EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO DETECT CORRUPTION CASESFROM VARIOUS SOURCES IN THE STATE OF PALESTINE
Rasha Amarneh*

I. INTRODUCTION
Corruption is a transnational scourge, the impact of which extends beyond national borders, undermines
democracy and moral values, and jeopardizes sustainable development and the rule of law. The State ofPalestine became aware of the extent of the danger posed by corruption, which led to the adoption of theAnti-Corruption Law in 2010,1 which criminalizes acts of corruption and establishes a specialized body2
entrusted with the task of combating corruption by law enforcement through receiving, investigatingcomplaints and reports on suspicions of corruption, and referring cases with evidence of corruption for the
specialized corruption crimes prosecution. The law also entrusted the commission with tasks related to theprevention of corruption, raising awareness of its risks, and drawing up a general policy to combat it at thenational level in partnership with all components of society.
Complaints and reports that the commission receives about suspicions of corruption are among theimportant sources of information that enable the prosecution of those suspected of committing corruption
crimes. Although the law gives the commission the ability to initiate investigations and investigate suspected
corruption on its own, the largest percentage of information sources that enable the prosecution of suspected
corruption belong to whistle-blowers, whether they are individuals, institutions or regulatory bodies.
Accordingly, encouraging reporting of suspected corruption is one of the things that the commission has
worked to achieve since its establishment. And one of the means of encouraging reporting is the obligation
to provide protection for whistle-blowers and witnesses, in addition to the possibility of exempting theperpetrator of a corruption crime, or his/her accomplices, from criminal penalty if the perpetrator takes theinitiative to report the crime to the public authorities before its detection. The penalty is reduced by half ifthey cooperated during the investigation and after the crime was discovered. The perpetrators of the crimeor their accomplices will be exempted from a pecuniary punishment, provided that they refund the money
obtained from the crime.
In addition to the reports as the main source of information about corruption, cooperation between law
enforcement agencies, the access to data held by some official departments and asset declarations are
considered to be another source of information that may lead to more detection of corruption.
This paper will deal with the protection of witnesses and whistle-blowers according to Palestinian
legislation in its first axis, and in its second axis it will deal with the possibility of exemption from punishment
according to Palestinian legislation, and in the third and final axis, the paper will deal with the importance ofcooperation between the commission and law enforcement authorities and other authorities in detecting
corruption crimes and their perpetrators.

* Commissioner Advisor, Palestinian Anti-Corruption Commission.
1
Anti-Corruption Law No (1) 2005 as Amended, The original law, Law on Illicit Gain No (1) 2005, Amendment (1): Law-byDecree No (7) 2010 on amending the Illicit Gains Law No (1) 2005, Amendment (2): Law-by-Decree No (13) 2014 on amending
the Anti-Corruption Law No (1) 2005, Amendment (3): Law-by-Decree No (4) 2017 on amending the Anti-Corruption Law 2005
as amended, Amendment No (4): Law-by-Decree No (37) 2018.
2
Palestinian Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC).

15

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 113

II. PROTECTION OF WHISTLE-BLOWERS AND
WITNESSES OF SUSPECTED CORRUPTION
The Anti-Corruption Commission receives complaints, reports and communications of corruption
allegations from individuals, institutions and oversight bodies, and it also receives anonymous reports. Reports
and complaints are received through: fax, email, PACC’s website, hotline (free phone number), PACC’s mobile
application and through personal attendance.3

Numbers of complaints and reports received during the year 2020 compared to previous years.4
According to the Law by Decree No. (7) of 2010 Amending the Law on Illicit Gain No. (1) for the year 2005,
in particular Article 18, the Commission must provide job and personal and legal protection for witnesses,
experts and whistle-blowers in corruption cases. Further, the law referred to a regulation (bylaw) preparedby the Commission and issued by the Council of Ministers determining the mechanisms and procedures for
granting this protection. From 2010 to 2019, the Commission has faced many obstacles to the implementationof its commitment to provide protection to various forms of whistle-blowers, witnesses and experts, which
are as follows:
1. The lack of provision for protection mechanisms in the law and the referral of protection mechanisms
to regulations issued by the Council of Ministers made it difficult to stipulate some mechanisms,
especially those related to concealing the identity of the witness or the reporter and the possibility ofholding court sessions via videoconferencing, because these provisions conflict with the Code of
Criminal Procedure.5
2. The law did not contain any of the provisions that entail penalties in the event of non-compliance with
the implementation of the protection decisions issued by PACC.
3. Protection did not include relatives of whistle-blowers, witnesses, experts, and persons closely related
to them in accordance with the requirements of Articles 32 and 33 of the United Nations Convention
against Corruption.
3

