GROUP 2
EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO ESTABLISH SYSTEM S TO PREVENT AND
COM BAT CORRUPTION
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
M embers

AdviserMs. Oris Idalmis JAEN FERNANDEZ
Mr. David Gathii WAM BUGU
Mr. Alexandru DONCIU
Ms. Shizu KOYAMA
Mr. Mohammad Saidur RAHMAN
Mr. Hideyuki INUKAIMr. Takayuki SAKAI
Mr. Martin Otieno OBUO
Ms. Khin M yat TAR
Mr. Myo Khaing SWE
Mr. Abraham Nikolous IHALUA
Mr. Apichai THONGPRASOM
Prof. Yusuke HIROSE(Panama)(Kenya)(M oldova, Rep. of)(Japan)(Bangladesh)(Japan)(Japan)(Kenya)(M yanmar)(M yanmar)(Namibia)(Thailand)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCTION
The group started its discussions on 25 October 2013. The group, in its first meeting, elected byconsensus Ms. Oris Idalmis JAEN FERNANDEZ (Panama) as its Chairperson, M r. David Gathii
WAM BUGU (Kenya) as co-Chairperson, M r. Alexandru DONCIU (Moldova) as Rapporteur and Ms.
Shizu KOYAMA (Japan)as co-Rapporteur.
Corruption continues to be a major challenge to a majority of developed and developing countries,
with the latter being hardest hit. All countries represented in the group had put in place various
measures to prevent and combat corruption.The countries had signed the United Nations Convention
Against Corruption (UNCAC) and, with the exception of Japan, ratified it. Implementation of the
UNCAC was at various but advanced stages of implementation with regular reviews and reporting on
progress. Apart from the establishment of robust criminal justice systems through which cases ofcorruption were processed and enactment of anti-corruption laws,a majority of the countries,with the
exception of Japan, had also established anti-corruption agencies charged with enforcement throughinvestigations and asset tracing, prevention and education.
The groupʼs aim was to establish :effective measures to prevent and combat corruption in regard
to the current situation of corruption in each country,effective systems to prevent corruption,effective
systems ofcapacitybuilding in each country,and problems and countermeasures related to establishingsystems to prevent and combat corruption in each country.

II. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
A. Current Situation of Corruption in Each Country
In order to have a clear picture of the current situation of corruption in each country, members
considered the report by Transparency International (TI)regarding the Corruption Perception Index
2012 (CPI). According to this index, the countries represented in the group fared as follows:
JAPAN
Japan was ranked 17th among 176 evaluated countries.Participants from Japan noted that corruption
mainly spreads in local administrative authorities,particularly in the field of public procurement.For
example, a public official of local government gets a kickback from the construction company andleaks cost estimates for construction projects coming up for bidding.
NAM IBIA
Namibia was ranked 58th in the world. M ost of the corruption happens in law enforcement agencies,

287

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 92
the judiciary and government ministries such as customs and immigration control.
PANAM A
Panama was ranked 83rd out of 176 countries.The majority of the corruption cases relate to embezzlement,abuse of authority and public procurement,among others.M ost of these cases are highlighted in
the media, hence the higher perception of corruption in the country.
THAILAND
Thailand was ranked 88th out of 176 countries. Corruption in the public administration system hastaken place for a long time in Thailand.The Thai people somehow accept the reality that corruption
is inevitablypart ofthe system and when an ordinarycitizen or honest business people seek the services
from governmental authorities or politicians, a small fee or reward may be given to officials in
exchange of convenience and speedy services. In the eyes of the public,this does not count as corruption.
REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
Republic of Moldova was ranked 94th among 176 countries. Corruption is mostly prevalent in the
judicial system, health sector, law enforcement and other public authorities.As an ex-Soviet country,
M oldova inherited the soviet way of life which tolerates bribes and other corrupt acts. Moreover,political patronage in all public authorities allows corruption to thrive.
KENYA
Kenya was ranked 139th out of 176 countries. Corruption is endemic in Kenya and has eaten into thesocio-economic and political fabric of the country.Corruption mostly thrives in politics,administrative
authorities: police, immigration, revenue and lands departments, and criminal justice authorities.
Corruption spreads in Kenya mainly in the following fields:public procurement, the criminal justicesystem, immigration and tax collection. Corruption is therefore an existential threat to the economy
and national security in Kenya.
BANGLADESH
Bangladesh was ranked 144th out of 176 countries.The people ofBangladesh are engaged in corruption
due to poverty, over-population and inadequate resource. Public servants, non-state actors, politicalleaders are also engaged in corruption.Corruption is rampant in the service sector.The entrepreneurs
face problems in obtaining loan facilities and administrative facilitation without illegal payments.
Public officials and politicians misappropriate funds set aside for development.
M YANM AR
M yanmar was ranked 170th out of 176 countries.Most corrupt activities take place within administrative and criminal justice authorities. Corruption is rampant due to the fact that salary of public
servants is lower than in other countries. However, it is difficult to determine the exact fields ofcorruption for want of credible data.
In light of the foregoing, it is imperative to put in place effective systems to prevent and combat
corruption in countries represented in the group.
B. Effective System to Prevent Corruption
1. Establishment of Authorities to Prevent Corruption
Group members noted that in their countries,there are established authorities charged with responsibility of preventing and combating corruption.In the case of Japan,there is no specialized authority
to prevent corruption. However, there are effective mechanisms to prevent corruption put in place ineach public authority.
All members stated that they have Anti-Corruption Agencies (ACA) in their respective countries
with the exception of Japan.For example,in Moldova the National Anti-corruption Centre has power
to prevent corruption. In Thailand, many government authorities are set up to monitor, prevent andefficiently suppress corruption cases.These include the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC)
and the Office of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission.NACC is mandated to deal with declara-288

