FIFTH REGIONAL SEMINAR ON GOOD GOVERNANCEFOR SOUTHEAST ASIAN COUNTRIES

Hosted by UNAFEI
With the support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan
7-9 December 2011, Tokyo, Japan

August 2012
TOKYO, JAPANThe views expressed in this publication are those of the respective presenters andauthors only, and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNAFEI, theGovernment of Japan, or other organizations to which those persons belong.

FOREWORD
It is my great pleasure and privilege to present this report of the Fifth Regional
Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries, which was held in Tokyo
from 7 – 9 December 2011. This was our first time to hold a Good Governance Seminarin Tokyo, and it was our great pleasure to welcome participants to the Japanese capital.
We hope that we have repayed the hospitality always extended to us on our previous
visits to conduct the Seminar.
The main theme of the Seminar was “Preventing Corruption: Effective
Administrative and Criminal Justice Measures,” and it was attended by sixteen
participants and one observer ― all criminal justice practitioners ― from Cambodia,
Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. The
Seminar was organized by UNAFEI, with a contribution from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Japan.
Corruption destroys nations. It undermines democracy and the rule of law,distorts business activities and competition, and hinders sustainable development andprosperity. It is also a threat to the security of societies as it creates environments inwhich organized crime, terrorism, and other forms of unlawful activity may prosper.
Such enormous negative impacts of corruption and its increasing transnational
aspects led to the adoption of the United Nations Convention against Corruption(UNCAC), the first global, legally binding anti-corruption instrument, by the UN
General Assembly on 31 October 2003.
UNCAC introduces a comprehensive set of standards, measures and rules that
all countries can apply in order to better counter the problem of corruption. It takes amultidisciplinary approach and, recognizing the significance of both punitive andpreventive measures, devotes one full chapter to “Criminalization and Law
Enforcement” and another to “Preventive Measures.”
Criminal justice measures still perform core functions in addressing anddeterring corruption. However, given the magnitude of the problem and inherent
difficulties in detecting and prosecuting corruption, the importance of prevention canneither be overlooked nor overstated. A range of preventive measures and policies withvarying degrees of legal obligations are provided for in the UNCAC, and it also calls on
States Parties to promote active participation of wider society in the fight against
corruption and to raise public awareness regarding corruption and its threats.
The Fifth Regional Seminar aimed not only to develop human resources but
also to deepen mutual understanding of the current situation and mechanisms in regard
to preventing corruption. Through discussion of the issues, participants’ experienceswere exchanged, and their knowledge of effective strategies and best practices in thisregard was further improved.
It is my pleasure to publish this Report of the Seminar as part of UNAFEI’s
mission, entrusted to it by the United Nations, to widely disseminate meaningful
information on criminal policy.
Finally, I would like to express my sincere appreciation, on behalf of UNAFEI, tothe Department of Foreign Affairs of Japan, for its contribution in convening the Fifth
Regional Seminar.

Tatsuya SAKUMA
Director, UNAFEI
August 2012

INDEX– PREVENTING CORRUPTION –EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE MEASURESIntroduction ································································································· 1
Opening Address by Mr. Tatsuya Sakuma, Director, UNAFEI ··································· 3Introductory Remarks by Mr. Haruhiko Ukawa, Deputy Director, UNAFEI ··················· 5Papers and Contributions ················································································· 11
Visiting Expert, UNODC, Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann ···············································13
Visiting Expert, Hong Kong, ICAC, Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau····································34
Adviser, Ms. Chie Miyahara (JICA) ·································································65
Adviser, Mr. Fumio Noguchi (Japan Fair Trade Commission) ···································75
Adviser, Mr. Toshifumi Ishida (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan) ··························81
Adviser, Mr. Hideshiro Karasawa (FSA) ····························································87
Adviser, Mr. Junichi Izumi (Ministry of Finance) ·················································91
Adviser, Mr. Yuji Takada (National Public Service Ethics Board) ······························98
Philippines ····························································································· 107
Cambodia ······························································································ 118
Viet Nam ······························································································· 130
Indonesia······························································································· 148
Lao PDR ······························································································· 173
Malaysia ······························································································· 187
Myanmar······························································································· 208
Thailand································································································ 227
Discussions and Chair’s Statement···································································· 243
Panel Discussion Summary ········································································· 245
Chair’s Statement ····················································································· 247
List of Visiting Experts, Participants, and Organizers ·············································· 251
Seminar Schedule ······················································································· 257
Appendix ································································································· 259
Photographs ························································································ 260

INTRODUCTION

Opening Remarks by
Mr. Tatsuya Sakuma
Director of UNAFEI***

Introductory Remarks by
Mr. Haruhiko Ukawa
Deputy Director, UNAFEI-1-

OPENING REMARKS
Tatsuya SAKUMA
Director, UNAFEI

Mr. Katsuyuki Nishikawa, Honourable Vice Minister of the Ministry of Justice,
Mr. Tamotsu Shinotsuka, Honourable Ambassador in charge of International
Cooperation for Countering Terrorism and International Organized Crime, Ministry ofForeign Affairs, Mr. Osamu Shimizu, Honourable President, Research and Training
Institute of the Ministry of Justice; honourable guests, distinguished experts andparticipants, ladies and gentlemen;
It is a great pleasure and privilege for me to announce the opening of the Fifth
Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries.

On behalf of

UNAFEI, I would like to extend my heartfelt welcome to the honourable guests, thedistinguished experts and participants who come to join this significant forum.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Government of Japan for its
continued support as the host country of UNAFEI.

I would also like to express mydeepest appreciation to the Japanese Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Foreign Affairs
for their assistance in organizing this Seminar.
The topic to be discussed at the Seminar is “Preventing Corruption: Effective
Administrative and Criminal Justice Measures”. Corruption destroys nations. Everycountry has to make serious efforts to address this destructive force.

This requires amultidisciplinary approach involving all government departments.

While criminal

justice measures play a core function of punishing acts of corruption and deterring
future corrupt conduct, the importance of other preventive measures can neither beoverlooked nor overstated.
This meeting coincides with the United Nations’ International Anti-Corruption
Day, 9 December, which was designated to commemorate the historic High-level-3-

Political Conference for the purpose of Signing the UNCAC, convened from 9 to 11
December 2003 in Merida, Mexico. Further, less than two months ago, the fourth
session of the Conference of the States Parties to the UNCAC was held in Marrakech,
and one of its core outcomes was the adoption of “the Marrakech Declaration on thePrevention of Corruption.”
I believe this seminar, and particularly this year’s seminar topic, to be highly
relevant and very timely.

As a United Nations affiliated institute in the field of crime

prevention and criminal justice, UNAFEI, by holding this seminar, wishes to contributeto the efforts of Southeast Asian countries in their fight against corruption.
I look forward to seeing this Seminar provide a useful forum to exchange
expertise and knowledge in our common endeavour against corruption, contributing
further to the promotion of good governance in Southeast Asia.
Thank you very much for your attention.

-4-

PREVENTING CORRUPTION:
EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE & CRIMINAL JUSTICE MEASURES
Haruhiko UKAWA,
Deputy Director, UNAFEI

It is my pleasure to open the discussions at the Fifth Regional Seminar on Good Governance forSoutheast Asian Countries. Before going into this year’s seminar topic, let me provide a brief
introduction to the activities of UNAFEI and our Good Governance Seminar.
I. INTRODUCTION
UNAFEI1 is an international training and research institute in the field of crime prevention andcriminal justice, established in 1962 by agreement between the United Nations and the Government ofJapan. A major focus of its activities is to provide training programmes for criminal justice practitioners
from around the world in a multinational format.
While the Japanese Government now bears the sole responsibility for administrative matters such as
funding, facilities, and personnel, UNAFEI continues to be run under the joint auspices of the United
Nations and the Government of Japan, and it endeavours to assist in the sound development of criminal
justice systems and international cooperation among UN Member States, particularly in the Asia andPacific Region, in line with the UN Conventions and its Standards and Norms.
Every year, UNAFEI offers four multinational training courses that last for five to six weeks, eachof which addresses a different subject. The spring course covers offender treatment; the summer course
is UNAFEI’s basic anti-corruption programme; the autumn course tackles various criminal justice issues
in investigation, prosecution, adjudication and international cooperation; and the winter course is called“The International Senior Seminar” and is designed for senior officials.
In choosing the specific topic to be addressed in each programme, every effort is made toincorporate the priority issues identified by the United Nations. As a result, we find ourselves more
frequently and regularly choosing topics related to the challenges posed by transnational organized crimeand corruption.
This provides the background to the present seminar. The Good Governance Seminar is a recent
1

United Nations Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders
-1-

-5-

initiative, begun in 2007, in order to enhance our capacity-building and networking efforts in the field ofgood governance and anti-corruption. Every year, we choose one topic of substantive importance related
to UNCAC,2 and invite participants from eight Southeast Asian countries for discussion.
The topics for the first four seminars have been “Corruption Control in the Judiciary andProsecutorial Authorities”, “Corruption Control in Public Procurement”, “Asset Recovery andAnti-Money Laundering”, and “Measures to Secure Witness Protection/Co-operation,” respectively. The
first two seminars were held in Bangkok, in partnership with the Office of the Attorney General of theKingdom of Thailand, and the next two were held in Manila, in partnership with the Department ofJustice of the Republic of the Philippines.
This year, for the first time, we chose Tokyo, the home of UNAFEI, as the seminar venue, and took
the opportunity to double the number of participants that we invite. Therefore, this year, we haveparticipants not only from general criminal justice authorities but also from specialized anti-corruption
agencies. Another advantage of this year’s format is that we were able invite a number of speakers fromJapanese government authorities. These features have enabled us to address issues and challenges that
require multidisciplinary responses.
This brings us to this year’s seminar topic, “Preventing Corruption: Effective Administrative &Criminal Justice Measures.”
II. PREVENTING CORRUPTION“Corruption threatens the integrity of markets, undermines fair competition, distorts resource allocation,
destroys public trust, and undermines the rule of law. Corruption is a severe impediment to economic growth,and a significant challenge for developed, emerging and developing countries” – G20 Anti-Corruption Action
Plan (2010).

Corruption undermines every legitimate goal that states strive so hard to achieve. It threatens therule of law and democracy, impedes economic growth, and erodes the over all well-being of a state as awhole.
Anti-corruption efforts require a whole governmental and multidisciplinary approach that consistsof prevention (including awareness-raising/education) and enforcement. This notion is enshrined in the
UNCAC, the first legally binding global anti-corruption instrument, which devotes an entire chapter topreventive measures and another to criminal justice measures.
2

United Nations Convention against Corruption
-2-

-6-

Of these two, it has been pointed out that, first and foremost, corruption requires prevention. Why isprevention so important?
As a general principle, prevention is better than taking subsequent remedial measures, and this isparticularly true of corruption because it is difficult to detect and to prosecute after the fact. Unlike
crimes of violence, corruption leaves no readily identifiable traces such as bloodstains or dead bodies.
On the contrary, offenders will employ sophisticated modus operandi and technology to hide theircorrupt activities and the proceeds derived therefrom. Further, corruption takes place between guilty
parties. There is no victim to come forward and file a complaint; innocent or neutral witnesses are hard
to come by; and the most corrupt and powerful offenders will do everything to discourage witnesses andaccomplices from cooperating with the authorities.3 The nature of the offence thus makes preventive
efforts essential.
It should be noted also that, while it may be difficult to prevent crimes that are committed in theheat of the moment, prevention works for corruption. We know where and under what circumstances
corruption is likely to occur. Public sector corruption occurs in connection with governmental activities
and involves government officials. Opportunities for corruption can be limited by promoting theefficiency, transparency, and accountability of governmental businesses, and corruption risks can be
reduced by improving the integrity of officials.
One particular area identified by UNCAC as requiring special attention is public procurement(Article 9). We invited speakers from the Japanese Fair Trade Commission and Ministry of Finance toexplain how they ensure objectivity and competition in public procurement and prevent corruption.
With respect to the integrity of government officials, UNCAC calls for adequate human resource
management (Article 7.1), and mentions codes of conduct (Article 8.2) and reporting requirements(Article 8.3) for government officials. We invited speakers from the National Personnel Authority and
Financial Services Agency of Japan to offer examples of how they endeavour to ensure staff integrity.
We also invited Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann from the UNODC,4 and Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau from
Hong Kong’s ICAC.5 The UNODC is the guardian of UNCAC, and Ms. Dedeyne-Amann will talkabout the Convention and prevention of corruption in general. ICAC is Hong Kong’s anti-corruption
3

To remedy these difficulties, UNCAC requires States Parties to: introduce anti-money-laundering
measures, including suspicious transaction reporting (article 14.1(a)); take appropriate witness-protection
measures (article 32); consider adopting whistle-blower protection (article 33); and take appropriate
measures to encourage cooperation with the authorities (article 37).
4
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
5
Independent Commission Against Corruption
-3-

-7-

authority, renowned for its success in keeping the Special Administrative Region clean. You will hear Mr.
Yat-Sau talk about ICAC's strategies and measures for preventing corruption in Hong Kong.

III. CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT
Turning now to criminal enforcement, the critical question is this: If preventive measures andawareness-raising/education were appropriately implemented, would that make criminal justicemeasures unnecessary or less important?
The answer is “No.” At the risk of contradicting myself, I need to emphasize that criminal
punishment still is the key in the fight against corruption. Just think of the most corrupt and criminallyminded: preventive measures and education alone will not stop them from taking advantage of theiroffices for personal gain. They will continue as long as the risks of detection and punishment are small.
We need to make corruption a high-risk crime, and the only way to do that is to actually prosecute andpunish those who commit corruption. In that sense, criminal justice measures have a special effect inpreventing corruption – in criminal law parlance, this is known as “deterrence”.

Apart from providing specific and general deterrence, the significance of criminal enforcement is
manifold. It sends out a strong message that corruption will not be tolerated, and especially wheninfluential figures such as politicians or high-ranking officials are prosecuted, it demonstrates thepolitical will and determination of the government to fight corruption. This in turn cultivates a culture ofzero-tolerance and provides a basis for public education, especially of the younger generation. Moreover,the investigation may reveal the shortcomings of the existing system and give impetus for reform thatwould better prevent corruption. Two Japanese laws, which you will hear about during this seminar –The National Public Service Ethics Act of 19996 and the Involvement Prevention Act of 20027 – wereenacted in the aftermath of large-scale scandals and are examples of such reform efforts. They show thatprevention and enforcement are interrelated and that they must go hand-in-hand.
.
IV. CONCLUSION
There is a global consensus that a total anti-corruption package consists of prevention,
6

Act No.129 of 1999.
Act on Elimination and Prevention of Involvement in Bid Rigging, etc. and Punishments for Acts by
Employees that Harm Fairness of Bidding, etc. (Act No.101 of 2002).
7

-4-

-8-

awareness-raising/education, and enforcement. There are different approaches and varying options
regarding how countries design, mix, and implement these measures. To better prevent and fightcorruption, learning from other countries’ experiences and looking into emerging good practices shouldbe particularly useful.8 This Seminar is intended as an opportunity to share experiences, exchange ideas,
and to build a network of counterparts. Your fight is our fight, and I hope the seminar will help you inyour efforts to curb corruption.

