NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION STRATEGY:
THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT MINISTRIES
Tony Kwok Man-wai *I. INTRODUCTION
I am honoured to have been invited to UNAFEI for the seventh time to share with you my 27 yearsof experience in fighting Corruption in Hong Kong, as well as my last six years of experience as an anticorruption consultant/trainer in 19 different countries. I joined the ICAC as a junior investigator shortly
after its inception in 1975 and was subsequently promoted through a number of ranks to become thefirst Chinese Deputy Commissioner and Head of Operations in 1996. I witnessed and participated in
the successful battle to turn Hong Kong from one of the most corrupt places on earth to now one of thecleanest. Having been a pioneer corruption fighter for 27 years, I have maintained a strong passion for
the anti-corruption mission and thus, since my retirement, I have been offering my consultancy service in
the international arena to help fight this common enemy. Hence I am most grateful for the opportunity toparticipate in this most worthwhile course and share with you my experience.

II. POLITICAL WILL
From my experience and observation in a number of countries which have a serious corruption problem,
I come to the conclusion that the most important element of an effective anti-corruption strategy is “politicalwill”. Without political will at the highest level, it is almost impossible to combat corruption effectively.
However, all political leaders will claim that they have the will to combat corruption. I propose that weshould be able to judge whether there is genuine political will by checking the following criteria:
•

•

•
•

Firstly, how much support has the government provided in its anti-corruption budget? In Hong
Kong, we set aside 0.3 to 0.4% of our government budget for the ICAC and we believe this isquite adequate. I think no government can claim that they cannot afford to set aside such a small
percentage for combating corruption, particularly when corruption is one of their major problems.
However, I have witnessed that in many “corrupt” countries, their anti-corruption budget isoften less than 0.01% of the national budget, and very often this is the main reason why they are
unsuccessful. If a Government wants to demonstrate its political will, it should ensure that the Anti
Corruption Agency (ACA) is given adequate resources.
Secondly, is there adequate legal support for the ACA to investigate corruption? Because of
its secret nature, corruption is one of the most difficult crimes to investigate, and to carry out
effective enforcement an ACA needs strong power and easier-to-prove offences. The government
and parliament can demonstrate their political will by passing legislation which is anti-corruption
friendly.
Thirdly, is the ACA truly independent in carrying out its enforcement work without politicalinterference?
Fourthly, is the government adopting a zero tolerance policy on corruption? If there is a double
standard in the society, where minor corruption is tolerated or private sector corruption is tolerated,then it is impossible for the society to become a genuinely clean society.

Apart from political will, I want to point out two misconceptions about fighting corruption.

* Adjunct Professor & Honorary Course Director, Postgraduate Certificate in Corruption Studies, Hong Kong University
SPACE and Former Deputy Commissioner and Head of Operations, Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC),
Hong Kong.

133

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.79••

Firstly, it should be realized that there is no single solution to the problem of corruption. You need acomprehensive approach. The Hong Kong model, which is now widely accepted internationally andincluded in the United Nations Convention against Corruption, is to combat corruption through athree pronged approach: enforcement, prevention and education.
Secondly, it should also be realized that you cannot rely on one single agency to combat corruption.
Apart from ACA, there should be a coalition of all social partners. The most important partner is theGovernment, which has an important role in cleaning its own house. Other partners should include
the judiciary, the parliament, the private sector, professional bodies, civil organizations, international
agencies, the media and the public.

III. WHAT IS AN EFFECTIVE ANTI-CORRUPTION STRATEGY?
As a result of the success of the Hong Kong model in fighting corruption, many countries followed Hong
Kong’s example in setting up a dedicated anti-corruption agency. However, many such agencies have notbeen effective and hence there are queries as to whether the Hong Kong model can be successfully applied
to other countries. The point is whether there is a thorough understanding of the working of the Hong Kongmodel. In my view, it consists of the following eleven components.