16TH UNAFEI UNCAC TRAINING PROGRAM MEREPORTS OF THE PROGRAM ME
tion and inspection of assets and liabilities, prevention of corruption and suppression of corruption.
The participants from Kenya stated that the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission has been
established which is mandated to prevent corruption in line with the UNCAC requirements. Furthermore, the Constitution of Kenya 2010 requires the National Police Service to prevent corruption.The
National Land Commission is also charged with the responsibility of stamping out corruption in theland sector.Moreover,the National Anti-Corruption Campaign Steering Committee was established toprevent corruption through sensitization and awareness creation to the public.
The members pointed out that though most ofthe countries have ACA,there is a need to define theirpowers and functions in order to make them more effective in preventing corruption. These include
proper governance structures,accountability,declaring conflicts of interest and having enough powers
to ensure that their recommendations after audit of public entities are implemented. In addition, the
ACA should be well resourced in order to fully support their operations.
The functions of these authorities should include corruption risk assessment,systems,policies andprocedures audits,education,sensitization,awareness creation,developing codes of conduct in private
and public sectors and development of strategies to prevent corruption.
2. Establishment of Independent Authorities to Investigate Corruption
The members were of the view that the afore-mentioned preventive measures would not be effective
unless independent authorities to investigate corruption are established.All the participants stated thatthey have in their countries independent authorities that investigate corruption cases.Such authorities
should be independent,well resourced with the capability to initiate their own investigation and havespecial investigative powers such as eavesdropping,wiretapping,surveillance,and search and seizure,among others.
The members strongly felt that both investigation and prosecution should be conducted under thesame roof to effectively combat corruption cases.M embers concluded that there should be robust andadequate legal framework to anchor the above measures.
3. Systems to Ensure the Independence of Criminal Justice Authorities
For corruption to be effectively dealt with, the members agreed that systems must be put in place
to ensure the independence of the criminal justice authorities as follows:(a)Independence of the judiciary
Independence of the judiciary must be guaranteed in the constitutions of the respective countries.
This will enable the adjudication of corruption cases without undue interference.M embers suggested
that the appointment of judicial officers should be fair, transparent, competitive and insulated frompolitical interference and other vested interests. Judges should have security of tenure and should be
only removed from office by an independent tribunal.They should have a fixed retirement age,be wellremunerated and that the pay should not be reduced during their term of service.Members agreed that
judicial officers should be transferred after a fix period of time according to a transfer policy formulated by the judiciary itself.
(b)Prosecutorial independence
All participants agreed that prosecutorial independence should also be guaranteed in the constitution, and the Public Prosecutor should not be under the direction or control of any authority.
(c) Investigative independence
M embers agreed that investigative agencies should be independent and this must be guaranteed in
the constitution. The recruitment and selection of personnel in these agencies must be competitive,
transparent and fair.
(d)Codes of conduct for public officials
M embers were unanimous that there should be one code ofconduct for public servants,as is the casein Japan and Panama. The code of conduct should provide for sanctions in cases of breach by public289