8

Paragraph 7 of the Marrakech Declaration on the Prevention of Corruption (Oct. 2011), adopted at the
fourth session of the Conference of the States Parties to UNCAC, requests Member States to promotebilateral, regional and international activities to prevent corruption, including workshops for theexchange of relevant experiences and good practices.
-5-

-9-

VISITING EXPERTS AND ADVISERS’ PAPERS AND CONTRIBUTIONS
Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann, Visiting Expert
Chief, Implementation Support Section, Corruption and Economic Crime Branch,
Division for Treaty Affairs, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau, Visiting Expert
Independent Commission against Corruption,
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China

Ms. Chie Miyahara, Adviser
Japan International Cooperation Agency

Mr. Fumio Noguchi, Adviser
Director General, Trade Practices Department, Japan Fair Trade Commission

Mr. Toshifumi Ishida, Adviser
International Safety and Security Cooperation Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of JapanMr. Hideshiro Karasawa, Adviser
Financial Services Agency, Japan

Mr. Junichi Izumi, Adviser
Legal Division, Budget Bureau, Ministry of Finance, JapanMr. Yuji Takada
Ethics Officer for Planning
Secretariat of the National Public Service Ethics Board- 11 -

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTIONJo Dedeyne-Amann1

I. THE IMPORTANCE OF PREVENTING CORRUPTION
AND THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINSTCORRUPTION (UNCAC)
Corruption undermines democracy and the rule of law, leads to violations ofhuman rights, distorts markets, erodes the quality of life and allows organized crime,
terrorism and other threats to human security to flourish. Fighting corruption is of utmost
importance to ensure that the State’s funds are used to improve people’s quality of life
through the delivery of basic services and the establishment of a good businessenvironment and, hence, to reduce poverty and achieve sustainable development. This
was also acknowledged by the United Nations General Assembly, during the High-Level
Meeting on the Millennium Development Goals in September 2010. The Assembly
supported urgent and decisive steps to continue to combat corruption in all of its
manifestations, and urged all States to consider ratifying or acceding to the United
Nations Convention against Corruption and to begin its implementation.2
The UNCAC is the first and only all-inclusive, legally-binding anti-corruption
instrument that encompasses the comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach needed
to successfully counter corruption. To date, more than four countries out of five all1

Chief, Implementation Support Section, Corruption and Economic Crime Branch, Division for Treaty
Affairs, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Vienna. The opinions expressed in this article arethose of the author and do not reflect the views of the United Nations. I would like to express my gratitude
to Mr. Jason Reichelt whose assistance was indispensable to this article.
2
A/Res/65/1 (19 October 2010).

- 13 -

around the world have ratified it, signalling that the world considers it as the suitable
framework to prevent and fight corruption.
The Convention devotes an entire chapter to the prevention of corruption,highlighting that although corruption needs to be investigated and prosecuted, first andforemost, it requires preventive action. The Convention requires States parties tointroduce effective anti-corruption policies and practices. It calls for the introduction of avariety of measures concerning both the public and the private sectors. Such measures
range from institutional arrangements, such as the establishment of a specific anticorruption body, to codes of conduct and policies promoting good governance, the rule oflaw, transparency and accountability. The Convention pays special attention to the issueof public procurement, as a sector proven to be particularly prone to corruption. It further
contains measures to promote transparency and accountability in the management ofpublic finances. Significantly, the Convention underscores that each of us, individuallyand collectively, can and must contribute to a culture of integrity.
These preventive measures, together with the Convention’s provisions on
criminalization and law enforcement as well as international cooperation and asset
recovery, make it a valuable tool in protecting the public purse. If properly implemented,
the Convention can help to curtail illicit financial flows and stop leakages of publicresources, thereby making more resources available for basic services, such as education,
health care, clean water and sanitation.
Considerable progress has been made since the adoption of the Convention in
October 2003, and its entry into force in December 2005. With 158 States parties having- 14 -

adhered to the Convention, 3 it has nearly reached universal application. Much work,
however, remains to be done to translate the text of Convention into reality on the groundand to achieve an effective global regime against corruption.

II. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED NATIONSCONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTIONA.

The Conference of the States Parties
The Conference of the States Parties to the Convention aims to improve thecapacity of, and cooperation between, States parties to achieve the objectives of theConvention and promote and review its implementation.4 The United Nations Office on
Drugs and Crime (UNODC) acts as Secretariat to the Conference of the States Parties to
the Convention. The Conference has held four sessions to date and established working
groups to assist it in its work in the fields of review of implementation, asset recovery,
and prevention.
The fourth session of the Conference, held from 24 to 28 October 2011 inMarrakech, was attended by 125 countries, by 28 intergovernmental organizations and
200 delegates representing non-governmental organizations. In addition to its main
agenda, the conference hosted nineteen side events, which were very well frequented andcontributed significantly to raising the profile of the Conference as the main internationalanti-corruption event.

3
4

Status 25 November 2011, http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/signatories.html
Article 63, UNCAC.

- 15 -

One of the key outcomes from the fourth session of the Conference is the adoption ofresolution 4/3 entitled “Marrakech declaration on the prevention of corruption”. 5 The
resolution, while recognizing that the implementation of the Convention is the
responsibility of States parties, reiterated that the promotion of a culture of integrity,transparency and accountability is a responsibility to be shared by all stakeholders,
including civil society and the private sector. The resolution requests the Secretariat,
among other things, to:•Continue to assist the Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group on
Prevention;6•

Continue to function, subject to voluntary contributions, as an observatory ofgood practices in preventing corruption;•

Continue to assist in promoting awareness of the principles of the Convention
among the business community;•

Create opportunities for the involvement of young people as key actors in theprevention of corruption;•

Promote the responsible and professional reporting of journalists on corruption;•

Continue to cooperate with UN DESA (Department for Economic and Social
Affairs) in the prevention of corruption, in particular with regard to the UN PublicService Awards;•

Continue to provide technical assistance for the implementation of Chapter II of
the Convention.

56

http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/CAC-COSP-session4.html
See Chapter C below.

- 16 -

B.

The Implementation Review Mechanism
The Conference at its third session in Doha in November 2009 adopted landmark

resolution 3/1 on the review of the implementation of the Convention.7 It established areview mechanism aimed at assisting countries to meet the objectives of the Convention
through a peer review process. Under the new mechanism, which is now fully operational,
all States parties are reviewed on the fulfillment of their obligations under the Convention.
This further enhances the potential of the Convention, by providing the means forcountries to assess how they are doing in implementation, identify potential gaps innational anti-corruption laws and practices, and develop action plans to strengthen theimplementation of the Convention domestically. There are two review cycles of five
years each: The current cycle addresses the implementation of the Chapters on (i)criminalization and law enforcement and (ii) international cooperation in criminal matters.
The second cycle, starting in 2015, will then focus on (iii) prevention and (iv) asset
recovery.
Reviews are based on responses to the self-assessment checklist submitted bycountries under review. Countries do not have to wait until they are up for review; neither
do they have to limit themselves to the chapters on criminalization and law enforcement
and international cooperation, which are under review during the current review cycle.
The self-assessment checklist also covers the chapters on preventive measures and asset
recovery. Some States parties have started, on a voluntarily basis, a comprehensive
assessment and gap analysis, in accordance with the Guidance note on UNCAC selfassessments “Going beyond the minimum”, developed jointly by UNDP and UNODC,
along with a number of other partners.
7

http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/CAC-COSP-session3.html- 17 -

The Implementation Review Mechanism is meant to become the main interface
for review and delivery of technical assistance in the field of anti-corruption. Its basic
objective is to determine priorities and strategies to that effect and to promote andfacilitate technical assistance provision. The Mechanism also has a great potential inmeasuring the impact of assistance provided.
The Convention itself, as well as resolutions by the Conference, the General
Assembly and the Economic and Social Council have mandated UNODC to support
Member States in the ratification and implementation of the provisions of the Convention,in particular in strengthening legal, institutional, and operational capacities at thedomestic level, and to promote international cooperation among States parties. UNODC
has been developing a series of technical assistance services to meet the growing
demands of Member States in this field,8 including through its Anti-Corruption Mentors
8 An indicative list of such services includes, inter alia, the following:•

Provision of advice and expertise to support the development of a wide range of policies and programmes to ensure theeffective implementation of the UNCAC provisions on the prevention of corruption, including national anti-corruption
strategies and action plans, codes of conduct, asset declaration systems, conflict of interest policies and human resource
management systems based on principles of efficiency, transparency and objective criteria;•

Provision of advice and expertise to support the development of domestic legislation aiming at ensuring full compliancewith the provisions of UNCAC. In addition to legal advisory services, the development of such tools as legislative guides,
model legislation and electronic libraries is another pillar of legal assistance provided by UNODC;•

Provision of assistance to States parties in enhancing the integrity, accountability and oversight of their criminal justice andsecurity institutions with a view to enhancing their capacities to effectively carry out their mandate, implement theprovisions of UNCAC and reduce their vulnerability to corrupt practices;•

Conduct of corruption risk assessments and strengthening of national capacities to carry out these assessments, in order toacquire a profound knowledge and understanding of the challenges posed by corruption (scope, nature, causes andcontributing factors) as well as of the weaknesses of the laws, institutions, and policies in any given country;•

Provision of support to Governments in raising awareness about the negative impact of corruption through targeted
information campaigns and effective work with the media;•

Supporting elements of civil society in strengthening the demand for good governance through the International AntiCorruption Day campaign, including raising awareness about the negative impact of corruption in daily life andencouraging a more active stand against corruption;- 18 -

Programme. These anti-corruption advisors provide a broad range of policy and technicaladvice and day-to-day support for the implementation of the Convention, such as
conducting gap assessments, assisting in establishing anti-corruption institutions andpolicies, providing training in investigation and prosecution of corruption offenses,
providing legislative assistance and advising on asset recovery strategies.

C.

Working Group on Prevention
At its third session, the Conference of the States Parties to the Convention decided

to establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group to advise and assist it in theimplementation of its mandate on the prevention of corruption. The Conference alsodecided that the working group should perform the following functions:•

Assist the Conference in developing and accumulating knowledge in thearea of prevention of corruption;•

Facilitate the exchange of information and experience among States on
preventive measures and practices;•

Facilitate the collection, dissemination and promotion of best practices in
corruption prevention;•

Assist the Conference in encouraging cooperation among all stakeholders
and sectors of society in order to prevent corruption.9•

Building and strengthening partnerships between the public and the private sector against corruption, and promoting, in thisregard, the business community’s engagement in the prevention of corruption by, inter alia, developing initiatives topromote and implement public procurement reform and identifying elements of optimal self-regulation in the private sector(http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/corruption/private-sector.html).

9

See http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/working-group4.html.

- 19 -

At its most recent meeting, held from 22 to 24 August 2011, the Working Group
noted with appreciation that many States parties had shared before the meeting
information on their initiatives and good practices regarding the key topics on the agenda,
namely: (i) awareness-raising policies and practices with special reference to articles 5, 7,
12 and 13 of the Convention; and (ii) the public sector and prevention of corruption;
codes of conduct (article 8 of the Convention) and public reporting (article 10 of theConvention). With regard to the latter issue, 10 most States parties reported to havedeveloped codes of conduct, equivalent public statements or conduct standards for their
public officials to clarify what is expected, as well as the disciplinary consequences, if
such standards were violated. Many States parties reported on systems and measures toincrease transparency within their public administrations. Those measures guarantee thelegal right of citizens to access information on public management and provide citizens
with tools for such access. The tools commonly reported on are electronic online systems
facilitating e-government, e-administration and e-procurement systems.
The Working Group requested States parties to continue to share with thesecretariat updated information on initiatives and good practices related to Chapter II of
the Convention.
The Working Group will at its next session, which will be held in August 2012,
address, among others, the following topic: Conflicts of interest, reporting acts ofcorruption and asset declarations, particularly in the context of articles 7-9 of theConvention.

10

See background paper prepared by the Secretariat: CAC/COSP/WG.4/2011/3.

- 20 -

As decided by the Conference at its fourth session, the Working Group will then also
discuss a multi-year workplan for the period up to 2015, when the second cycle of the
Mechanism for the Review of Implementation of the Convention begins.

III. EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO PREVENT CORRUPTION AND TO RAISE
AWARENESS
A. A Sector-Based Approach
Recognizing that the prevention and fight against corruption is a gradual process,the sectoral approach can help States to set priorities for the implementation of theConvention at the national level. The anti-corruption work in specific sectors that are ofprime relevance to citizens, such as health care, education or water, provides relatively
fast and concrete results, allowing citizens to feel the change directly and develop
confidence in the broader anti-corruption agenda.
It is worth emphasizing here the importance of the criminal justice sector to
public service delivery in health care, education and water, among other areas. Without afair, transparent and professional justice system to protect rights and resolve disputes,
anti-corruption efforts in other sectors are not sustainable in the long term.

B. Judicial Integrity and Capacity
The establishment of an independent and effective justice system that safeguards
human rights, facilitates access to all and provides transparent and objective recourse is acore value held the world over. As a result, judicial and legal reform is consistently apriority on the agendas of countries regardless of their state of development.

- 21 -

Article 11 of the Convention requires each State party, in accordance with thefundamental principles of its legal system and without prejudice to judicial independence,
to take measures to strengthen integrity and prevent opportunities for corruption among
members of the judiciary. In addition, similar measures may be introduced and applied
within the prosecution services where such entity operates in a posture of independence
similar to that of the judicial service.
UNODC has provided technical assistance to the justice sectors in many countries
to help strengthen integrity mechanisms. Moreover, in 2011, UNODC completed a
Resource Guide on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and Capacity,11 with the purpose tosupport and inform those who are tasked with reforming and strengthening the justicesystems of their countries, as well as development partners, international organizations
and other providers of technical assistance who provide support to this process12. The
guide intends to contribute to the existing literature by providing a guide to target thecore areas identified by the expert group as priorities in justice sector reform. The guidetouches on a broad set of issues ranging from judicial recruitment and selection practices,to the timeliness of decisions, to the openness and transparency of the process, to theaccessibility of these systems for those seeking justice and the protection of their rights.

11 UNODC has also recently completed a handbook on police accountability, oversight and integrity, for use by policymakers andmanagers of police agencies. The handbook is available online at http://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prisonreform/crimeprevention/PoliceAccountability_Oversight_and_Integrity_10-57991_Ebook.pdf.
12 Work on the Resource Guide on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and Capacity began following the United Nations Economic andSocial Council Resolution 23/2006, which endorsed the Bangalore Principles on Judicial Conduct and requested UNODC to convene
an open-ended intergovernmental expert group, in cooperation with the Judicial Group on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and otherinternational and regional judicial forums, to develop a technical guide on approaches to the provision of technical assistance aimed atstrengthening judicial integrity and capacity.

- 22 -

The guide further offers recommendations, core ideas and case studies13 for considerationin the development and implementation of national justice sector action plans, strategies
and reform programmes. One of the issues covered is the definition of performanceindicators: While measuring the performance of justice systems, careful considerationmust be given to the selection of appropriate indicators. In doing this, a look at pastexperiences, lessons and guidelines can be helpful. The guide gives an overview of setsof indicators which have been developed by both national and international organizations
to evaluate judicial reform projects, or measure the performance of the justice systems.
While some of them have been designed to carry out specific investigations, or toinvestigate specific justice services, others have been designed to be just reference tools,
easily customizable and adaptable according to the needs. Examples provided include theindicators developed by the UNODC Field Office in Nigeria, when it conducted an
integrity and capacity assessment of the justice sector in the Federal Capital Territory andin eight Nigerian States with the aim of producing a clear and coherent picture of thecountry’s justice system conditions.14 In addition, UNODC’s Criminal Justice Assessment
Toolkit15 provides a standardized set of tools designed to enable agencies, government

13 One of the case studies covered in the Resource Guide on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and Capacity is the Centralized System
for Selecting Court Support Personnel in France. The hiring and appointment of court personnel throughout France is overseen by the
MOJ, which utilizes a uniform selection and appointment system. All court personnel positions are advertised nationally on acustomized website, which includes position descriptions, education and experience requirements for candidates, and information on
the applicable skills tests that are required. Potential applicants can then download a standardized application form and submit it toreserve their place in the next testing cycle.
14 http://www.unodc.org/documents/corruption/publications_nigeria_assessment.pdf. UNODC Project (FS/NIR/04/NIR/R81) on
strengthening judicial integrity and capacity. The assessment has been designed to investigate seven justice system areas, and more indetail: 1. access to justice; 2. timeliness and quality of justice delivery; 3. independence, impartiality and fairness of the judiciary; 4.
levels, locations, types and costs of corruption within the justice sector; 5. coordination and cooperation across the justice sector
institutions; 6. the public’s trust in the justice system; and 7. the functioning of the integrity safeguards.
15 http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/justice-and-prison-reform/Criminal-Justice-Toolkit.html?ref=menuside. The Criminal JusticeAssessment Toolkit is designed to be a practical guide, organized as a dynamic set of documents that continue to meet assessment- 23 -

officials engaged in criminal justice reform, as well as other organizations andindividuals to conduct comprehensive assessments of criminal justice systems; to identify
areas of technical assistance; to assist agencies in the design of interventions that
integrate United Nations standards and norms on crime prevention and criminal justice;and to assist in training on these issues.