A. Three Pronged Strategy
As stated earlier, there is no single solution in fighting corruption. Hong Kong’s ICAC adopts a threepronged approach: deterrence, prevention and education. As a result, the Commission consists of three
separate departments: the Operations Department to investigate corruption; the Corruption Prevention
Department to examine the systems and procedures in the public sector, to identify the corruption
opportunities and to make recommendations to plug the loopholes; and the Community Relations
Department to educate the public against the evil of corruption and to enlist its support and partnership infighting corruption.
B. Enforcement Led
The three prongs are equally important, but ICAC devotes over 70% of its resources to the Operations
Department. The reasons are that any successful fight against corruption must start with effective
enforcement on major targets, so as to demonstrate to the public the government’s determination to fightcorruption at all costs, as well as to demonstrate the effectiveness of the anti-corruption agencies. Without
that, the public would be reluctant to come forward to report corruption. Successful enforcement assists
in identifying problem areas for corruption prevention review and can clear any human obstacle in thereview. The successful enforcement stories also provide a basis for public education and deter other corrupt
officials.
C. Professional Staff
Fighting corruption is a very difficult task, because you are confronting people who are probably very
intelligent, knowledgeable and powerful. Thus anti-corruption agents must be very professional. The
ICAC ensures that its staff is professional in its diverse responsibilities – the Operations Department has
professional investigators, intelligence experts, computer experts, forensic accountants and legal experts.
The Corruption Prevention Department has management/technical experts and the Community Relations
Department pools together education, ethics and public relations experts. Apart from professionalism, each
ICAC staff member is expected to uphold a high level of integrity and to possess a passion and sense of
mission in carrying out his or her duties.
D. Effective Deterrence Strategy
The ICAC’s strategy to ensure effective enforcement consists of the following components:
•
•
•

134

An effective public complaint system to encourage reporting of corruption by members of the
public and referrals from other institutions. ICAC has a 24 hour report centre – a highly publicized
telephone hotline to facilitate public reporting.
A quick response system to deal with complaints requiring prompt action. At any time, there is aninvestigation team standing by, ready to be called into action.
The ICAC adopts a zero tolerance policy. So long as there is reasonable suspicion, all reports ofcorruption, irrespective of whether it is serious or relatively minor in nature, will be properlyTHE ELEVENTH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CORRUPTIONVISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS••

investigated.
There is a check and balance system to ensure all investigations are professionally and prompted
investigated, and free from political interference.
Any successful enforcement will be publicized in the media to demonstrate effectiveness and to
deter further corruption.

E. Effective Prevention Strategy
The corruption prevention strategy aims at reducing corruption opportunities in government
departments and public institutions. The general principle is to ensure efficiency, transparency andaccountability in all government businesses.
The most corruption-vulnerable areas are public procurement, public works, licensing, public services
delivery, law enforcement and revenue collection. These should be the priority areas to introduce corruption
prevention reform as success would undoubtedly enhance government revenue and reduce wastage, hence
providing the government additional resources to tackle the poverty problem.

F. Effective Education Strategy
To enlist the support of the entire community to fight corruption the ICAC has a very wide range ofeducation strategies. These include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Media publicity to ensure effective enforcement cases are well publicized, through press releases,
media conferences and interviews, as well as TV drama series based on successful cases;
Media education – use of mass media commercials to encourage the public to report corruption;
promote public awareness of the evil of corruption and the need for a fair and just society, and as
deterrence to the corrupt;
School ethics education programmes, starting from kindergarten up to university;
The ICAC Club, which accepts members who wish to perform voluntary work for the ICAC incommunity education;
Corruption prevention talks and ethics development seminars for public servants and the businesssector;Corruption prevention best practices and guidelines publications;
In partnership with the business sector, the ICAC set up an Ethics Development Centre as aresource centre for the promotion of a business code of ethics;
Organize exhibitions, fun fairs, and television variety shows to spread the message of a clean society;
Wide use of websites for publicity and reference, youth education and ethics development.

G. Effective Legal Framework and Anti-Corruption Law
Hong Kong has comprehensive legislation to deal with corruption. Apart from the normal bribery
offences, it created three unique offences. It is an offence:•••

for any civil servant to accept gifts, loans, discounts and passage from persons who have official/business relationships with the government, even if there is no related corrupt dealings, unlessspecific permission is given;for any civil servant to be in possession of assets disproportionate to his or her official income; or tolive above his or her means,
for a public official to abuse his or her authority for private gain, whether for him or herself or otherpersons. This is a criminal breach of the rule against conflict of interest. It includes a statutory
requirement to report potential conflict of interest.

On investigative power, apart from the normal police power of search, arrest and detention, ICAC
has the power to check bank accounts, intercept telephone communication, require witnesses to answer
questions under oath, restrain properties suspected to be derived from corruption, and hold the suspects’
travel documents to prevent them from fleeing the jurisdiction. Not only are they empowered to investigate
corruption offences, both in the Government and the private sector, they can investigate all crimes which
are connected with corruption.
The ICAC cases are prosecuted by a select panel of public prosecutors to ensure both quality andintegrity. The judiciary of Hong Kong is a strong supporter of fighting corruption, which ensures that the135

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.79

ICAC cases are handled in courts by highly professional judges with absolute fairness. The conviction ratefor ICAC cases is very high, around 80%.