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 92
servants as well as declaration of income, assets and liabilities for the official, spouse and dependent
children.The declarations should be submitted periodically and also upon appointment,promotion andexit from service. These declarations should be easily accessible to the law enforcement agencies.
(e) Systems to Manage Public Procurement
During group discussions,it was agreed that the management of public procurement is an importantand critical problem in many countries. A case in point is Japan which faces the problem of public
procurement and has adopted the Overall Evaluation System. This system enables the prevention of
dumping and bid-rigging and expulsion of delinquent, disqualified companies etc., by allowing only
qualified contractors to participate in public procurement.It also enables the prevention of bid-rigging
by considering non-pricing factors.
Finally,group members came to a consensus on the following principles to manage public procurement:open tendering,sufficient time to prepare and submit tenders,transparent evaluation and award
process;and avenues for appeal.
(f) Measures to prevent corruption by encouraging cooperation between public and private sectors
M embers noted that there is a need for cooperation and involvement of the citizens and the private
sectors in supporting measures to prevent corruption. It is important to encourage the spirit ofcooperation between both sectors.Corruption in the private sector has an impact on the public sector.
M easures to prevent corruption in the private sector may include signing corporate integrity pledges,
establishing risk and compliance units and promoting corruption reporting within corporations.
M embers agreed that it is important to ensure active public participation in anti-corruption initiatives.Their participation may include refusing to give/receive bribes,reporting corruption,recording
statements and testifying in courts of law and other forums.
Participants from Japan stated that in each organization, public and private, employees are
educated to obey the relevant laws.The group members suggested the following measures to encourage
the participation of private and public sectors:active participation of civilians in the fight against
corruption, trust in institutions and processes to deliver results, public education, sensitization andawareness creation, public campaigns, enactment of law to address corruption in the private sector,
media advertising, civil society involvement and access to relevant information.
C. Effective Systems of Capacity Building in Each Country
1. Necessary Expertise and Abilities
M embers were of the view that in order to effectively prevent and fight corruption it is necessary
to build capacity in each country. For example in Namibia there is a huge backlog of cases in the
Courts. The Magistrates, Judges and Prosecutors are also not enough to deal with the cases. In
M yanmar,for financial,accounting and fiscal expertise,officers from the Office ofAuditor General arerequested to check financial affairs and where necessary, private accountant firms are engaged byinvestigators. Further, experts from the Information and Communication M inistry may perform
computer forensics to assist the investigations.
M embers agreed that the main expertise and abilities necessary for effective systems of capacity
building in each country include:financial, accounting and fiscal expertise, analysing financial evidence and computer forensics.Where necessary,specialized divisions to perform fiscal expertise within
ACA may be established.
The participants agreed that for a better case management, it would be advisable to have thesetypes of expertise within ACAs. Participants stated that it was necessary to build capacity to ensure
fair,speedy and organized investigation and trial of corruption cases.It was also recognized that lackof timeframe for trying corruption cases,as is the case in Thailand and Moldova,hinders proper casemanagement.
Further, members agreed there was a need to build capacity of public officials to enable themconduct official business in an ethical manner. Consequently, newly hired public officials should be290

16TH UNAFEI UNCAC TRAINING PROGRAM MEREPORTS OF THE PROGRAM ME
instilled with public ethics while at the same time,establishing systems of reward and punishment for
unethical conduct.
2. M easures to Ensure Expertise
As a measure to ensure expertise,members stated that ACAs must competitively recruit specialists
in different areas.These specialists must be trained continuously to be up to date with emerging trends
in corruption.The training should encompass short and long courses,exchange programmes and study
tours,on the job training,mentoring and partnership with academic institutions to promote excellence.
Since it is not possible to have all the expertise required to investigate corruption under one roof,
members stated that is was necessary to outsource to the private sector.Outsourcing also supplements
the expertise available within ACAs.Outsourcing can also be used as a means of technology transfer.
It is important to have a pool of highly specialized bodies of investigators,prosecutors and judges
in the investigation,prosecution and hearing of corruption cases respectively.This is a highly specialized area that requires specialized personnel.
D. Problems and Countermeasures Related to Establishing Systems to Prevent and Combat Corruption in Each Country
M embers appreciated that preventing and combating corruption is faced with many challenges,andthere is a need to identify them and suggest countermeasures to establish effective systems.Therefore,
it was unanimously agreed to identify problems and countermeasures related to the establishment ofsystems to prevent and combat corruption in each country, as follows:
1. Lack of Political Will
Commitment of the top political leadership to the goal of eradicating corruption in countries isweak, as has been the case in many of the group membersʼcountries. Most governments only pay lip
service to the fight against corruption.Anti-corruption reforms,in this regard,are therefore bound to
fail.
M embers proposed the following countermeasures: political party manifestos should containpledges to prevent and combat corruption as a priority. The citizens should hold their leaders toaccount in this regard.
2. Political Influence and Interference
The participants felt political influence and interference is a threat to the establishment of effective
systems to prevent and combat corruption. The budgetary allocation process, which is controlled bypoliticians, was cited. Interference in the appointment of the heads and staff of ACAs, among others,
was also cited.The group agreed that it is necessary to guarantee independence in the constitution anddevelop well-defined policies to avoid political influence.
3. Lack of Adequate Legal Framework
All members agreed that though the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) provides a
powerful tool to strengthen anti-corruption programmes, ACAs continue to be denied adequate legal
frameworks to fight corruption. Some participants stated that in their countries, ACAs do not havepowers to investigate corruption in the private sector, while in others, ACAs are denied special
investigative powers such as wiretapping, etc.
As a countermeasure,members were of the view that the legal framework should be strengthened.
In this regard ACAs should have powers to prevent corruption through laws that allow improvement
in collection of evidence, investigation, prosecution, asset tracing and seizure, intervention in theprivate sector and mutual legal assistance.
4. M ind-set of the Citizens and Public Officials
All participants agreed that the mind-set of the citizens is a threat to establishment of effective
systems. They noted the culture of “giving”gifts promoted corrupt practices. In some countries thecitizens think that they have no responsibility in the fight against corruption,yet they are on the supply