At the international level, the most comprehensive and well-known document on
the topic of judicial integrity is the “Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct.” 16 In
2000, UNODC, in collaboration with Transparency International, convened a firstmeeting for chief justices and senior judges from eight Asian and African states with the
purpose of considering ways of strengthening judicial institutions and procedures in theparticipating states and beyond. Initially, the Bangalore Principles were developed,
drawing from 24 different codes of judicial conduct as well as eight documents
elaborated at the international level, prevalently on the concept of judicial independence.
Subsequently, the document underwent extensive consultations involving chief justices
and senior judges from over 75 Member States. The Bangalore Principles are articulatedaround six basic values: “independence,” “impartiality,” “integrity,” “propriety,”“equality,” and “competence and diligence.” A short definition of the meaning of each of
those values for the judiciary is also provided, as well as a list of the expected behaviouron the part of the judges in application of each of the six basic values. The Bangalore
Principles are explicitly addressed to the national judiciaries that do not as yet have codesneeds as they evolve. The Tools have been grouped according to four broad areas: Policing; Access to Justice; Custodial and NonCustodial Measures; and Cross-Cutting Issues. The Tools are organized thematically, both to ensure ease of use and to assist theassessor in understanding the key issues confronting the system being assessed.
16

http://www.unodc.org/pdf/corruption/corruption_judicial_res_e.pdf.

- 24 -

of judicial conduct, for the purpose of adoption and implementation. The behaviouralimplications of the values and expected judicial conduct which have been officially
included in the Bangalore Principles have been further elaborated in an extended
commentary17 and have provided the basis for the development of a training manual on
judicial ethics.18 These materials might also be of assistance to the citizens and to thosethat might have an interest in the promotion of judicial ethics.

IV. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS IN
PREVENTING CORRUPTION
The private sector has a key role to play in enhancing integrity, accountability andtransparency. The rapid development of rules of corporate governance around the worldis prompting companies to focus on anti-corruption measures as part of their mechanisms
to protect their reputations and interests of their shareholders. Internal checks andbalances are increasingly being extended to include a range of ethics and integrity issues.
Article 12 of the UNCAC requires States parties to take measures to prevent
corruption in the private sector, including through enhanced accounting and auditing
standards. It also provides a menu of suggested measures to achieve these goals,
including by promoting cooperation between the private sector and law enforcement
agencies, promoting standards and procedures designed to safeguard the integrity ofprivate entities (including codes of conduct and business integrity standards), promoting
transparency among private entities, preventing conflicts of interest, and ensuring
effective internal audit systems.
1718

http://www.unodc.org/documents/corruption/publications_unodc_commentary-e.pdf.
http://www.unodc.org/documents/corruption/publications_unodc_judicial_training.pdf.

- 25 -

Over the years, a number of regional and international initiatives, standards andprinciples have been developed to provide guidance for companies on how to fightcorruption in their business operations while upholding enhanced integrity standards.
However, the vast majority of such cross-industry guidelines pre-date the adoption (in2003) and entry into force (in 2005) of the UNCAC. Moreover, these anti-corruption
initiatives, standards and principles leave a lot to be desired in terms of their internal
coherence and consistency with UNCAC. The need to align existing business principles
to the values of UNCAC was recognized in January 2008, when representatives of thebusiness community came together in the margins of the Conference of the States Parties
to the Convention and adopted the so called “Bali Business Declaration”. As the guardianof UNCAC, UNODC is well placed to also assist private sector stakeholders instrengthening their legal and regulatory regimes to fight corruption, and to provide
technical assistance on implementation. UNODC has developed strong partnerships witha number of private sector initiatives, such as The World Economic Forum Partnering
against Corruption Initiative (PACI), the International Chamber of Commerce andTransparency International, and is working closely with these partners to harmonize thecompeting cross-industry guidelines and bring them in line with the universal principlesof UNCAC.
A study published by UNODC and PricewaterhouseCoopers in 2008, entitled
Anti-Corruption Policies and Measures of the Fortune Global 500 19 , shows that allcompanies of the Fortune Global 500 have adopted internal compliance programmes,
which include measures to encourage staff and managers to report cases of wrongdoing

19

This study can be found at http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/corruption/anti-corruption-policies-andmeasures-of-the-fortune-global-500.html.

- 26 -

that they become aware of. Almost all such companies also sanction retaliation against
so-called whistleblowers. However, the type of reporting that such programmes
encourage and protect remains an internal matter and varies therefore from company tocompany.
In the period 2010-2011, the United Nations Global Compact and UNODC
together developed an e-learning tool for the private sector to enhance understanding of
Principle 10 of the Global Compact, which states: “Business should work against
corruption in any form, including bribery and extortion,” 20 and its underlying legal
instrument, the United Nations Convention against Corruption, as it applies to actors
operating in the business community. The e-learning tool consists of six short interactive
learning modules developed for use by anyone who acts on behalf of a company. They
are based on real-life scenarios designed to provide guidance on how to deal withpotential risks of corruption that people working in business may face in their daily work.
Issues covered include: (a) receiving gifts and hospitality; (b) gifts and hospitality
towards others; (c) facilitation payments and corruption; (d) the use of intermediaries andlobbyists; (e) corruption and social investments; and (f) insider information. The elearning tool is publicly accessible and free of charge.21
In the first half of 2011, UNODC, with the support of the Siemens Integrity
Initiative, launched three anti-corruption projects aimed at promoting the private sector’s
engagement in anti-corruption efforts. One of those technical assistance projects, entitled“Public-Private Partnership for Probity in Public Procurement”, aims to reduce

20

There are ten principles in total, one of which relates to corruption. The full list can be found at
http://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html.
21This tool can be found at http://thefightagainstcorruption.unodc.org or
http://thefightagainstcorruption.unglobalcompact.org.

- 27 -

vulnerabilities to corruption in public procurement systems and to bridge knowledge andcommunication gaps between public procurement administrations and the private sector.
The project will promote States’ implementation of article 9 of the Convention andsupport private actors’ efforts to comply with Principle 10 of the United Nations Global
Compact.
The second project, entitled “Incentives to Corporate Integrity and Cooperation in
Accordance with the United Nations Convention against Corruption”, is intended tofoster cooperation between the private sector and government authorities, especially law
enforcement authorities. It aims to encourage business to report internal instances ofcorruption and to promote States’ implementation of articles 26 (Liability of legal
persons), 32 (Protection of witnesses, experts and victims), 37 (Cooperation with law
enforcement authorities) and 39 (Cooperation between national authorities and the private
sector) of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and to facilitate private
actors’ compliance with the Tenth Principle of the UN Global Compact. These first two
projects are being piloted in India and Mexico and also encompass the compilation anddissemination of good practices and lessons learned.
The third project, entitled the “Outreach and Communication Programme”, seeks
to enhance companies’ knowledge of how the Convention can make a difference in their
daily work both internally, and in their interaction with public counterparts, and toencourage the business community to turn their anti-corruption commitments into action
by bringing their integrity programmes in line with the universal principles of theConvention. The project also seeks to support learning institutions which have come torealize that they do have a role to play in preparing the next generation of public and- 28 -

business leaders to the challenge of making right and ethical decisions. This will beachieved by: (a) creating and disseminating a structured outreach and communication
programme that combines a global perspective with local contexts, reaching out toprivate companies, particularly the UN Global Compact business participants; and (b)developing a comprehensive academic learning course on the UNCAC and its
implication for public administrators and private operators to be embedded in curricula ofbusiness, law and public administration schools.

V. RAISING PUBLIC AWARENESS AND
INVOLVEMENT BY SOCIETY AT LARGEAs already mentioned, one of the issues of focused attention during the second
meeting of the intergovernmental open-ended Working Group on Prevention wasawareness-raising policies and practices, acknowledging the importance of partnerships
between the public sector, the private sector and civil society.
A background paper on awareness-raising policies and practices with specialreference to articles 5, 7, 12 and 13 of the United Nations Convention against
Corruption was presented by the Secretariat. 22 The paper describes the tasks ofspecialized anti-corruption agencies established by States parties to disseminate
information about anti-corruption efforts and to act as coordinators of suchactivities on the national and international levels. Institutional cooperation between
the public and private sectors, either in the form of community councils or under
the umbrella of anti-corruption agencies, was viewed as essential to raising
22

The paper can be found at
http://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/WorkingGroups/workinggroup4/2011-August-2224/V1185011e.pdf.

- 29 -

awareness. Reference was also made to the relevance of conferences organized byintergovernmental and regional organizations, and the usefulness of creating
networks and platforms for collaboration between the private sector andgovernments.
Article 13 of the Convention requires States parties to take measures topromote the active participation of individuals and groups in the prevention of, andthe fight against, corruption. Examples reflected in the above-mentioned
background paper include anti-corruption advertisement campaigns launchedthrough traditional marketing channels, such as television, radio, billboards and theInternet, as well as the creative use of other channels such as short message service(SMS) transmissions, airlines, stamps, religious gatherings, hotlines and electronic
mail (e-mail) to reach society as a whole.
Many States parties to the Convention recognize the importance of focusing
on youth and reported on the initiation of anti-corruption educational courses,
summer and winter camps, integrity clubs and artistic and academic competitions
and on measures taken to adapt university curricula or complement existing
curricula with a course on anti-corruption.
Reference is to be made in this context to an initiative recently launched by
the UNODC, in collaboration with a range of partner organizations and universities,
to develop a comprehensive academic anti-corruption curriculum outline. Thisinitiative involves a group of approximately 30 experts in the field of anticorruption and higher education engaged in a consultative process aimed atdeveloping an academic programme on anti-corruption for university students. The- 30 -

backbone of the initiative is a comprehensive set of academic educational materials
organized in modular form in a so-called ‘menu of courses’ (course topics). This
structure is not intended to be a full-fledged curriculum per se, but rather a flexible
compilation of teaching modules on different aspects of corruption, which can betaught separately or in sequence, and thus incorporated into existing curricula or
syllabi as needed and as scope and teaching plans permit. The thematic outline or‘menu’ will be annotated with a detailed bibliography and will ideally becomplemented by case studies, taking into account the variety of legal systems andeducation models and traditions that exist, facilitating utmost adaptability toteaching styles across the globe. The idea is to make the material available as anopen source tool online, accessible free of charge and open to amendments andfurther elaboration by teachers who use the material in order to keep it a living
document. Pilot testing for the curricula is scheduled to begin in Spring 2012 withthe completion and roll-out of the final tools scheduled to take place in Fall 2012.
Finally, another issue that deserves special attention is the role of the media inpreventing corruption. This topic was discussed by the Working Group on Prevention at
its first session from 13 to 15 December 2010, during which a background paper preparedby the Secretariat on best practices for promoting responsible and professional reportingon corruption for journalists was presented.23 The Conference of the States Parties to theConvention at its fourth session in Marrakech took note of the efforts undertaken by the23This paper can be found at
http://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/WorkingGroups/workinggroup4/2010-December-1315/V1056937e.pdf.

- 31 -

Secretariat to gather information on good practices on this matter, and requested theSecretariat to further collect and disseminate such information.24

VI. EPILOGUEThe United Nations Convention against Corruption is a powerful manifestation of
the collective political will of the international community to put in place a framework tosuccessfully counter corruption. The Convention attaches great importance to theadoption and implementation of measures geared towards rendering criminal justiceresponses to corruption more efficient, both at the domestic and international levels. The
Convention, however, also recognizes that “preventing is better than responding” and thata primary challenge for States parties is to put in place effective corruption prevention
mechanisms that instill a culture of professional integrity in both the public and private
sectors.
In conclusion, the words of Mr. Yury Fedotov, UNODC’s Executive Director, canbe recalled, in the statement, delivered on his behalf, at the closing of the fourth sessionof the Conference of ‘the States Parties 25 : “Yet, perhaps the defining feature of ourjourney from Doha to Marrakech has been the realisation that we cannot succeed inisolation. Others must join us, and we must all walk together if we are to combat
corruption wherever it arises. […] The reality is that we need governments, the private
sector, parliamentarians, anti-corruption authorities, civil society organizations, young
people and the media to cooperate in rejecting corruption at every level of society. […]The Arab Spring has sparked rapid reforms and placed anti-corruption at the heart of the24
25

Resolution 4/3, operative paragraph 20.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/marrakechspeech28.10.11.html- 32 -

democratic agenda. As a result, it has become a symbol for the anti-corruption movement
and we must heed the call it has issued. We must help individuals live in countries whereprosecutions of instances of corruption are fair and where a citizen’s daily interaction
with the state and commerce are firmly anchored in professionalism, honesty andintegrity. And we must provide strong political commitment at the international level. The
Arab Spring, with its emphatic rejection of corruption, must last longer than a season,and become a model to promote integrity and transparency throughout the region andthe rest of the world.”- 33 -

PREVENTING CORRUPTIONICAC’S STRATEGIES AND MEASURES
Joseph Lee Yat-Sau∗

INTRODUCTION
Since its inception in 1974, the Independent Commission Against
Corruption (ICAC) of Hong Kong has been adopting a three-pronged strategy
comprising law enforcement, prevention and education to combat corruption.

Inview of the ICAC’s success, this strategy has been adopted by anti-corruption
agencies around the world.

This paper takes a closer look at the ICAC’s corruption prevention strategy,
including its organisational setup to implement the strategy, ongoing and recent
initiatives and measures to prevent corruption in Hong Kong, and some case studies.

I.

THE ORGANISATION AND STRATEGY OF ICAC
(WITH FOCUS ON PREVENTION)

A. The Three-pronged Strategy
1. The Three-pronged Strategy and Statutory Duties of the ICAC
Since its inception in 1974, the Independent Commission Against Corruption(ICAC) of Hong Kong has been adopting a three-pronged strategy comprising law
enforcement, prevention and education (Figure 1) to combat corruption:(i)

Law enforcement – investigate and prosecute corruption offences;∗

Independent Commission against Corruption, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of thePeople’s Republic of China.

- 34 -

(ii) Prevention – prevent corruption through securing the adopting of systemsafeguards and internal controls in organisations;(iii) Education – educate the community against corruption and enlist their support infighting corruption.1

Enforcement

Corruption
Prevention

Education

Figure 1 – ICAC’s Three-pronged Strategy
This three-pronged strategy is in fact built-in to the ICAC Ordinance (Cap. 204,
Laws of Hong Kong), set out as the Duties of the Commissioner of the ICAC under
Section 12 of the ordinance (Appendix A).
2. A Closer Look at How the Strategy Works
Today, the concept of the “fraud triangle”2 (corruption can be regarded as a typeof employee fraud) is widely adopted in the auditing and fraud prevention professions.
The concept suggests that three conditions are conducive to the occurrence of fraud:(i)

Incentive/Pressure, leading to a motive to commit fraud;1

It is understood that some other jurisdictions regard education as part of prevention, but in the ICAC
of Hong Kong the two are distinguished with the latter focusing on system controls.
2
Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99: Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit
issued by the Auditing Standards Board of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants(AICPA) in October 2002.