H. Check and Balance Mechanism
With the provision of wide investigative power, there is an elaborate check and balance system toprevent abuse of such wide power. One unique feature is the Operations Review Committee. It is a highpowered committee, with the majority of its members coming from the private sector, appointed by the
Chief Executive. The committee reviews each and every report of corruption and investigation, to ensure
all complaints are properly dealt with and there is no “whitewashing”. It publishes an annual report, to betabled for debate before the legislature, thus ensuring public transparency and accountability. In addition,
there is an Independent Complaint Committee where members of the public can lodge any complaint against
the ICAC and/or its officers and there will be an independent investigation. It also publishes an annual report
to be tabled before the legislature.
I. Equal Emphasis on Public and Private Sector Corruption
Hong Kong was amongst one of the first jurisdictions to criminalize private sector corruption. ICAC
places equal emphasis on private and public sector corruption. The rationale is that there should be no
double standards. Private sector corruption can cause as much damage to society, if not more so, than public
sector corruption. Serious corruption in financial institutions can cause market instability; corruption in
the construction sector can result in dangerous structures. Effective enforcement of private sector anticorruption measures can be seen as a safeguard for foreign investment and ensures that Hong Kong
maintains a level playing field in its business environment, thus a competitive advantage in attracting foreign
investment.
J. Partnership Approach
You cannot rely on one single agency to fight corruption. Every one in the community and every
institution has a role to play. The ICAC adopts a partnership approach to mobilize all sectors to fightcorruption together. The key strategic partner of ICAC is the government agencies. The head ofgovernment agency should appreciate that it is his or her solemn responsibility to clean his or her own
house. Other important partners of ICAC include:(i) The Civil Service Commission(ii) The business community(iii) Professional bodies(iv) Civil societies and community organizations(v) Educational institutions(vi) Mass media(vii) International networking.

K. Top-Level Political Will
The most important factor in fighting corruption is “political will”. In Hong Kong, there is clearly toplevel political will to eradicate corruption, which enables the ICAC to be a truly independent agency. ICAC
is directly responsible to the very top, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. This ensures that the ICAC isfree from any interference in conducting its investigations. The strong political support was translated into
financial support. The ICAC is provided with adequate resources to combat corruption on all three fronts.
IV. WHY MANY ACAs FAILED
Many countries suffering from serious corruption problems set up Anti Corruption Agencies (ACAs).
Countries in Asia that have established dedicated ACAs include Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, thePhilippines, Brunei, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Timor Leste, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan, Bangladesh, South
Korea, China, Bhutan and Mongolia. However, few of them are regarded as effective in reducing corruption.
In some cases, corruption worsened. By comparison with the Hong Kong Model, one can identify thefollowing reasons why they failed:•136

Lack of understanding of the causes of corruption: The causes of corruption are due to available
corruption opportunities, lack of ethical values of public officials and citizens, and lack of deterrence.

THE ELEVENTH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CORRUPTIONVISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

•

•
•
•

•
•
•
•

Some ACAs failed to understand and hence failed to take effective action against each of the threemain causes. The most common error is the belief that corruption can be eradicated through good
governance reform. Some ACAs have no jurisdiction to investigate corruption and can only deal withprevention and education. On the other hand, some ACAs focus on enforcement only.
Lack of resources: In most corrupt countries where the ACA is not seen to be effective, it usually
suffers from lack of resources. Such ACAs’ budgets are invariably below 0.01% of the national
budget. Hong Kong’s anti-corruption budget is 0.38% of the government budget, which is alreadyadequate and such small percentage is clearly affordable by most governments;
Lack of independence: The ACA is subject to political interference in its investigations andprosecutions. Some ACAs were perceived to be used as political tools against the opponents of thegovernment;
Lack of legal support: The anti-corruption law is inadequate to enable the ACA to function
effectively. Some ACAs do not have power to have access bank accounts, which is essential incorruption investigations. Some ACAs do not even have the power of arrest.
Lack of public credibility: Some ACAs do not pursue a policy to encourage public reports. Some evendiscourage public reporting by imposing stringent conditions. In some countries, any corruption
report should be in the form of sworn affidavit before it is accepted by the ACA. Some ACAs refused
to investigate minor corruption complaints or those involving political sensitivity. Some failed
to observe confidentiality with the corruption reports. Some are biased in their investigation orabuse their power. They all suffered from lack of public credibility and without public support, it is
impossible for them to achieve success
Lack of coalition: The ACA appears to be fighting a lonely battle, with little support fromgovernment institutions and legislature;
Corrupt judiciary: making it most difficult to convict corrupt offenders, hence lack of deterrent
effect. To tackle this problem, some countries, such as Pakistan and the Philippines, have to set up
special courts to hear corruption trials;
Lack of professionals: Some ACAs commence their operation prematurely before they havesufficiently experienced and professional staff. Hence their ineffectiveness was highly exposed andthe initial public welcome was replaced by public cynicism;
Lack of internal control: Some ACAs are perceived to have an internal corruption problem.