The increase of the number of complaints and reports since 2019 may return to the use of technologies that enabled thereporting of corruption through PACCs mobile application in the beginning of 2019, in addition to the adoption of whistleblowers protection regulations and the establishment of whistle-blowers and witness protection unit also in 2019.
4
The annual report of PACC for the year 2020, sited: https://www.pacc.ps/library/viewbook/30408.
5
Articles 84 and 235 of the criminal procedures law No(3) for the year 2001. http://muqtafi.birzeit.edu/en/Legislation/
GetLegFT.aspx?LegPath=2001&MID=13854

16

PARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS
4. PACC faced difficulties related to providing job protection for workers in sectors covered by the law
other than the public sector, such as the private sector and local authorities, taking into considerationthat labour law does not include articles related to this kind of protection, and the employer has theright to dismiss workers in some cases.
To address these gaps and problems faced by the system of whistle-blower and witness protection, theCommission proposed an amendment to Article 18 of the law consistent with the requirements of articles 32
and 33 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption. This amendment was issued under Law by
Decree No. 37 of 2018, and the most important features of this amendment are as follows:
a- Expansion of protection to include relatives of the whistle-blower, witnesses, experts and persons
closely related to them.
b- Prescribing the mechanisms of protection represented in:- Providing them with protection in their places of residence;- Not disclosing information about their identity and whereabouts;- Giving their statements and testimonies through the use of modern communication techniques toensure their safety;- Protecting them in their places of work, and immunizing them from any discrimination, mistreatment,
any arbitrary action, or an administrative decision that changes their legal or administrative status
or detracts from their rights because of their testimonies, notification, or actions they haveundertaken to uncover corruption crimes;- Providing places to shelter them when necessary;- Taking any action or any necessary action to ensure their safety.
c- Imposing sanctions on any person who assaults or abuses a whistle-blower, witness or expert, becauseof what they have done to detect corruption or prevents them from giving testimony or from reportingon corruption, etc.6
d- The commission was allowed to disburse financial aid to whistle-blowers, witnesses and experts
determined in accordance with a regulation issued by the Council of Ministers.
This regulation to protect whistle-blowers, witnesses, informants and experts in corruption cases, theirrelatives and the persons close to them, No. (7) for the year 2019, has identified the scope of protected persons
to reach the relatives to the fourth degree, as well as persons close to them. It also stipulated the establishmentof a unit in the Commission for the protection of whistle-blowers and witnesses, specifying the proceduresfor submitting applications for protection and appeal, and cases of tightening or mitigating protection
measures, and their removal. The regulation also identifies the forms of protection, including functional, legal
and personal.
Accordingly, it can be said that the amendments introduced in the legislation regulating the protection ofwhistle-blowers, witnesses and experts in corruption crimes in Palestine worked to strengthen this system,
but what is required in this regard can be summarized as follows:-

Launching awareness campaigns on the protection system for whistle-blowers, witnesses andexperts, using all available means, to encourage people to report corruption with no fear of being
threatened;
Allocating sufficient budget to the Whistle-blowers and Witness Protection Unit;

6

Articles 25/5, 25/6. “5. A person who divulges information on the identity or whereabouts of witnesses, whistle-blowers, or
experts shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than six months and with a fine of not less than JOD (500) and not
more than JOD (10000).” “6. Without prejudice to any more severe punishment outlined in any other legislation, a person who
assaults whistle-blowers, witnesses or experts due to their work in revealing corruption, ill-treats them, discriminates againstthem in work or prevents them from testifying or report corruption, shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than
one year and with a fine of not less than JOD (500). In case force is used, or there is a threat with firearms or any othermeans of intimidation, imprisonment shall be for not less than two years and a fine of not less than JOD (500) and not morethan JOD (10000).”

17

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 113-

Activating some of the mechanisms mentioned in the law, especially those related to the possibilityof using technology to hear the testimonies of witnesses in corruption crimes, and the possibility ofconcealing their identities, especially during the trial, as these texts are not activated yet;
Launching of an official annual prize for whistle-blowers on corruption crimes;
Raising the capabilities of workers in the Whistle-blower and Witness Protection Unit.

