harder to conceal. A clause on how to protect whistleblowers marks a trick missed. The implicit invitation that the Convention affords the private sector to work with governments – both local and national – to stamp out corruption represents an important breakthrough, and one which would ultimately benefit all companies to accept.
Come clean
Multinational companies may find themselves subject to enforcement procedures previously only applied to nation states, following the publication of a draft UN Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with regard to Human Rights. The draft, adopted on August 13, is a first step by the UN towards the regulation of multinationals. Legal obligations in the draft are drawn from existing human rights, labour and environmental standards. Contact Annick Stevenson, OHCHR-UNOG, on 00 41 22 917 9000, (http://www.unhchr.ch)
Not fair
Only a third of people think globalisation creates opportunities for everyone, according to the Environics International 2003 Global Issues Monitor survey. The survey, which looks at global issues in 21 countries also indicates that most people think that globalisation concentrates wealth in the hands of the few. Contact Shannon Stevenson, Environics, on 00 1 416 969 2775 (http://www.environicsinternational.com)
What makes this Convention significant if the role it passes to the private sector to help in the fight against corruption.
What makes this Convention significant if the role it passes to the private sector to help in the fight against corruption. There are clear reasons for business to do so. Not least is the avoidance of fines, litigation and civil and criminal sanctions. Controlling direct and indirect costs that add to the cost of capital represent another obvious business driver major business driver. Throw into the mix the preservation of brand image, a check against internal corruption and the development of new consumer markets, and anti-corruption measures by the private sector make sense.
So why the need for a UN Convention? Most obviously, there’s a need to close some significant loopholes. Most obvious is the prohibition against paying bribes to public officials, but no to political parties or party officials. The Convention also serves to provide a framework for worldwide co-operation, where corruption issues such as money laundering and asset recovery stretch across international boundaries.
For the best companies, the Convention provides an authoritative global benchmark with which to pressurise governments where corruption is endemic. For the worst companies, however, the question must be asked whether the Convention has the teeth to succeed where the business case has failed. Most promising in this respect are the provisions to tighten accounting and auditing standards, which will make off-the-books payments harder to conceal. A clause on how to protect whistleblowers marks a trick missed. The implicit invitation that the Convention affords the private sector to work with governments – both local and national – to stamp out corruption represents an important breakthrough, and one which would ultimately benefit all companies to accept.
COMMENTS