- 35 -

(ii) Opportunity in the system or environment for fraud to be committed (e.g. lack ofcontrol);(iii) Attitude/Rationalisation of/by the perpetrator that makes/allows him/her toself-justify his/her commitment of the fraud.
A closer look at how the Three-pronged Strategy works shows that it reduces thethree conditions in the “fraud triangle” (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

How the Three-pronged Strategy Works

Figure 3 provides a view of how the Three-pronged Strategy works to reduce thethree conditions in the “fraud triangle” and enhances the counter-measures:(i)

System Approach –Through regular system reviews (or corruption prevention audits), corruption

risks and system loopholes conducive to corrupt practices are identified, followed by- 36 -

strengthening of controls and improvements to business processes.

The

controls/improvements remove or reduce opportunities for corruption in thesystem/environment.

One type of control particularly highlighted is transparency,

which facilitates external monitoring by customers, business partners, the public, etc.
Internal detective controls and external monitoring facilitates the detection ofcorruption, leading to prosecution.

Post-mortem of corruption that has occurredassists the system reviews to further enhance the controls if necessary.
(ii) Human Approach –Public education against corruption as well as each organisation’s own integrity
management programme (Code of Conduct, integrity training, etc.) help to reduce
employees’ incentives to commit bribery, modify their attitudes and reduce theirrationalisation of fraudulent behaviour.

Public education also reduces the public’s

tolerance to corrupt behaviour and encourages them to report any corrupt behaviour
observed, while an organisation’s integrity management programme can encourage
whistle-blowing.

These facilitate the detection of corruption.

(iii) Law Enforcement –Detection and prosecution provides a strong deterrent against corruption, helping
to reduce incentives to commit bribery and modify attitude/rationalisation.
Enforcement also serves a public education purpose, educating the public about what
corruption is, the consequence of corrupt behaviour, and effectiveness of our law
enforcement thereby encouraging people to report corruption.

Analysis of the modesof corruption and system weaknesses in detected cases also helps us design more
effective preventive measures.

B. Organisation of the ICAC
1. Independence- 37 -

The ICAC’s “independence” is one of its key success factors.

Before theestablishment of the ICAC in 1974, enforcement against corruption was the
responsibility of an anti-bribery unit in then Royal Hong Kong Police Force, which
proved to be ineffective as the Police Force was then one of the most corrupt
government departments.

It was decided that an independent anti-corruption agency

had to be set up, reporting directly to the then Governor of Hong Kong, independent
from any other government organisations and officials including the then Chief
Secretary who was the head of the administration.

This led to the formation of theICAC, which now reports directly to the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special
Administration Region (HKSAR).
2. Organisational Structure
The ICAC is headed by the Commissioner of ICAC.

Its organisation isdesigned according to the Three-pronged Strategy, with one distinct Department
responsible for each of the three approaches, plus an Administration Branch to deal
with general administration:(i)

Operations Department – responsible for the law enforcement strategy and duties
set out in ICAC Ordinance Section 12 (a) to (c).

(ii) Corruption Prevention Department (CPD) – responsible for the prevention
strategy and duties set out in ICAC Ordinance Section 12 (d) to (f).
(iii) Community Relations Department (CRD) – responsible for the law enforcement
strategy and duties set out in ICAC Ordinance Section 12 (g) and (h).
3. The Operations Department
A simplified organisation chart of the Operations Department is at Appendix B.
As this paper focuses on prevention, it will not go into further details of theorganisation of Operations Department.

- 38 -

4. The Corruption Prevention Department
A simplified organisation chart of CPD is at Appendix C.

The department isheaded by the Director of Corruption Prevention (DCP) and is organised into two
Divisions and a Centre for Anti-Corruption Studies (CACS).

Each Division has anumber of Groups each having a charter of responsibilities.

Other than theManagement Group (M Group), each Group is responsible for corruption prevention
in a number of government departments and public bodies (duties under Section 12(d)and (f) of the ICAC Ordinance).

Some of the Groups also have responsibility over

one or more specialty areas in addition, e.g.:(i)Group C – civil service integrity policies and matters.

(ii) Group E – corruption prevention in the construction industry and public works
projects.
(iii) Group F, also named Advisory Services Group (ASG) – corruption prevention in
the private sector, including handling requests for advice from private sector
entities (Section 12(e) of the ICAC Ordinance).
Also under CPD is the Centre of Anti-Corruption Studies (CACS) established in
April 2009 to facilitate and conduct research and analytical studies on issues
pertaining to the development of anti-corruption initiatives locally, regionally andinternationally.
5. The Community Relations Department
A simplified organisation chart of CRD is at Appendix D. The department isheaded by the Director of Community Relations (DCR) and is organised into two
Divisions. Division 1 is comprised mainly of specialist units tasked to publicise
anti-corruption messages through the mass media and territory-wide programmes.
Division 2 mainly provides in-depth, face-to-face corruption prevention education- 39 -

services to the public through a network of Regional Offices.

The duties of the

major units are:(iv) Regional Offices – reach out to the local communities to enlist support for
ICAC’s work and receive corruption reports and answer enquiries about
corruption.
(v) Hong Kong Ethics Development Centre (EDC) – promotes business andprofessional ethics in the business sector and provides consultancy services on
ethics programmes, including ethics training.
(vi) Youth and Moral Education Office (YMEO) – formulates and implements
strategies and programmes for preventive education for youths and students.
(vii) Mass Communication Office (MCO) – makes use of media for publicising
ICAC’s work and preventive education for the public, such as television andradio advertising campaigns, TV dramas and training videos.
C. Oversight of the Work of the ICAC
The work of the ICAC comes under the scrutiny of five independent committees
comprised of responsible citizens drawn from different sectors of the community andappointed by the Chief Executive of the HKSAR.

They oversee different aspects of

ICAC’s work (Appendix E).
The Commissioner reports directly to the Chief Executive of the HKSAR on thework of the ICAC, and regularly attends meetings of the Executive Council andLegislative Council and their relevant committees (e.g. the Security Panel) to brief
their members and answer questions on ICAC’s work.

- 40 -

II. EFFECTIVE WAYS TO PREVENT CORRUPTION IN HONG KONG
(THE SYSTEM APPROACH)

A. Preventing Corruption in the Public Sector
1. Partnering Approach
In the prevention of corruption, the ICAC adopts a partnering approach with thegovernment bureaus and departments (GBDs) and public bodies (PBs).

The

GBD/PBs are convinced to recognize that prevention of corruption and integrity
management is part of good governance and hence they should assume ownership ofsuch with the ICAC providing assistance.

CPD has formed Corruption Prevention

Groups with major GBD/PBs, chaired by their directorate officers.

The Corruption

Prevention Groups hold regular meetings to discuss and monitor collaboration toprevent corruption, including identification of areas requiring corruption prevention
audits (see A.2) or corruption prevention advice (see A.3), and implementation of the
Ethical Leadership Programme (see A.4).
2. Corruption Prevention Audits
The ICAC’s duty to examine procedures and practices of GBD/PBs to identify
risks of corruption and secure the revision of work methods to reduce the risks is done
by CPD, through corruption prevention studies/audits of specific functions andprocesses (e.g. letting and administration of contracts, licensing) of the GBD/PBs.
The study/audit subjects are selected based on inherent corruption risk, actual
occurrence of corruption, importance to people’s livelihoods, amount of public funds
involved, etc.

Reports on the findings and the recommendations, after endorsementby the Corruption Prevention Advisory Committee, are sent to the organisations’ top
management.

CPD also monitors implementation of the agreed recommendations

and provides follow-up assistance if necessary.

- 41 -

A corruption prevention study/audit normally involves the following:(i)Study of relevant laws and regulations and the organisation's relevant policies,
procedures, guidelines, and relevant papers.

(ii) Study of other information on the subject, such as media reports, Audit Reports,
CPD's own records or past reports on the subject, reports of relevant past ICAC
cases and/or briefing by investigators on relevant cases or trends.
(iii) Interviews

withemployeesoftheorganisation

responsible

for

the

function/operation under study.
(iv) Examination of files and records of past cases relating to the function/operation
under study.
(v) Site observation of performance of the function/operation under study.
(vi) Information available to the public or relevant stakeholders regarding therelevant policies, procedures and operations.
(vii) Occasionally, if necessary, interviews with experts in the field.

Aspects and control measures examined during corruption prevention
studies/audits and the recommended enhancements usually cover the following:(i)adequacy and clarity of policies, procedures and guidelines on integrity andconduct as well as performance of the function/ operation;(ii) clarity, enforceability, etc. of the relevant legislation and regulations;(iii) adequacy of segregation of duties, approval procedures and level of authorities,
and other checks and balances;(iv) proper and adequate documentation for enhancing accountability;(v) openness and fairness, e.g. consistency in treatment of similar cases, equal
opportunity for all eligible parties to participate;- 42 -

(vi) transparency, e.g. disclosure and publicity of application procedures, vetting
criteria, processing time, reasons for rejection, etc.;(vii) simplicity and user-friendliness of the system and procedures, e.g. whether there
are long waiting times or excessive barriers/procedures (which are conducive tobribery);(viii)adequacy and effectiveness of supervision and monitoring, e.g. conduct ofadequate supervisory checks, availability of management and exception reports
for senior management's review;(ix) independent checks and monitoring, e.g. by internal audit, independent
non-executive directors;(x) existence and publicity of feedback/complaint channels;(xi) any other preventive and detective control measures applicable to thefunction/operation being examined;(xii) any existing practices that may be conducive to corruption, such as excessive
discretion exercised by staff, deviation from policies or procedures, frequent
overrides, lax enforcement or non-enforcement of any law or regulation, etc.
3. Corruption Prevention Advice
In addition to detailed corruption prevention audits, CPD provides quick andearly/simultaneous

corruption

prevention

adviceto

GBD/PBsincurrent

initiatives/projects, such as formulation of new legislation (e.g. proposal for a new
Charity Law in Hong Kong), policies and procedures (e.g. procedures for the
Immigration Department’s Automated Vehicle Clearance System), tendering of major
contracts (design-and-build contract for the new Government Central Offices).

For

major projects of public concern (e.g. tendering of contract for the operation of the
New Cruise Terminal at Kai Tak), CPD also sends an observer to sit on the tender- 43 -

boards.

The approach has proved to be effective in ensuring proper andcorruption-free tendering processes in the projects.
In the event that corruption or other malpractice has occurred, CPD conducts a“post-mortem” analysis on the case. If system weakness is identified as a factor in
the case, follow-up action will be taken with the GBD/PB concerned, such as reviewof the procedures, advice on enhanced controls, or if necessary a full-scale corruption
prevention audit of the business function concerned.

This does not include only

prosecuted cases but also cases which have not resulted in prosecution due to lack ofevidence, no criminal offence but only non-criminal misconduct involved, etc.
4. Capacity Building
Corruption cannot be prevented by the ICAC alone.

Managers and supervisors

in GBD/PBs play an important role in preventing corruption in their organisations by
putting in place suitable controls and vigilantly exercising supervision and monitoringover their staff and day-to-day operations.

CPD therefore also adopts a capacity

building approach and, through training, raises their awareness and capacity inhelping to prevent corruption in their GBD/PBs.
5. Preventing Corrupt Practice by Contractors or Partners
GBD/PBs frequently work with contractors or business partners in various ways,
e.g. engaging a contractor to provide services to the GBD/PB, or engaging acontractor or partner (e.g. under a public-private partnership) to deliver public
services to the public. It is necessary to prevent such contractors/partners fromengaging in corrupt practices, including bribing the public officers, or their employees
from accepting bribes in delivering the public/social service.

Measures undertakenby the GBD/PBs include:(i)

Anti-bribery clauses prohibiting tenderers/contractors/partners from offering- 44 -

corrupt gifts to public officers and anti-collusion clauses in GBD/PBs’ tendering
documents and/or contracts.
(ii) Probity clauses in GBD/PBs’ contracts requiring the contractor/partner to adopt
corruption prevention practices in performing the contract or function (e.g.
prohibiting their employees from accepting advantages from third parties inrelationship to their duties under the contract).
(iii) Specifying procedures that the contractor is required to follow/perform for acontrol purpose (e.g. conduct of inspections, keeping of records, submission ofreports/information certified by a person-in-charge).
(iv) For certain types of government contract (e.g. works contracts), suspension ofcontractors convicted of bribery offences from bidding such contracts for aperiod of time.
(v) Conduct of corruption prevention audits by CPD on the contractors/partners’
procedures in performing the public function (e.g. private sector operated Car
Testing Centres appointed by the Transport Department to conduct annual
examination of private cars), or give corruption prevention advice to thecontractors/partners (e.g. advising a works contractor suspended from bidding
government contracts due to the occurrence of corruption on how to improve
integrity management).
B. Preventing Corruption in the Business Sector
1. Corruption Prevention Advisory Service
The ICAC has a duty to advise any persons on ways to prevent corruption onrequest (Section 12(e) of the ICAC Ordinance). The service is free of charge and wepledge confidentiality on the requests and information received.

The corruption

prevention advisory service is promoted and given to private sector entities through- 45 -

various channels including:(i)Advisory Services Hotline – A telephone hotline and mailbox is provided andpublicised through various means (e.g. ICAC website) for members of the public
to request corruption prevention advice or services.

Requests may also bereceived by referral from CRD or other contacts.
(ii) Collaboration with partners – CPD collaborates with partners such as tradeassociations and professional bodies to organise events/seminars for theirmembers (see the following section on “Corruption Prevention Capacity
Building”).

Through such events or the partners’ newsletters or circulars,

advice is given and additional, tailored service is promoted to their members.
(iii) Victim companies – Following investigation of a private sector corruption caseby the ICAC, if system weaknesses is noted, the case may be referred to the CPD
for follow-up.

Where considered appropriate, ASG will approach the victim

company to offer corruption prevention advisory service.
(iv) Organisations funded by GDB/PB – GDB/PBs fund a large number oforganisations under various schemes to perform functions/services that achieve adesired social objective, e.g. NGOs, social enterprises, schools, residentialbuilding owners receiving government subsidies to repair their buildings.

Inview of the amount of public funds and the corruption risk involved, someschemes encourage the funded organisations to seek corruption prevention
advice from CPD.
There are about 350 to 400 cases of advice/service provided to private sector
entities each year.
2. Corruption Prevention Capacity Building
ICAC cannot prevent corruption in each and every private organisation.

- 46 -

We

must enlist the support of senior executives, managers, supervisors and practitioners
in the private sector to help prevent corruption in their own organisations.

Toachieve this, we need to raise their awareness to corruption risks and build up theircapacity to prevent corruption.

To do so, CPD again adopts a partnering strategy

mainly through two approaches:(i)

Trade (vertical) approach – collaborating with trade associations and/or trade
regulators (e.g. Hong Kong Federation of Restaurants and Related Trades, Hong
Kong Retail Management Association, Securities and Futures Commission) tocarry out initiatives to enhance corruption prevention awareness and capacity ofmembers/practitioners of their trades (see next paragraph).

This covers

preventing corruption in key business functions in a trade.
(ii) Functional(horizontal)

approach–collaborating

withprofessional

bodies/associations (e.g. Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants,
Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply, Institute of Internal Auditors) tocarry out initiatives to enhance corruption prevention awareness and capacity ofmembers/practitioners of their profession (see next paragraph).

This focuses on

preventing corruption in a business function that is common to all/most trades.
The methods for corruption prevention capacity building employed include:(i)

Publication of Corruption Prevention / Ethics Management Guides for referenceby managers, practitioners, business operators of specific trades or professions.

(ii) Development of corruption prevention training materials (e.g. training slides,
videos, guides, and case studies) for use by CPD/CRD officers in providing
corruption prevention training, or by other organisations’ trainers who have been
given train-the-trainer training or training guides.
(iii) Conduct of corruption prevention seminars, workshops and continuous- 47 -

professional

education

sessionsformembersofpartnersormanagers/practitioners in individual organisations.
(iv) Development of corruption prevention training courses/modules for use byeducational institutions (e.g. universities, vocational training institutions) indegree, diploma or other courses of disciplines that relate to relatively morecorruption-prone trades/professions (e.g. construction engineering, property
management, purchasing and merchandising).
3. Corruption Prevention Audits
While prevention of corruption in the private sector is mainly through theprovision of advisory services and capacity building, sometimes more in-depth
corruption prevention studies/audits (as those for the public sector) may also be
conducted for private sector entities with their Boards' support such as:(i)

Major subvented NGOs/charities – in view of the considerable government
subvention and public donations they receive, their procedures such as
procurement and service delivery processes may be subjects of corruption
prevention studies/reviews.