III. EXEMPTION OR COMMUTATION OF PUNISHMENTFOR COLLABORATORS ACCUSED OF
CORRUPTION CRIME AND THEIR ACCOMPLICESThe United Nations Convention against Corruption calls on States parties, in Article 37, to take appropriate
measures to encourage persons who participate or have participated in the commission of an act of corruption
established under the Convention to provide useful information to the competent authorities for investigationand evidentiary purposes, and to provide assistance that may contribute to depriving offenders of theproceeds of crime and recovering those proceeds, and also calls for consideration of the possibility of
mitigating the penalty for the accused who provides substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecutionof an act criminalized under the Convention.
The amended Anti-Corruption Law in Palestine, in paragraph (3) of Article 25 thereof, dealt with provisions
that are consistent with the requirements of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, referred toabove, for the crime before its detection, and for the money obtained from it, provided that he returns themoney obtained. This case assumes that none of the public authorities have prior knowledge of the crime,
and that they have not undertaken any of the investigation, criminal or even administrative procedures, as
the author believes that the existence of an administrative investigation with any of the institutions denies
the possibility of benefiting from the exemption from punishment.
The same paragraph of Article (25) of the amended Anti-Corruption Law also deals with the possibilityof reducing the penalty by half and exempting the perpetrator or his/her accomplice from the fine if he/shehelps the investigation authorities to discover the crime and its perpetrators.
In this regard, it should be noted that the Palestinian legal system does not allow reconciliation incorruption crimes, as every crime results in the state’s right to punish its perpetrator, and the state’s meansfor enforcing this right is the criminal case, and the Public Prosecution, as an investigative authority, is the
body entrusted with practicing those procedures. However, this does not mean that the public lawsuit
belongs to the Public Prosecution, but rather it is the right of the social body. As for the Public Prosecution,
it is only its agent in using it. And it has no right to waive it, leave it, disrupt its functioning, or reconcile it,
unless permitted by law. This principle was referred to in the Palestinian Code of Criminal Procedures in its
first article, which states that the Public Prosecution shall have the exclusive jurisdiction to initiate andconduct criminal cases, and it shall not be instituted by others except in the cases specified in the law andthat the case may not be suspended, waived, abandoned, or obstructed, nor reconciled except in the cases
mentioned in the law".
In Article (16), the Palestinian legislature permitted reconciliation in violations and misdemeanours
punishable by a fine only. 7 The legislature differentiates the parties that are entitled to offer reconciliationaccording to the type of crime. In violations, the competent judicial officer, when drafting the report, presents
the reconciliation to the accused or his representative, and this is evidenced in his report. As for the offer ofreconciliation in misdemeanours, it is for the Public Prosecution. Reconciliation shall be in accordance with
Palestinian legislation by paying an amount equal to a quarter of the maximum fine prescribed for the crime,or its minimum value, if any, whichever is less, provided that the payment shall be within fifteen days from

7

Article 16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. (3) for the year 2001 that "may be reconciled in offenses materials andmisdemeanours punishable by a fine only, and the warden control the judicial competent when editing the record thatthe reconciliation presented to the accused or his agent in the offenses and prove it in His presence, and be introduced toreconcile misdemeanours from the public prosecution.

18

PARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS
the day following the acceptance of the reconciliation.8 The payment of the settlement amount entails the
expiration of the penal lawsuit without having any effect on the civil lawsuit.
Based on the foregoing, and since the crime of corruption is one for which it is not permissible toreconcile, as it imposes penalties other than a fine, and since the Palestinian Anti-Corruption Law is devoidof any provision that permits reconciliation, there is no room for the system of reconciliation in the crime ofcorruption in Palestine. The implementation of this system in Palestine is either by amending the text ofArticle (16) of the Code of Criminal Procedure so that it is one of the crimes in which reconciliation ispermissible, or by finding a special text in the anti-corruption law that allows reconciliation for the crime ofillicit enrichment, or corruption crimes in general, so the text specific to these crimes is restricted to thegeneral text contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In this regard, there is a debate in Palestine whether to have legal provisions to establish a reconciliation
system in corruption cases or to stick with the possibility of the exemption or reduction of punishment. Most
Palestinians are against any measures that are considered as tolerant of corrupt persons, even if it resulted
in the recovery of stolen assets.