The overriding factor for failure is the lack of political will. If there is strong political will anddetermination, most of the above problems can be resolved

V. THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT MINISTRIESApart from the ACAs, the most important players in combating corruption in a country are thegovernment ministries. I had assisted the President of the Philippines and the Prime Minister of Mongolia
to run top level anti-corruption workshops for their heads of ministries. It was amazing to note that initiallythese heads did not consider fighting corruption as their prime responsibility. But it is interesting to notethat after the workshop, they then came to have a better understanding of their internal corruption problem
and their responsibilities to clean their own houses. In these workshops, they came to accept that they havethe following internal problems:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Failure by the head of ministry to accept his or her responsibility to combat inhouse corruption;
Inadequate and ineffective in-house anti-corruption strategy and action plan;
Lack of integrity and ethics amongst staff;
Lack of enforcement of ethical conduct and ethical training;
Nepotism and conflict of interest in human resource management;
Poor public service delivery due to bureaucracy and corruption;
Outdated regulations, resulting in lack of transparency and accountability;
Lack of fair procurement procedures and political interference;
Weak internal audit.

They also agreed that there were indeed many things which they can or should do. These workshops
ended with a consensus on an action plan which the government ministries should implement, such as:••

Set up its own Anti-corruption Steering Group;
Review procedures and systems to make them more transparent and accountable;

137

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.79

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Formulate tailor-made codes of ethics and include regulation on acceptance of gifts andentertainment;
Introduce a declaration system for conflict of interest;
Practice an open and fair recruitment and promotion system, and include integrity checking;Introduce staff training on ethics and corruption prevention;
Leadership by example;
Promulgate zero tolerance policy;
Set up internal staff monitoring unit & internal audit unit;
Enhance and promulgate a public and internal confidential complaint channel with a complaint
hotline;Prompt referral of cases to the ACA and full co-operation with the ACA in investigation.

The government ministry should have a comprehensive corruption prevention strategy which should
include enhancement in the following management systems:
•
•
•
•
•

Performance Management
Procurement Management
Financial Management
Human Resources Management
Complaint Management.

Examples of some of the corruption prevention practices are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Identify risk in vulnerable areas and risk management;
Streamline work procedure manuals;
Enhance staff supervision through surprise check systems;
Enhance internal audits;
Maintain proper documentation for accountability;
Information security policy;
Job rotation policy;
Performance indicators/performance pledges (service guarantee);E-government and e-procurement;
Exercise transparency and fairness in staff recruitment, appraisal and promotion.

In both the Philippines and Mongolia, there is now a system of monitoring the annual anti-corruption planof the government ministries, to provide professional support and to ensure its sustainability through annual
review.

VI. INTERNATIONAL BEST PRACTICESHaving travelled to different countries as an international anti-corruption consultant, I have collected
some examples of international best practices in combating corruption:
•
•
•
•
•
•

138

In South Korea, the public sector, the business sector and civil society joined hands in forming a
coalition called Korea-PACT. Over 800 organizations signed the PACT and undertook to implement
the agreed action plan. The progress was reviewed annually by an international evaluation team;In the Philippines, an expert team is going through the government ministries one by one to carryout a comprehensive integrity audit check and to make recommendations on what measures therespective government ministries should implement to combat internal corruption problems;
In the Philippines, all public procurement in government ministries should be conducted througha “Bids and Award Committee”, and lay observers should be appointed to represent the public inmonitoring the decision making progress;
In Canada, all public officers have a legal obligation to report corruption;
In Pakistan, the Philippines and Indonesia, special anti-corruption courts were formed to hearcorruption trials;
Malaysia set up its own Malaysian National Integrity Index to monitor its the integrity progress.

THE ELEVENTH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CORRUPTIONVISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

VII. CONCLUSION
There is no single solution in fighting corruption. Every country has to examine its unique circumstancesand come up with a comprehensive strategy, which should embrace the three pronged approach deterrence, prevention and education. Ideally, there should be a dedicated and independent anti-corruption
agency tasked to co-ordinate and implement such strategy, and to mobilize support from the community.
The Hong Kong experience offers hope to countries which have a serious corruption problem whichappears to be insurmountable. Hong Kong’s experience proves that given top-level political will, a
dedicated anti-corruption agency and a correct strategy, even a most corrupt place, like Hong Kong, can betransformed into a clean society.

139