(ii) Corporations fully or partially owned by the government or public bodies that are
not public bodies – in view of their public ownership and the public interest
involved, their relevant procedures may be subjects of corruption prevention
studies/reviews.
(iii) Private corporations – on request, and if considered worthwhile, corruption
prevention reviews may be conducted on corruption-prone processes of a private
corporation, but this is very uncommon.

- 48 -

III. EFFECTIVE WAYS TO PREVENT CORRUPTION IN HONG KONG
(THE HUMAN APPROACH)

A. Public Education
1. Mass Communication
Mass media is an effective vehicle for publicising the work of the ICAC andenlisting the public’s support in fighting corruption.
(i)Effective uses include:

Advertising campaigns comprising television and radio messages,
complemented

withposters

mountedthroughout

theterritory(Appendix F shows a few samples of ICAC posters).
(ii) Bi-annual production and television-broadcasting of the “ICAC
Investigators” drama series, each featuring five episodes on fivesuccessful ICAC cases in recent years.
(iii) Use of the Internet to extend the reach of ICAC’s messages, e.g. an“ICAC Channel” website to keep the public abreast of ICAC’s latest
events and activities, uploading of integrity issues onto popular social
networking websites to stimulate discussion, and a youth website “iTeen
Camp” targeting primary and junior secondary school students.
(iv) Press releases on ICAC’s corruption prevention work and newspaper
articles on integrity issues are used to raise public awareness on
corruption risks and enlist their support for ICAC’s work.
2. Community Relation and Activities
To maintain a high level of ICAC’s presence in the community and keep thefight against corruption on the public agenda, CRD officers attend meetings ofvarious district consultative committees to expound on ICAC’s work and gauge
opinion leaders’ views on anti-corruption programmes.

- 49 -

Regular contacts aremaintained with district organisations, and district activities (e.g. workshops, roving
exhibitions) conducted to reinforce the community’s commitment to sustaining a
probity culture.

The ICAC Club was set up in 1997 to provide a channel for the

public to partake in ICAC activities and demonstrate support for the anti-corruption
cause, its about 1,200 members include professionals, district leaders, working youth,
students, retirees, and housewives. An ICAC Club newsletter is published regularly
to keep members informed of the latest developments.

B. Youth Education
It is important to educate children and youths on correct moral values andanti-corruption attitudes at an early stage.

The major work in youth education inrecent years is highlighted below.
1. Tertiary Education Institution (TEI) Students(i)

ICAC Ambassador Programme – mobilizes university students toorganise on-campus activities to promulgate anti-corruption and probity
messages.

In addition, the i-League was also established for the ICAC

to maintain contact with former and current Ambassadors to maintaintheir continuous support in anti-corruption work.
(ii) Personal Ethics Module for Tertiary Institutions – developed for
adoption by TEIs for their students. Seven universities have agreed toinclude the module in their relevant programmes.
2. Secondary School Students(i)Interactive Drama – Professional drama troupes are hired to perform
interactive

dramasthat

illustratetheanti-corruption

law

and

consequences of corruption to secondary school students. About 280
shows for some 55,000 secondary students are arranged annually.

- 50 -

(ii) ICAC Ambassador Programme – About 1,100 students from 135 schools
have been recruited as “ICAC Ambassadors” to disseminate integrity
messages to their schoolmates through activities.
(iii) Liberal Studies Teaching Package – A Liberal Studies (ICAC
Investigators) Package was recently developed for senior secondary
students, using two episodes of the “ICAC Investigators 2009” drama
series and a variety of learning activities as teaching aids.
3. Primary School and Kindergarten Students(i)Senior Primary General Studies Teaching Packages – Our General
Studies Moral Education Package, comprising audio-visual teaching aids
and materials for activities, helps inculcate self-discipline and proper
attitude towards material wealth among students.

(ii) Gee-Dor-Dor Cartoon Series and Teaching Packages for Kindergartens
and Primary Schools – Produced since 1999, the Gee-Dor-Dor Cartoon
Series publicise moral values to children.

Parent-child activities werealso organised to enlist parents’ support in promoting positive values toyoung kids.

An electronic book based on the cartoon series and othermoral education stories was also produced for young kids.
C. Integrity Management in the Public Sector
1. Ethical Leadership Programme (ELP) for the Government Sector
While CRD has been providing integrity and anti-bribery briefings togovernment officers since its establishment, to further enhance probity culture andpromote ethical leadership in the civil service, the ICAC and the Civil Service Bureau
jointly launched the ELP in December 2006.

Under the ELP, each GBD is requested

to appoint a senior directorate officer as the organisation’s Ethics Officer, to be- 51 -

responsible for developing and sustaining ethical culture in the GBD and assumes
overall responsibility for all integrity management work.

They have to submit to the

Civil Service Bureau an annual return on the GBD’s work under ELP.

At present,

there are some 150 Ethics Officers.
Periodic seminars on different topics concerning integrity, conduct and discipline
are organised for the Ethics Officers and their assistants. A government intranet“Online Community for Ethics Officers” has been developed to facilitatecommunication and provide up-to-date information and reference materials related tointegrity issues.
2. Integrity Training for Public Bodies
Apart from GDBs, CRD also provides integrity and anti-bribery training for staffof public bodies, which include public hospitals, public utilities companies, public
transport companies, TEIs, etc.
D. Integrity Management in the Business Sector
1. Promotion of Business Ethics
To promote integrity and anti-corruption culture in the business sector, the ICAC
launched a Business Ethics Campaign in 1994 jointly with the major chambers ofcommerce in Hong Kong.

At the first conference, business leaders arrived at aconsensus that long-term promotion of business ethics was of strategic importance toHong Kong.

In response, the ICAC set up the Hong Kong Ethics Development

Centre (EDC) in 1995 to act as a focal point for promoting ethics in Hong Kong andadvising the business sector on ethics and integrity management programmes.
EDC partners with related regulatory bodies, chambers of commerce, trade andprofessional associations in developing tailor-made ethics training modules andpackages for specific trades and professions, and promotes the training modules and- 52 -

other corruption prevention products to their members.

Ethics and corruption

prevention elements were also injected into the licensing and professional
qualification requirements of the trades/professions and continuous professional
education programmes.

EDC also organises regular thematic corruption prevention

seminars for small and medium enterprises.
2. Integrity Management of Contractors and Business Partners
On CPD’s recommendation, it has become a standard practice for GDB/BPs to
include probity clauses in their contracts with service providers, suppliers or otherpartners/operators requiring them to prohibit their staff from accepting advantages
from third parties and to avoid/declare conflicts of interest in relation to their duties
under the contract.

They are also required to ensure the requirements are madeknown to the staff, e.g. through training.
In view of the higher corruption risk in public works projects, CPD has astanding arrangement with the Development Bureau to, on a project by project basis,give corruption prevention briefings to key staff of major works projects’ consultants
and contractors.
IV. CASE STUDIES
A. Public Sector
1. Corruption Prevention Audit – Enforcement of Driving-Offence Points System
In Hong Kong, driving-offence points are assigned to a driver for certain traffic
offences (e.g. speeding).

The Transport Department (TD) would summon a driver

who has accumulated 15 or more offence points within a period of two years toappear in court, and apply for an order to disqualify him from holding and renewing adriving licence.

Our study in 2008 revealed that, among other risks, many drivers

who had accumulated over 15 offence points (over 100 offence points in extreme- 53 -

cases) could still drive on the roads because the summonses had not been successfully
served on them, mainly due to the inaccurate addresses reported by the drivers or
because they avoided receiving the summonses.

Apart from ineffective enforcement,

this also gave rise to risk of collusion between the offending drivers and the police
officers responsible for serving the summonses.

TD had no legal power to serve

summonses on an offending driver even when he approached TD to renew his driving
licence, and also could not refuse his renewal request. CPD thus recommended
legislative amendments to plug the enforcement and corruption loopholes.
Subsequently, the law was amended to strengthen the powers of TD and the Police tofacilitate more effective enforcement of the system.
2. Preventing Corruption in Public Infrastructure Projects
Readers may refer to Transparency International’s Report titled “Hong Kong:
The Airport Core Program and the Absence of Corruption”3 published in 1999 which
provides a good and detailed case study.
In a more recent project involving a contract for the operation of a major public
facility, CPD secured the government’s agreement to include probity requirements inthe agreement with the operator to ensure it adopts anti-corruption policies andmeasures in managing and operating the facility. CPD also assigned a representative
to sit in the project’s tender assessment panel as an observer to ensure fair and proper
procedures were adopted.
3. Ethical Leadership Programme – Correctional Services Department
Right after the launching of the ELP, the Commissioner of the Correctional
Services Department (CSD) set up a departmental Ethics Committee to strengthen
ethical governance and integrity management in the department.

3

http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN013116.pdf- 54 -The Ethics

Committee is chaired by the department’s Ethics Officer who is the Deputy
Commissioner, and meets quarterly. An Assistant Director of the ICAC sits on theCommittee to give advice.
Among the first things the Committee did was to conduct research on potential
integrity risks faced by frontline and supervisory staff.

The issues identified werethen featured in case studies in a lively training video used in integrity training
sessions to facilitate discussion, raise awareness, and provide guidance on proper
conduct.

ICAC provided input during development of the video and training guideand conducted train-the-trainer workshops for CSD training officers.

To enlist the

support of senior staff in implementing the department’s integrity management plan,
the Ethics Officer personally conducted a seminar for all institution heads andsuperintendents.
CSD’s implementation of ELP displayed strong commitment at the top toenhancing ethical culture.

The programme plan was carefully thought out andvigorously implemented.

Different levels of staff were involved and the progress

was closely monitored by the Ethics Committee.
B. Business Sector
1. Corruption Prevention Advisory Service – Administration of Obstetric Services in
Private Hospitals
For various reasons, Hong Kong has become a highly popular place for Hong
Kong pregnant women in Mainland China to give birth. In both public and private
hospitals, the supply of obstetric delivery service appointments was outstripped bydemand, with many Mainland China customers willing to pay excessive fees to agentsin order to secure an appointment.

Apart from various social problems, the situation

has given rise to significant risks of corruption for hospital staff, with private hospitals- 55 -

more susceptible. CPD’s Advisory Services Group, with the support of the Hong
Kong Private Hospitals Association, quickly responded to the situation and conducteda study on the administration of obstetric delivery services in the private hospitals.
The study found that, as the risk was relatively new to the private hospitals, some
did not have ready measures to prevent possible manipulation of the booking andallocation of obstetric delivery service appointment slots. Following the study, theAdvisory Services Group produced a corruption prevention guide for reference by theprivate hospitals, and organised a seminar jointly with the Association to raise theirawareness. The Group also provided follow-up, tailored advice to individual private
hospitals.
2. Director’s Ethics Training Programme
In the wake of local and overseas corporate failures in recent years whichshowed signs of malpractice in top management of corporations, EDC took the lead tospearhead a systematic training programme for company directors, “Ethics – The
Core Value of Leadership” Training Programme in 2007, in collaboration with 12
partners including the Securities and Futures Commission and Hong Kong Exchanges
and Clearing Limited, major chambers of commerce, and professional bodies.

Workdone included:(i)

Directors' Forum in 2007 – Some 150 company directors, top and senior
executives and their professional advisors attended the Forum, at which theyprobed into the ethical challenges they were facing and shared views on how to
put ethical governance and leadership into practice.

(ii) Conference on Corporate Governance in 2008 – Some 350 directors and senior
executives of listed companies attended to examine the topical issues of ethicalgovernance and share experience on good governance practices.

- 56 -At theconference, CRD launched a “Toolkit on Directors’ Ethics” and a training video"Boardroom Agenda", while CPD launched “A Corruption Prevention Guide for
Listed Companies”.
(iii) An ethics training module was incorporated in the accreditation training
programme for company directors provided by the Hong Kong Institute of
Directors.

V. CONCLUDING REMARKSThe three-pronged strategy has been an effective strategy for fighting corruptionin Hong Kong, and is still an effective one for sustaining a clean government andbusiness environment in Hong Kong.

Building on the foundation, the ICAC iscontinuously improving its strategies and measures with new and enhanced initiatives
to meet new challenges in the changing environment.
Nevertheless, it must be pointed out that the three-pronged strategy for combating
corruption is only part of the “formula” in the fight against corruption.

Fundamental

success factors include a country’s or city’s institutions, and what is referred to by
Transparency International as the “National Integrity System”.

Hong Kong had infact undergone major institutional improvements in the later part of the last century,
along with the ICAC’s vigorous efforts in fighting corruption, to achieve its overall
success in stamping down corruption.

Any country or city committed to fighting

corruption cannot rely only on a stand-alone corruption prevention strategy, but must
make fundamental institutional improvements.

- 57 -

APPENDIX A
ICAC’s Statutory Duties and Strategies

Duties of the Commissioner

Corresponding(ICAC Ordinance Section 12)

Strategy(a)receive and consider complaints alleging corrupt
practices and investigate such of those complaints as
he considers practicable(b)

investigate any alleged or suspected offence under thePrevention of Bribery Ordinance (Cap. 201, ICAC
Ordinance (Cap. 204), etc.

(c)

Law Enforcement

investigate any conduct of a prescribed officer4 whichin the opinion of the Commissioner is connected withor conducive to corrupt practices and to report thereon
to the Chief Executive of the HKSAR(d)examine the practices and procedures of government
departments and public bodies5, in order to facilitate
the discovery of corrupt practices and to secure therevision of methods of work or procedures which, inthe opinion of the Commissioner, may be conducive tocorrupt practices(e)Prevention

instruct, advise and assist any person6, on the latter’s
request, on ways in which corrupt practices may beeliminated by such person(f)advise heads of Government departments or publicbodies of changes in practices or procedures

4“Prescribed officer” is defined in the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (Cap. 201, Laws of HongKong) to include, among others, any person holding an office of emolument, whether permanent or
temporary, under the Government, any judicial officer and any ICAC officer.
5“Public body” is defined in the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance to include, among others, theGovernment, Legislative Council, Executive Council, etc. and any body listed in Schedule 1 to theOrdinance.
6
This covers any persons or entities in the private sector.

- 58 -

compatible with the effective discharge of the duties
of such departments or public bodies which theCommissioner thinks necessary to reduce thelikelihood of the occurrence of corrupt practices(g)educate the public against the evils of corruption(h)enlist and foster public support in combating
corruption- 59 -

Education

APPENDIX B- 60 -

APPENDIX C

Corruption Prevention Department
Director of
Corruption Prevention

Division 2

Division 2

Assistant Director 2

Assistant Director 2

Assignment Groups

Management Group

Assignment Groups

Government
Departments &Public Bodies- Disciplined Services- Transport- Home Affairs- Judiciary- Commerce & Trade- Labour- etc.

Administrative
SupportGovernment
Departments &Public Bodies- Public Works
Departments- Housing- Health- Public Hospitals- Lands- Environmental- Public Utility
Companies- etc.

Civil Service Integrity
Public Elections
Public Procurement

Corruption
Prevention
Advisory
Committee
Secretariat

Construction Industry

Schools &Educational Institutions
Etc.

- 61 -

Advisory Services
Group
Private Sector
NGOs, Charities
Building
Management(Private Sector)
Government
Departments &Public Bodies- Financial Sector
Regulators- Travel Industry
Regulators

Centre ofAnti-Corruption
StudiesResources for studyof issues pertaining tofight against corruptionin Hong Kong andinternationally
Platform for scholarly
exchange and collaboration
with international &Mainland anti-corruption
agencies & institutions

APPENDIX D- 62 -

APPENDIX EICAC Advisory Committees
1.