IV. COOPERATION BETWEEN THE AUTHORITIES AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS AND
THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION TO
ENHANCE THE DETECTION OF CORRUPTION
A. Cooperation with Security Agencies
The exchange of information between law enforcement agencies, and in particular between each of theAnti-Corruption Authorities as a special judicial control body empowered to investigate and infer suspicionsof corruption and the security services authorized as a public judicial control body to investigate crimes ingeneral, is of great importance for crime detection and cooperation in the investigation process. Cooperation
between the two sides enables the concerted efforts available to both of them and the optimal use of human,material and technical resources in a way that enhances investigations. In this regard, the State of Palestine
has a particularly good experience, as the commission worked on concluding memorandums of understanding
with the Palestinian Police, the Preventive Security Service, the Military Intelligence and the Intelligence,
according to which information related to suspected corruption, including corruption committed by membersof these organizations, is exchanged. The devices, as well as the memorandums of understanding, allow them
to benefit from the capabilities of the criminal investigation laboratory in the police in investigations related
to suspicions of corruption. This cooperation has resulted in several positive outcomes:-

The commission can now use the agencies as part of its investigations into suspicions of corruption(joint investigations);
The authority was allowed to benefit from the technical expertise available in the criminal investigationlaboratory at the police, especially in the work of matching and detecting forgery;
The agencies committed themselves to referring the files available to them regarding corruption
crimes to the Commission as a special judicial control body, including those committed by members ofthese agencies, and not only disciplinary accountability.

Enhancing cooperation with law enforcement agencies, arrangements were made for the secondment ofa member of each law enforcement agency to work with the PACC.9 These officials became the focal point
between PACC and their agencies.
B. Cooperation with the Financial Follow-up Unit
The Financial Follow-up Unit was established by virtue of a decision of the Anti-Money Laundering andTerrorist Financing Law No. (20) for the year 2015 and its amendments, as an independent unit, and the unit
aims to combat the crime of money-laundering and terrorist financing, protect the national economy from
8
9

Article 17 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Palestinian No. (3) for the year 2002.
They work as an operation team helping investigators and are located in PACC.

19

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 113
the negative effects of these two crimes, raise the level of systems and procedures for combating moneylaundering and terrorist financing in Palestine, and activate local cooperation frameworks with all thecompetent authorities, and the unit works on implementation. The objectives are approved by the National
Committee for Combating Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, which in turn draws up policies
aimed at combating these two crimes at the local and international levels.
In this regard, the cooperation between the Anti-Corruption Commission and the Financial Follow-up
Unit is of a high degree of importance, as the Palestinian law considers laundering the proceeds from
corruption crimes a form of corruption crime, and tracking money and financial information that can be usedin the expertise of the Follow-up Unit Finance would help in revealing the original crime represented by oneof the corruption crimes, as it would reveal all the participants in the crime, including natural and legal
persons.
A memorandum of understanding was signed between the Corruption Crimes Prosecution and the
Financial Follow-up Unit, according to which the relationship between the two parties was organized,
enabling the Commission, through the Corruption Crimes Prosecution, to use the expertise of the Financial
Follow-up Unit to prepare and analyse suspicion reports in a way that enhances financial investigations into
suspicions of corruption.
C. The Importance of Accessing Some Public Records to Enhance the Investigation of Suspicions ofCorruption, Especially the Crime of Illicit Gain
The data kept in some public records, such as the civil registry with the Ministry of Interior, the vehicle
registry with the Ministry of Transport and Communications, the property registry with the Land Authority
and the Property Tax Department, in addition to the companies registry with the Ministry of Economy andNational and other records are of very great importance when investigating corruption crimes, especially ofgain, as the investigation and investigation procedures in this crime are based on comparing the wealth andproperty of the suspect in the crime of illicit gain with his legal income declared in the financial disclosurestatements submitted by him/her and kept with the Commission Combating corruption. If investigations
prove an unjustified increase in the suspect’s wealth, or the wealth of his/her spouse and minor children, thatis not commensurate with their legal and authorized income, and he/she is unable to justify this increase
with a legitimate source, he/she is presumed to have committed the crime of illicit gain.10
During the past two years, the commission has succeeded in obtaining the mentioned records throughthe ability to access all the required data directly and electronically.

10

Article 1 of the anti-corruption law defines “Illicit gain: Anything acquired by a person who is subject to the provisions of
this law for himself or for others due to the exploitation of office or status. Any increase in wealth after assuming office or
the existence of status of a person who is subject to the provisions of this law, his spouse or minor children when it is notproportional to their incomes and fails to prove the legitimate source.”20