291

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 92
side of the corruption equation. Citizens also donʼt view corruption as a crime, but as mutual obligations and mutual benefits.
M embers proposed extensive public education, sensitization and awareness of citizens to promotemoral and ethical behaviour. This will enhance the public officialsʼintegrity in the society.Engaging
citizens in fighting corruption through providing information/feedback (change the public perception
and expectations), involvement of mass-media, positive engagement, call-in programmes, debatecompetitions, establishment of local civilian oversight committees, establishment of a system toempower people to report incidences of corruption without reprisal.
5. Lack of Equipment (Advanced Technology, Transport, Etc.)
All participants agreed that a lack of appropriate equipment and advanced technology could
hamper the development of effective measures to prevent and combat corruption.Persons engaged incorrupt activities have embraced new technology making it hard to detect and collect evidence.Lackof modern equipment and technology makes it difficult for investigators to deal with corruption cases
effectively.The same applies to the delivery of the public education programmes.The group,therefore,
recommended acquisition of modern technology and equipment.
6. Human Resources
The group noted that human resources are an important factor in the establishment of effective
systems.M ismanagement of human resources through unfair recruitment,appointment without transparent policy, lack of motivation and low salaries was cited.
Participants stated that it is necessary to develop clear policies as far as recruitment,appointment,
management and development of human resource are concerned. There is also the need for establishment of an independent body for recruiting and selection as well as enhancing salaries according toliving standards and competitiveness and developing reward programmes.
7. Insufficient Funds
The participants agreed that the lack of reasonably adequate funds undermines the efficacy of theanti-corruption systems.The members were of the view that funding policies should be developed andimplemented. ACAs should be allowed to receive support from NGOs, foreign authorities for campaigns training and advertisements.
8. Bureaucracy (Process Length, Inefficiency)
M embers identified bureaucracy as a threat to the establishment of effective systems.Lengthy andcomplex processes frustrate the service delivery and provide opportunities to extort and offer bribes.
M embers recommended the development and promotion of service delivery charters,automation of themanual processes and review of policies, procedures and processes.
9. Lack of Interagency Cooperation
All participants agreed that lack of mutual trust and working at cross purposes by law enforcement
agencies pose a threat to the establishment of systems to prevent and combat corruption. Members
noted that there is need to foster cooperation between the agencies, develop better communication
mechanisms and demonstrate unity of purpose. Agencies are encouraged to sign M emoranda ofUnderstanding (MOUs)and build synergies.
10.Lack of Supervision
The participants noted that lack of supervision is a threat to establishment of effective systems as
the staff may lose its sense of direction and focus. Members, therefore, recommended the following
countermeasures:open-space office policy,hands-on management,visiting and inspecting subordinatesʼ
workplaces.

III. CONCLUSION
M embers appreciated that fighting corruption through investigation and prosecution of the corruption cases was very expensive.Corrupt individuals who had illegally acquired public resources would292

16TH UNAFEI UNCAC TRAINING PROGRAM MEREPORTS OF THE PROGRAM ME
not hesitate to deploy such resources to circumvent legal processes. The group was therefore of theview that establishing effective systems to prevent and combat corruption should be governmentʼ
sprimary concern.Consequently sufficient resources,political will and support should be fostered by all
stakeholders.
The participants unanimously agreed that creating awareness of the people and engaging the civilsociety, mass-media, private and public sector cooperation in preventing and combating corruption is
the ultimate goal for zero tolerance of corruption.

293