The Advisory Committee on Corruption is the principal advisory body ofICAC and oversees all the Commission’s activities and keeps its operational,
staffing and administrative policies under review.

2.

The Operations Review Committee, among other things, receives from theCommissioner information about all corruption complaints and reports oncompleted and prosecution cases, and advises on the follow up of cases not
subject to prosecution or caution.

3.

The Corruption Prevention Advisory Committee advises the Commissioner
on the work of CPD, including considering and endorsing its corruption
prevention study reports.

4.

The Citizens Advisory Committee on Community Relations advises theCommissioner on the work of CRD and monitors public attitudes towards
corruption in general.

5.

The ICAC Complaints Committee oversees the handling of non-criminal
complaints against ICAC officers.

The terms of reference of the Advisory Committee on Corruption, Operations Review
Committee, Corruption Prevention Advisory Committee, and Citizens Advisory
Committee on Community Relations as at 2010 can be found in the Report of ICAC
Advisory Committees 20107.

7

http://www.icac.org.hk/filemanager/en/Content_1020/2010.pdf- 63 -

APPENDIX F
Samples of ICAC Posters

A Sample Poster in 1970s

A Sample Poster in 1980s

A Sample Poster in 2000s

A Sample Poster in 2010/11- 64 -

JICA’S APPROACH TO GOOD GOVERNANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION
Chie Miyahara*

This paper explains, firstly, JICA’s role as the Japanese ODA implementing agency,
then, secondly discusses our approach towards establishing good governance and promoting
anti-corruption in our partner countries. Lastly, concrete project cases concerning
anti-corruption are introduced.
A. JICA’s RoleJICA assists and supports developing countries as the executing agency of Japanese
ODA. In accordance with its vision of “Inclusive and Dynamic Development,” JICA
supports the resolution of issues of developing countries by using the most suitable tools of
various assistance methods and a combined regional-, country-, and issue-oriented approach.
1. JICA’s Vision, Mission and Strategy
There are many issues in the world that must be addressed not by individual countries
but by the international community. In dealing with such issues, together with its Vision,
JICA has defined four Missions to be achieved through four main Strategies. JICA’s
cooperative operations are implemented under this Vision and Mission.
(i) JICA’s Vision
Inclusive and Dynamic Development(ii) JICA’s Mission(a) Addressing Global Agenda: includes climate change, water, food, energy, infectious
diseases and financing.
(b) Reducing Poverty through Equitable Growth: pursues sustained poverty reduction
through inclusive and equitable growth(c) Improving Governance: strengthens policies, institutions, organizations and humanresources as the underpinning of development.
*

Director, Administration and Financial / Financial Division, Governance Group, Industrial Development
and Public Policy Department, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).

- 65 -

(d) Achieving Human Security: protects people from threats and building societies where
they can live with dignity.
(iii) JICA’s Strategies(a) Integrated Assistance: combines policy support, institution building, human capacity
development, infrastructure development, etc. This also includes cross-border andcross-sector assistance.
(b) Seamless Assistance: means speedy and continuous aid delivery from emergency relief
to rehabilitation/reconstruction and peace-building.
(c) Promoting Development Partnerships: between the public and private sectors, applying
technologies and know-how.
(d) Enhancing Research and Knowledge Sharing: shares JICA’s abundant field
experiences through research and leading discussions.
2. ODA and JICA – JICA’s Assistant Schemes
Since joining the Colombo Plan in 1954, Japan has been providing financial andtechnical assistance to developing countries through ODA, aiming to contribute to the peaceand development of the international community and thereby help ensure Japan’s own
security and prosperity.
JICA is in charge of administering all ODA such as technical cooperation, ODA loans
and grant aid in an integrated manner, except contributions to international organizations.
JICA, the world’s largest bilateral aid agency, works in over 150 countries and regions andhas some 100 overseas offices worldwide.
(i) Technical Cooperation
For human resources development and formulation of administrative systems ofdeveloping countries, technical cooperation involves the dispatch of experts, provision ofnecessary equipment and training of personnel from developing countries in Japan and othercountries. Cooperation plans can be tailored to address a broad range of issues.
(ii) ODA LoansODA loans support developing countries above a certain income level by providing
low-interest, long-term and concessional funds (in Japanese yen) to finance their- 66 -

development efforts. ODA loans are used for large-scale infrastructure and other forms ofdevelopment that required substantial funds.
(iii) Grant Aid
Grant aid is the provision of funds to developing countries which have low income
levels, without the obligation of repayment. Grant aid is used for improving basic
infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, water-supply facilities and roads, along withobtaining health and medical care, equipment and other requirements.
In addition to the above schemes, JICA is also responsible for disaster relief andcooperation through citizen participation.
3. JICA’s Operational Flow for Providing Assistance
JICA implements effective and efficient support under the Japanese government’s aid
policy based on an unbiased, broad perspective that extends beyond assistance schemes suchas technical cooperation, ODA loans and grant aid. In particular, JICA promptly conducts
project formulation and implementation by undertaking preparatory surveys to investigate
the content of assistance at project sites before receiving aid requests from partner countries.
JICA also conducts evaluation of the projects using the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA)
cycle for each scheme of technical cooperation, ODA loans and grant aid and employs thesystem to further improve operations and sufficiently achieve public accountability.
B. JICA’s Approach to Good Governance
1. Basic Concept of Supporting Good GovernanceIn year 2004, with the primary objective of proposing a framework forgovernance-related assistance by systematically clarifying the concept of governance andstreamlining JICA’s contribution to this issue, JICA developed a report named “Governance
Assistance of JICA – Toward Indigenous Development of Democratic Institutions,
Administrative Functions and Legal Institutions in the Developing World,” where we
discussed: i) the definition of governance in JICA projects; ii) components of good
governance; iii) proposed basic guidelines of governance assistance in JICA’s projects; iv)
proposed role of JICA’s assistance in improving governance; and v) major issues in JICA’s
governance assistance. In the report, JICA defines governance as a concept encompassing
not only government institutions, but also the mechanisms and systems which determine the- 67 -

relationship among government, civil society and the private sector. More specifically, weinterpret governance as follows:
The development and operation of all the institutions, including governmentorganizations and systems, the synergetic relationship among government, civil society
and the private sector, and the processes of decision making, in order to mobilize,
allocate and manage the resources of the country efficiently and in a manner thatreflects the will of the people, with the aim of realizing the stability and developmentof the country.
In accordance with the above-mentioned definition of “governance”, the basic
guidelines of its governance assistance can be summarized as follows: “JICA considers it
important that the government of the partner country promote improvement of governanceand enhancement and consolidation of democratic institutions on its own initiative. In orderto facilitate the endogenous processes without forcing a certain type of institutional reformfrom the outside, JICA assists the government of the partner country to select, develop andoperate the necessary systems and institutions by providing information and engaging in
dialogue. In other words, it adopts approaches such as “the provision of policy options” or“joint thinking.”
2. JICA’s Approach towards Good Governance
The role of JICA’s assistance in improving governance in developing countries can besummarized as the following three items, depending on the condition of the partner countries,
such as the level of problem awareness and actions taken:(i)

To provide options for developing new systems and mechanisms and to stimulatechanges in the awareness of government organizations and the parties concerned;(ii) To assist the development of new institutions and mechanisms;(iii) To assist the development of detailed measures and methods and the necessaryorganizational reform and human resource development for putting the systems andmechanisms into operation.
Although the scale of the mechanisms and systems varies, the number of projects in iii)
above is the largest among JICA’s projects.
When it comes to the concrete projects implemented by JICA aimed at governance,
improvement in developing countries can be categorized into three major issues- 68 -(sub-categories): i) promoting the rule of law; ii) improving the public administration
function; and iii) establishing democratic systems. The following is a summary of the major
issues (sub-sectors) and the characteristics of JICA’s current cooperation on those issues.
(i) Promoting the Rule of Law
The focus of assistance will be to facilitate the efforts of developing countries to develop
legislation, aimed at moving towards a market economy or establishing the rule of law.
Assistance for development of legal institutions will include not only assistance for thedrafting and enactment of bills, but also for the development of various systems of law
enforcement and their application (assistance for judiciary reform), and for human resource
development in the legal profession.
(ii) Improving the Public Administration Function
Its focus will be to facilitate institutional development which is harmonized with theownership and self-reliant efforts of the partner countries and existing socio-economic
conditions, with emphasis on their conducting the processes on their own. “Improvement of
the efficiency and effectiveness of administrative functions,” “assistance for harmonizing
decentralization,” and “promotion of participation and improvement in transparency” will be
the three important cooperation issues.
(iii) Establishing Democratic Systems
It is based on respect for ownership of the partner countries and focused on assisting
democratic advancement towards enhanced basic freedoms and protection and promotion ofhuman rights from long-term perspectives. The major cooperation issues are assistance forelections, assistance for the legislature and assistance to the police and criminal justicesectors.
C. JICA Approach to Anti-Corruption
Responding to the increased number of requests from our partner countries concerning
anti-corruption measures, JICA studied and pulled together approaches to tackle
corruption-related issues in 2010. As it was introduced above, JICA has conducted a study
towards good governance in 2004, which also touched upon corruption-related issues. In thereport, it was explained that: “Corruption is regarded as one of the values which good
governance can tackle … For the assistance in anti-corruption related sector, development of- 69 -

anti-corruption system, strengthening oversight mechanisms, and thoroughness oftransparency would be major intervention.”
Based on this initial idea, JICA has studied current international trends, assistance
implemented by other donors, efforts done by governments as well as the private sector, andsummarized our aim to combat corruption, four pillars to tackle this issue and ourapproaches for each pillar.
1. Aim:Support establishment of anti-corruption systems and implementation of the systems, aspart of good governance.
As described above, the definition of JICA’s assistance in governance is “thedevelopment and operation of all the institutions, including government organizations andsystems, the synergetic relationship among government, civil society and the private sector,
and the processes of decision making, in order to mobilize, allocate and manage theresources of the country efficiently and in a manner that reflects the will of the people, withthe aim of realizing the stability and development of the country.” Therefore, the purpose of
assistance in the anti-corruption sector is to support establishment of a system and governing
structure to prevent/deter corrupted actions.
2. Four Pillars and Its Approach to Anti-Corruption(i) Strengthen the Rule of Law and Institutional Development for Deterring Corruption
Prevention of corrupted actions by: i) developing legal and regulatory frameworks andtheir enforcement systems to detect and penalize corrupted acts; ii) establishing clear
administrative and judicial procedures and improve the administrations; iii) building
awareness of the civil society and improve access to the law; and iv) developing the legal
system and institutions to promote fair and transparent political activities.
(ii) Enhance Efficiency, Transparency, and Accountability of Public Administration
Prevention of corrupted actions by: i) improving the capacity of public financial
management; ii) reducing opportunities of corruption and improve transparency in revenue
administration; iii) improving the systems of public procurement; and iv) promoting civil
service management reform and ethics.
(iii) Strengthen National Checks and Balances Mechanism- 70 -

Prevention of corrupted actions by: i) strengthening the function and capability ofsupreme audit institutions (SAI); ii) strengthening parliamentary oversight; iii) improving
access to information and strengthen media; and iv) creating broader public participation.
(iv) Promote Fair and Healthy Competition in the Private Sector
Prevention of corrupted actions by: i) improving regulatory governance; ii) increasing
the commitment of private enterprises to anti-corruption and promote their compliance withlaws and regulations; and iii) creating a business environment to reduce the vulnerability tocorruption.
D. Project Cases
1. Vietnam(i) Holistic Approach
In Vietnam, as Japan’s ODA loan relates to corruption, we have a holistic approach tocombat corruption. However, each intervention is rather small, as our resource is limited.
Some of the intervention does not necessarily address anti-corruption. We are implementing
the following projects:(a) Improving transparency in public procurement(b) Strengthening supervisory function towards public administration(c) Supporting implementation of Vietnam’s anti-corruption strategy(d) Technical Assistance for the Legal and Judicial System Reform(e) Capacity development of National Assembly of Vietnam
2. Tanzania(i) Capacity Development Programme for Internal Audit (Sep. 2009 – August 2012)
This project falls in “Improvement of the capacity of public financial management” inour approach towards anti-corruption. The project purpose and expected outputs are as
follows:(a) Aim
The foundation of the technical guidance of internal audit of MDAs (Ministries,- 71 -

Departments and Agencies) is established.
(b) Project Outputs(i) Training courses for internal audit are developed in accordance with skill
levels.
(ii) A user-friendly internal audit handbook is prepared.
(iii) CIAU’s (Central Internal Audit Units) staff and selected MDA internal
auditors are trained as Champions.
(iv) Training of MDAs’ internal auditors by Champions is introduced.
(v) Monitoring of other MDA internal audits and the handbook revision process
are introduced.
3. China(i) Training Program on Anti-Corruption in the Administrative Management Field andAdministrative Supervision (2009 - 2011)
This project falls in “Improvement of public procurement” in our approach towards
anti-corruption. The project purpose and training components are as follows:(a) AimDevelop capacity of inspection officers in charge of anti-corruption.
(b) Training Program(i) Human Resource Management(ii) Public Procurement/Tender for Public Works(iii) Public Information Disclosure(iv) Whistle-blowing

4. Uzbekistan(i) Improvement of Administrative Procedures for the Development of Private Sector
Activities (Apr. 2010 – Mar. 2012)
This project falls in “Develop legal and regulatory frameworks and their enforcement
systems to detect and penalize corrupted acts” in our approach towards anti-corruption. The
project purpose and expected outputs are as follows:(a) AimDevelop institutional capacity and structures in the the Ministry of Justice for
implementing appropriate administrative procedures.

- 72 -

(b) Project Outputs(i) Administrative procedures under the Law on Guarantees of the Freedom of
Entrepreneurship Activities (LGFEA) are made clear to officials andentrepreneurs.
(ii) Model Rules concerning administrative procedures and Implementation
Manual of the Model Rules are prepared for enhancing appropriate
administrative procedures.
(iii) Capacity of Ministry of Justice is strengthened to monitor implementation ofrules and regulations concerning provisions of administrative procedures under
LGFEA.

5. Honduras(i) Development Capacity Building in the Western Region of Republic of Honduras (Sep.
2006 - Oct. 2010)
This project falls in “Create broader public participation” in our approach towardanti-corruption. The project purpose and expected outputs are as follows:(a) AimEstablish an appropriate model to socialize, formulate, execute, manage, operate
and properly maintain the projects of consolidation of social infrastructure in the
Higuito Inter-Municipal Council and member municipalities.
(b) Project Outputs(i) Improve formulation process of Municipal Development Plan and social
infrastructure projects;(ii) Strengthen capacity of the functionaries of the Higuito Inter-Municipal Council
and member municipalities, and of the communities;(iii) Diffuse the model to other areas.
6. Group Training
In addition to the projects introduced above, JICA implements some “group” training
courses concerning anti-corruption. These training courses involve the transfer of Japanese
specialized knowledge and technology. Training programs are implemented with thecooperation of Japan’s national and local governments, universities, private enterprises,- 73 -

non-governmental organizations and other relevant parties. The training courses are as
follows:(i)

Seminar on Government Audit Practices for ASOSAI (Asian Organization of Supreme
Audit Institutions) Member Supreme Audit Institutions (supported by the Board ofAudit)(ii) Seminar on Government Audit (supported by the Board of Audit)(iii) Seminar on National Government Administration for Senior Officials (supported by
National Personnel Authority)(iv) Seminar on Public Personnel Administration for Middle Level Officials (supported by
National Personnel Authority- 74 -

COMPETITION AND RESTRICTIONS ON BUREAUCRAT-LED
BID-RIGGING PRACTICES
Fumio Noguchi*

Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC):
JFTC controls actions that will restrict inter-company competition.
Many cases: Administrative investigations
Some malicious or serious cases: Compulsory investigation of criminalcases; Filing an accusation with Public Prosecutor’s Office
Anticompetitive Acts
Cartel: e.g. Raising the price level in unison on the industry-wide scale
Bid-rigging: The winning bidder is designated in advance. Other firms
cooperate so that the winning bidder will be awarded the contract.
Private monopolization: Controlling or excluding competitors
Unfair business practices
Inter-company Competition
Lowering prices
Developing technology
Innovations in corporate management styles
Fostering moral values: Company staff will not seek their personal interests inthe company.
Edo Era: 1603–1868
The Tokugawa shogunate served as the central government, while various clans(local governments) ruled local areas.
Japan’s Feudal System
The shogunate granted feudal lords their own territories, and the lords managed
them. Japan had more than 200 clans at that time.
Feudal lords and their lieges needed to make their territories flourish in orderfor their offspring to prosper.
* Director General, Trade Practices Department, Japan Fair Trade Commission.

- 75 -

“Issho Kenmei”…“all over creation”
Direct meaning is “working hard to protect land”.
Clans served like a corporation where staff members share the same destiny.
Large-scale flood control projects, development of new rice fields, fostering ofcommerce and industry sectors: Competition among local governments
Population increased threefold during the Edo era.
Education spread (the three R’s: Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic)
Samurai moral values are similar to corporate ethics.
Since the Meiji era
Accumulation during the Edo era served as a driving force for national development
Becoming a centralized nation
Competitive local governments faded out.
However, Samurai moral values lingered on, serving as a mental
backbone.
Bid-rigging
Competitors designate a prospective winning bidder prior to the public sector’scompetitive bidding.
Corporations other than the prospective winning bidder will cooperate so thatthe prospective winning bidder will be awarded the contract.
It looks like a competition on the surface, but it is not a competition
in real terms: The successful bidder will enjoy high profits.
Collusive Bidding at the Initiative of Government Officials
The ordering party gets involved in designating prospective winning bidders.
Staff members of the ordering party do not usually earn direct
rewards for their involvement.
Retirees of the ordering party will parachute into winning bidders
or their related organizations.
Actions against Bid-Rigging
JFTC: Issues cease and desist orders, surcharge payment orders, or files criminal
accusations in malicious or serious cases (criminal penalties will be imposed).
Ordering party: Seeks compensation for damages, demands payment of penalty, or- 76 -

suspends the bidding qualifications.
Act for the Prevention of Collusive Bid-Rigging at the Initiative of Government
Officials
Came into force in 2003.
This legislation prohibits the following acts:
1) Making bid participants engage in bid-rigging;2) Expressing an intention on winning bidders;
3) Leaking confidential information on order placement; and4) Aiding bid-rigging.
Improvement measures by ordering party:
JFTC recognizes the ordering party’s involvement
JFTC demands the ordering party to take improvement measures
The ordering party will conduct necessary investigations
If the ordering party gets involved, it will take necessary improvement
measures, such as improving its bidding systems.
The ordering party will disclose to the general public investigation results
as well as improvement measures and also report them to JFTC.
Actions against staff members
Seeking compensation for damages, or taking disciplinary measures(dismissal/suspension from office, salary cut, etc.)
Criminal penalties (abetting bid-rigging or leaking secrets: Imprisonment withlabour for a maximum of five years, or a maximum fine of ¥2.5 million,
will be imposed): Independent of JFTC’s investigation.
Past Cases
1. The order for construction work placed by Iwamizawa City (Hokkaido) (in 2003)
1) The officials of the city government selected a prospective winning bidder foreach construction project and gave such information to the industry group.
2) The officials of city government told the industry group about the estimatedconstruction cost (much higher than the actual cost) for each project.
In this way, the city hall made bid participants engage in bid-rigging.

- 77 -

In response to this case of bid-rigging, the city government decided to prepare
instruction manuals, expand the general competitive bidding system, and voluntarily
refrain from re-employment of the city government’s retirees at related organizations.
(The ordering parties took the same approach in subsequent cases.)
2. The order for construction work placed by Niigata City (Niigata Prefecture) (in 2004)
In response to a request from a prospective winning bidder (designated by bidding
participants), the city government officials passed on its estimated project cost.
The Niigata District Public Prosecutor’s Office prosecuted four city government
officials for Obstruction of Public Auction. The Supreme Court has delivered the final
and conclusive judgment, imposing imprisonment with labour for one year to one and ahalf years, with a suspended sentence of three years.
3. The order for upper portion bridge work placed by Japan Highway Public Corp. (in2005)1) Japan Highway Public Corp. (JHPC) received an allocation list of prospective
winning bidders from JHPC retirees and approved such list.
2) In response to requests from JHPC retirees, JHPC placed multiple orders by
splitting the entire project into several portions.
JHPC made bidding participants engage in bid-rigging in order to provide
reemployment opportunities for JHPC retirees.
JFTC accused noncompliant enterprises as well as a vice president and an
executive board member of violating the antitrust law. The Supreme Court delivered aconclusive judgment that imposed imprisonment with labour for two and half years witha suspended sentence of four years, and imprisonment with labour for two years with asuspended sentence of three years.
JHPC demanded two executive board members to pay compensation for damagesof approximately ¥8.7 billion jointly and severally with the noncompliant enterprises.
4. The order for the water gate work placed by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism (in 2007)
The officials of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism(MLIT) informed a bid facilitator of their intended winning bidder so that bid-rigging
would go smoothly.

- 78 -

MLIT demanded two former staff members to pay compensation for damages ofapproximately ¥800 million jointly and severally with the noncompliant enterprises andthree MLIT retirees.
5. The order for civil engineering/building construction work placed by Defense
Facilities Administration Agency (in 2007)
Based on the status, age, etc., of the Defense Facilities Administration Agency(DFAA) retirees at the time of their retirement, the officials of DFAA calculated theannual target of new orders acceptance for each construction firm where DFAA retirees
have parachuted. Within such calculation result, DFAA selected prospective winningbidders for each construction project and provided such information to the industry
stakeholders through DFAA retirees.
Then, DFAA was abolished and merged with the Ministry of Defense in September
2007.
6. The order for forest road survey design tasks placed by the Japan Green Resources
Agency (in 2007)
The JGRA selected the prospective winning bidder on the basis of the number offormer colleagues who had joined the bidding company, and the extent of thecompany’s enthusiasm for the contract. After selecting the prospective winning bidder
for each project, the JGRA informed the winning bidder that it had been chosen as such.
JFTC filed an accusation with the Prosecutor-General that the noncompliant
enterprises and a former executive board member and a former manager violated theantitrust law. The Tokyo District Court delivered the conclusive judgment, imposing
imprisonment with labour for two years, with a suspended sentence of four years, andimprisonment with labour for one and a half years, with a suspended sentence of three
years.
7. The order for the sewage treatment facility’s electric engineering work placed by
Sapporo City (in 2008).
8. The order for vehicle management tasks placed by the Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (in 2009).
9. The order for fixtures and furniture placed by the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (in2010).
10. The order for civil engineering package work placed by Aomori City (in 2010).

- 79 -

11. The orders for civil engineering package work and pavement work placed by Ibaraki
Prefecture (in 2011).

- 80 -

G20 Anti-Corruption
Toshifumi Ishida
International Safety and Security Cooperation Division
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of JapanThe views expressed in this presentation do not necessarily represent the views of the Government of Japan.

1Outline of the presentation
I.

Anti-Corruption:G8 and G20 related commitments¾¾¾

Toronto Summit (June 2010)
Seoul Summit (Nov 2010)
Cannes Summit (Nov 2011)

ii. G20 Anti-Corruption Action Plan¾¾¾¾

Implementation of the international legislative framework
National measures to prevent and combat corruption
International cooperation
Public-Private cooperation

III. Japan’s implementation of the Action Plan

2

- 81 -

Ⅰ. Anti-Corruption from G8 to G20-G7/ G8 discussed anti-corruption

In 2003 (Evian): the G8 expressed its continuing strong political will toengage in the fight against corruption and the mismanagement ofpublic resources.
2004 (Sea Island), 2005 (Gleneagles), 2006 (St. Petersburg),
2007 (Heiligendamm)
2008 Hokkaido Toyako: Accountability Report: Implementation
Review of G8 on Anti-Corruption Commitments-G20-major trading nations:have a special responsibility to prevent and tackle corruption, toestablish legal and policy frameworks that promote a clean businessenvironment (G20 Anti-Corruption Action Plan, Nov 2010)3

Related commitments and activitiesy

G20 Pittsburgh Summit (Sep 2009)-prevent illicit flows from developing countriesy

G20 Toronto Summit (June 2010)

Corruption threatens the integrity of markets, undermines faircompetition, distorts resource allocation, destroys public trust andundermines the rule of law…
→coordinated work by the G20 required: establishment of the G20 AntiCorruption WG to make comprehensive recommendations how G20
could continue to make practical and valuable contributions tointernational efforts to combat corruption and lead by exampleyy

G20 Anti-corruption WG was established
Co-chairs (Indonesia and France)
G20 countries and related international organizations
Meeting in Indonesia

G20 Seoul Summit (Nov 2010)
Adoption of the G20 Anti-Corruption Action Plany

G20 Cannes Summit (Nov 2011)
Publishing the first monitoring report, incl. recommendations to leaders4- 82 -

G20 commitments-external factors
y Sep 2009

Pittsburgh Summit

y June 2010

Toronto Summit

Establishment of
the G20 Anti-Corruption WG

The late-2000s recession
The 3rd COSP of UNCAC-adoption of TOR for thereview mechanismy Nov 2010

FATF’s newrecommendation

Seoul Summit

Adoption of the G20 AntiCorruption Action Plan
The Arab Springy Nov 2011

Cannes Summit

The 4th COSP of UNCAC

Publishing the firstmonitoring report andrecommendations

5

Ⅱ．Anti-Corruption Action Plan, Nov 2010
z Implementation of the international

legislative framework (action points 1 & 2)

◦ Ratification of the UNCAC as soon as possible◦ Conduct UNCAC review in an effective and thorough manner◦ Criminalization of bribery of foreign public officialsz National measures to prevent and combat

corruption (action points 3, 7, 8 & 9)yStrengthening its effort to prevent and combat money launderingy

Cooperation with the FATF

y

Enactment and implementation of whistleblower protection rulesyStrengthening the anti-corruption bodiesyPromoting integrity, transparency, accountability and theprevention of corruption
6- 83 -

Anti-Corruption Action Plan, Nov 2010
International Cooperation (action points 4, 5 & 6)
Denying entry of corrupt officials- consider a cooperative frameworky Promoting the use of UNCAC in extradition, mutual legal assistanceand asset recovery. Encouraging the singing of related treaties
y Establishing clear and effective channels for mutual legal assistanceand other forms of international cooperation, on corruption andasset recovery
y Transparency and high ethical standards in international organizationsyPublic-Private PartnershipyStrengthen partnership between the public-private sector.
7

Japan’s implementation of the Action PlanzImplementation of the international
legislative framework◦ Criminalization of bribery of foreign public officials
Amended the Unfair Competition Prevention Law(UCPL) in 1998
Has Concluded the OECD Convention on Bribery ofForeign Public Officials in International BusinessTransactions

llen
Ch a

ge

Participates actively in the OECD Working Group on
Bribery in International Business Transactions- Phase 3 review has been undergone-◦ Conclusion of the UNCAC as soon as possible
Japan has signed but not yet concluded- 84 -

8

Japan’s implementation of the Action Planz National measures to prevent and combat

corruptiony Strengthening its effort to prevent and combat

money laundering

・Has strengthened its anti-money laundering legislation;
The Act on Prevention of Transfer of Criminal
Proceeds was amended in April 2011.

z International cooperationy To encourage the signing of bilateral andmultilateral treaties on extradition, mutual
legal assistance and asset recovery
・Mutual legal assistance treaty/agreement with EU
and Russia – both entered into force in early 2011.
9

G20 Cannes Summit
Communiqué- FINAL DECLARATION

Intensifying our Fight against Corruption
We have made significant progress in implementing the Action
Plan ….

The First monitoring report by the WG was
submitted•••

An assessment of the collective progress made by theWorking Group and the G20
Significant individual country progress
A set of recommendations for consideration by Leaders10- 85 -

Thank you

11- 86 -

Compliance Research Office

Fifth Regional Seminar on Good Governance
8th December 2011
Hideshiro Karasawa
Financial Services Agency(Views expressed in this presentation are those of author and do not necessarilyreflect views of the FSA Japan.)

1

Organizational Structure of the FSA

Compliance Research OfficePlanning and
Coordination
BureauSupervisory
BureauRegional
Offices

Inspection
Bureau(Staff: 330)

(Staff: 273)

(Staff: 1,231)(Staff: 430)2

- 87 -

Compliance Research Office
Established: April 2006
Based on the spirit of Whistleblower Protection Act


Article 1 (Purpose)
The Purpose of this Act is to protect Whistleblowers, to provide fornullity, etc. of dismissal of Whistleblower on the grounds ofWhistleblowing and the measures that the business operator andAdministrative Organ shall take concerning Whistleblowing, and topromote compliance with the laws and regulations concerning theprotection of life, body, property……
http://www.cas.go.jp/jp/seisaku/hourei/data/WPA.pdf

3

Contents
Scope of business Compliance with laws and regulations regarding the FSA's conduct(including acts of employees)
 Whistleblowing to an Administrative Organ with the authority to
impose Disposition or Recommendation, etc.;

Organization
All members are lawyers

 Chief （１）･･･Professor and attorney Members （８）Administrative Law judge （１）Public prosecutor （１）Attorney （６）- 88 -

4

From Beginning to End…
Acceptanceof
information

Research

Report––––E-mailPost
Fax
Help Line– Hearing– Collection of evidence– Finding of fact
– Minister or Commissioner– Relevant departments
 Disciplinary measures Remedial Action or Preventive Measures
5

PointsInformation
 Variety of means to obtain information

Independence Organizations do not belong to any Bureaus
 Composed of legal experts

Confidentiality
 Protection of personal information
 Prevention of Conflict of Interest
6- 89 -

Thank you very much!

www.fsa.go.jp
hideshiro.karasawa@fsa.go.jp

7- 90 -

Contracting Procedures of theJapanese Government《 Content 》①Outline of the contracting scheme②Programmes for fair public procurement<For the Regional Seminar on Good Governance, the United Nations Asia and Far
East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI)>

Junichi Izumi
Legal Division, Budget Bureau, Ministry of Finance① Outline of the Contracting Scheme(Basic act: Public Accounting Act)- 91 -

How Does the Japanese Government
Decide its Counterparty?
《 Competitive approaches 》
GeneralGeneralcompetitivecompetitivecontracts
contracts
This type of contracting method is employed in principle.
The ordering party makes public announcement, decides a successful bidder through public bidding among the unspecified
number of bidding participants, and enters into a contract with the successful bidder.

Designated
Designatedcompetitivecompetitivecontracts
contracts
The ordering party decides successful bidder through bidding among competition participants designated by theordering party, and enters into a contract with the successful bidder.

AuctionAuctionsalesale
An unspecified number of competition participants are invited through public announcement and join competition
each other orally or with their specific act.

《 Noncompetitive approach 》
NegotiatedNegotiatedcontracts
contracts
The ordering party decides its counterparty and enters into a contract with such counterparty, without employing thecompetitive bidding process.

Negotiated Contracts
NegotiatedNegotiatedcontract
contractisisemployedemployedininthe
thefollowing
followingcases:
cases:① Competition is not possible owing to the characteristics or purposes of the contract <Noncompetitive negotiated contract>- A contract is for a land lot at an unsubstitutable location (for example, a road site). Purchasing a land lot at a different
location will not accomplish the intended purpose of the contract.
- The counterparty has special know-how that is unsubstitutable with the other person’s know-how, and the government will
not accomplish the intended goal of civil services if it does not enter into a contract with the counterparty.
- A museum intends to purchase a certain work by a certain artist.
- The government intends to procure defense equipment manufactured under license.

②Competition is not desirable owing to urgent needs.

- The government takes first-aid actions during disasters to protect a citizen’s life and ensures safety of properties when adisaster occurs.

③Competition will pose some negative impacts- The government sometimes needs to enter into an additional contract for ongoing construction projects if an unexpectedcircumstance occurs.

NegotiatedNegotiatedcontract
contractmay
maybe
beemployedemployedininthe
thefollowing
followingcases:
cases:
Estimated contract price stands at a small sum, etc.

(Other example)(Example of small-sum negotiated contracts)
Unsuccessful negotiated contracts without successful bidder
Construction or production: ¥2.5 million or lessThis type of contract is employed if competitive bidding or follow-up bidding does not yield
Acquisition of physical goods: ¥1.6 million or lesssuccessful bidder, or if successful bidder fails to enter into the contract.

- 92 -

② Programmes for Fair Public Procurement

OutlineOutlineofofScandals
Scandals[Fractionated, small-sum negotiated contract scandal (cash registers)] July 2004
Social Insurance Agency only explained to certain providers the specifications of cash registers and thenumber of cash registers installed, and it entered into negotiated contracts. In addition, social insurance
offices have split up the purchasing unit into small-lot orders of nine cash registers or less without
justifiable reasons.
[Bridge bid-rigging scandal] May 2005
In the central government’s construction projects of steel bridges, 47 companies that belong to the two
bid-rigging societies (Society K and Society A) engaged in collusive bidding (by adjusting new orderacceptance) and decided successful bidders and bid prices in advance on the basis of the past records
so that successful bidders would always win new orders.
* These 47 companies belonging to the bid-rigging societies have successfully won most orders forconstruction works placed by regional development bureaus of Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism from FY2002 to FY2004.
It is revealed that Society K and Society A have adjusted the approach to be followed by their member
firms for accepting new orders placed by Japan Highway Public Corp. Executive officers of Japan
Highway Public Corp. were also involved in the adjustment process of new order acceptance.
[DFAA-led bid-rigging scandal] January 2006
As for competitive bidding for US Yokota Air Base, Defense Facilities Administration Agency (DFAA)
decided successful bidders in advance so that a bidder that accepts parachutists from former Defense
Agency on the advantageous conditions will win new orders for construction works on favorable
conditions.

- 93 -

Appropriate Public Procurement(Outline of Scandal and Actions Taken (1))[Fractionated, small-sum negotiated contract scandal (cash registers)]
July 2004{ Handling clerical duties on negotiated contracts(Notice of Ministry of Finance to the head of ministries/agencies dated February
25, 2005)- Imposing stricter disclosure criteria on negotiated contracts
Except for small-sum contracts (¥1 million in the case of a consignment
contract), the ordering party must disclose counterparties, contract prices, andjustifiable reasons on the website.
{ Handling clerical duties on negotiated contract-type consignment contracts(Notice of Director General of the Budget Bureau to directors of Accounting
Division of ministries/agencies dated February 25, 2005)- Prohibiting lump-sum re-consignment and introducing an approval scheme forre-consignment

Appropriate Public Procurement(Outline of Scandal And Actions Taken (2))[Bridge bid-rigging scandal] May 2005

{ Instruction of the Prime Minister (with regard to amendment to “Act on Elimination andPrevention of Involvement in Bid Rigging, etc.”)
Outline of amendments to “Act on Elimination and Prevention of Involvement in Bid Rigging, etc.”- Creating criminal sentences for ordering party’s staff- Expanding the meaning of “involvement in bid rigging etc.”- Expanding the scope of ordering parties subject to this Act- Requiring disclosure of survey results on damage compensations and reasons for disciplinary
actions against staff workers, etc.
Setting up “Liaison Conference of Related Ministries/Agencies on Improvement in Bid Contracts
for Public Works” (December 2005)- 94 -

Appropriate Public Procurement(Outline of Scandal And Actions Taken (3))[DFAA-led bid-rigging scandal] January 2006

{ Setting up “Liaison Conference of Related Ministries/Agencies on Appropriate Public
Procurement Practices” (January 2006){ Programs for appropriate public procurement practices(The February 2006 decision of “Liaison Conference of Related Ministries/Agencies on
Appropriate Public Procurement Practices”)- Public works: Increasing general competitive bidding and expanding the overall evaluation
bidding approach- Negotiated contracts: Conducting emergency inspections, and expanding information
disclosure on negotiated contracts

Appropriate Negotiated Contracts with Public-interest Corporations, etc.
(The June 2006 decision of “Liaison Conference of Related
Ministries/Agencies on Appropriate Public Procurement Practices”)[Developing the Negotiated Contracts Review Plan]{ Re-examining negotiated contracts with public interest
corporations, and shifting approximately 70% of thenegotiated contracts (on the monetary value basis) to generalcompetitive bidding[Programs after developing the Plan]{ Re-examining negotiated contracts with contracting parties
other than public interest corporations on the basis of thesame concept and revising the Negotiated Contracts Review
Plan in January 2007
{ Further enhancing information disclosure{ Setting up procurement-related one-stop information service
desks at each ministry/agency, etc.

- 95 -

Appropriate Public Procurement (1)(Notice of Finance Minister to the head of ministry/agency
dated August 25, 2006)
1. Actions for appropriate bidding and contracting practices[Competitive bidding]{
Setting up eligibility for participating in competitive bidding asnecessary for fair and rational competitions.
{
Pushing ahead by introducing the overall evaluation bidding approachbased general competitive bidding for public procurement practices for
R&D, survey research, public relations services, etc.
[Negotiated contracts]
Except for counterparties clearly specified in applicable laws, thenegotiated contracts will be replaced with general competitive bidding.
⇒ Negotiated contracts for civil service assistance tasks, survey research,or leasing services will be replaced with general competitive bidding(including the overall evaluation bidding approach-type generalcompetitive bidding){Appropriate Public Procurement (2)(Notice of Finance Minister to the head of ministry/agency
dated August 25, 2006)
2. Actions for appropriate re-consignment practices{
Prohibiting lump-sum re-consignment{
Requiring contracting officer’s prior approval in the case of reconsignment{
Identifying compliance schemes, etc.
3. Disclosing information on contracts{
Disclosing information on competitive bidding as well and improving
user-friendliness of the overall contracting information, including
public works information⇒ Except for small-sum contracts, a list of all contracts will be disclosed.
[Information with improved visibility]- Estimated contract prices- Successful bidding rate
- If the ordering party enters into a negotiated contract with a public
interest corporation in its charge, the ordering party must disclose thenumber of central government’s former regular civil servants serving
for the public interest corporation as of the day of entering into such acontract.

- 96 -

Appropriate Public Procurement (3)(Notice of Finance Minister to the head of ministry/agency
dated August 25, 2006)
4. Setting up procurement-related one-stop information service
desks at each ministry/agency
5. Conducting internal audits{ Putting emphasis on auditing negotiated contracts{ Clearly identifying how internal audits are conducted, etc.
6. Preparing contract-related statistics{ Preparing contract-related statistics every fiscal year (since
FY2006)- Statistics on the number of contracts and contract prices- Statistics on negotiated contracts

Status of Competitive Contracting Practices in FY2009○ In FY2009, “noncompetitive negotiated contracts” have decreased since FY2005 as a percentage of theoverall contracts by 24 points on the monetary value basis and by 30 points on the contract volume basis.
FY2009 data

FY2005 data

¥7.3 trillion (185,000 contracts)

Competitive bidding¥3.4 trillion (84,000
contracts)

Competitive contracts, total
Contract monetary amount:*[54%]¥3.9 trillion
Contract volume: *[54%]100,000 contracts
Plan competitive bidding
Contract monetary amount: ¥0.5
trillion (16,000 contracts)

Noncompetitive
negotiated contracts
Contract monetaryamount: ¥3.4 trillion*[46%](Contract volume: 85,000
contracts, *[46%])¥8.1 trillion (174,000 contracts)“Competitive
contracts” haveincreased/decreased
from the FY2005
level as a percentageof the overall
contracts.
Contract monetaryamount: *[+24 points]
Contract volume:*[+30 points]“Noncompetitive
contracts” haveincreased/decreased
from the FY2005 levelas a percentage of theoverall contracts.
Contract monetaryamount: *[-24 points]
Contract volume: *[-30
points]Competitive bidding¥4.5 trillion (105,000
contracts)
Competitive contracts,
total
Contract monetaryamount: *[78%]¥6.3 trillion
Contract volume:*[84%]
146,000 contracts

Plan competition, open-type
proposals, etc.
Contract monetary amount: ¥1.8
trillion (41,000 contracts)
Noncompetitive negotiatedcontracts
Contract monetary amount: ¥1.7
trillion *[22%](Contract volume: 28,000
contracts, *[16%])(Note 1) Data in parentheses with asterisk represent “competitive contracts” or “noncompetitive contracts” as a percentage of the overall contracts.
(Note 2) The total sum of indicated data may not be 100% in some cases because data are rounded off.

- 97 -

SYSTEM OF ETHICS OF PUBLIC SERVANTS IN JAPANYuji Takada*
I. THE ROLES OF THE NATIONAL PUBLIC SERVICE ETHICS BOARD
The National Personnel Authority is placed under the Cabinet Office of the Japanese
government. Founded as a neutral and specialized third-party organization responsible for the
personnel management of national public servants, the National Personnel Authority has thefollowing functions: (a) to ensure fairness in personnel administration; (b) to compensate forthe restrictions on basic labor rights; and (c) to act as a specialized agency for personnel
administration.
The Ethics Board is set up under the National Personnel Authority as an institution
specializing in the maintenance of ethics pertaining to the duties of national public servants.
II. SYSTEM OF ETHICS OF PUBLIC SERVANTS IN JAPANA. Assessment of Recent Achievements
1. Improvement in the ranking and score of CPI (Corruption Perceptions Index)
An NGO called Transparency International annually publishes CPI, which ranks
countries by their perceived levels of corruption. Japan ranked 17th, scoring 7.8 points in theindex in 2010 and ranked 14th, scoring 8 points in 2011 in the most recent survey. This is asignificant improvement compared to the results in both ranking and score prior to theenactment of the National Public Service Ethics Law where Japan ranked 25th with the scoreof 5.8 points.
2. Decrease in the number of cases violating the Ethics Law
The number of violations had actually been on the rise until fiscal year 2008. Suchincrease was not necessarily because the level of awareness of ethics among public servants
lowered. It was due to the fact that violations that had been overlooked started to come up to
the surface because the rules and regulations stipulated in the Ethics Law became morewidespread among the public officials and because the awareness of ethics among the private
sector and the entire society saw an increase in recent years.
In the past couple of years, the number of cases in violation has decreased to around 20.
This demonstrates that the public administration has become well versed in the stipulations in
the Ethics Law, which has helped to raise the standard of ethics among public servants.
B. Structure of Duties of National Public Servants and Ethics System
The National Public Service Act specifies the duties that must be performed by all
workers in the public sector. Based on the underlying premise that “every official, as a servantof all citizens, shall serve the public interest,” the law provides the various responsibilities ofpublic servants such as their duty to obey the law and work orders, duty to refrain from taking*

Ethics Officer for Planning, Secretariat of the National Public Service Ethics Board.

- 98 -

labor dispute actions or any socially irresponsible actions, duty of confidentiality and theobligation to give undivided attention to duty.
The National Public Service Ethics Law is actually deeply connected to such duties ofpublic servants.
Usually the term public service ethics is used in a broad sense referring to the general“behavior and attitude called for by a public servant.” However, the Ethics Law is positioned
partly as a guideline that provides the minimum standards of the service rules that shall befollowed by the officials. This is because its primary purpose is to prevent cozy ties between
public servants and business entities by regulating donations and wining and dining byinterested parties.
The underlying reason for this positioning is that when this law was enacted, there was a
lot of discussion as to whether it was appropriate to create a law to regulate “ethics,” whose
values are tied to emotions. There were concerns that such law could infringe the freedom ofthought and conscience protected by the constitution. In addition, the primary focus of the law
was to prevent bribery and other misconduct.
C. Background to the Enactment of the Ethics Law
The administration in the mid-90s was plagued by scandals by high government officials.
One of the most scandalous cases was the arrest of a bureaucrat of the then Ministry of Healthand Welfare on bribery charges. He was accused for accepting monetary compensation fromthe head of a social welfare corporation in exchange for favorable arrangements with regard
to the grant of subsidy. A few other senior officials also received disciplinary punishment for
repeatedly being treated in exchange for favors.
This scandal prompted the Administrative Vice-Ministers’ Conference in 1996 to reachan agreement to formulate the code of ethics for public officials and have each ministry andgovernment office draw it up as an order or an internal rule.
However, shortly after this incident, another case of serious misconduct occurred in 1998.
This time it was the financial scandal involving the Ministry of Finance. The head of thefinancial inspection department and others were arrested on charges of receiving unlawful
corporate entertainment in exchange for favors such as informing of the inspection dates
beforehand. More than 100 public officials were subject to punishment for receiving lavish
wining and dining from financial institutions, etc.
The repeated scandals made it clear that it was not rational to have confidence in the
self-cleansing mechanism of the bureaucrats. This triggered the movement to legally stipulate
the code of ethics of public servants. The National Public Service Ethics Law was establishedon August 13, 1999 and was put into effect in April 2000. This law is distinctive in the sensethat it is lawmaker-initiated legislation and that it won a unanimous vote among all politicalparties.
The development of the Ethics Law has involved such a scandalous and dishonorable
course for government employees. We as public servants should always bear that in mind andcontinue to have a sense of crisis.

- 99 -

D. Framework of the System of Ethics of Public ServantsWithin the Ethics Law and Ethics Regulation, there is the Code of Ethical Conduct,
which stipulates the standards for proper behavior of public servants. There are two pillars
that provide the basis for more specific guidelines: “Rules of Conduct” and “Rules ofReporting.”
The Ethics Board has been set up to implement such rules. Whoever is in the position
equivalent to that of the administrative vice-minister assumes the role of Ethics Officer ineach ministry and government office.
The Ethics Board is a collegial body consisting of four members including the President.
The members either come from a legal, financial or academic circle or have worked in a labororganization. Within its organization, the Ethics Board has a Secretariat, which currently
consists of 14 staff members.
The National Public Service Ethics Board has various authorities pertaining to themaintenance of ethics among national public service officials. The authorities andresponsibilities include:{ Comprehensive planning and coordination of training programs for maintaining
ethics of public officials; and{ Investigation of cases in violation of the Ethics Law, instructions on investigations
in disciplinary proceedings and approval of disciplinary measures.
E. Code of Ethical Conduct
The Code of Ethical Conduct provides the guidelines for public servants to behave in an
ethical manner.
The code is comprised of five points: (a) public servants shall remember that they areservants of all citizens and always engage in their duties with fairness; (b) public servants
shall not abuse their duties and authorities for personal gain; (c) public servants shall not takeany actions resulting in public suspicion or distrust; (d) public servants shall exert their utmost
efforts in performing their duties; and (e) public servants shall always behave while bearing in
mind that their actions, even while off duty, may influence the public trust.
F. Rules of Conduct“Rules of Conduct” has two parts: “prohibited actions involving an interested party” and“other prohibited actions.”
Since the Ethics Law was formulated due to the scandals of public officials becoming
too cozy with business entities with special interests, the actions prohibited in the regulations
for ethics primarily apply to those considered inappropriate between public servants andinterested parties.
Interested parties refer to parties that may directly benefit or be penalized through the
public servants’ duties involving permission/authorization, on-site inspections and contracts.

- 100 -

To be specific, “prohibited actions involving an interested party” include the following:{ To receive gifts;{ To receive wining and dining; and{ To rent goods and receive services free of charge.
As an exception, “to receive widely distributed marketing materials” is not considered asa prohibited action.
“Other prohibited actions” include the following:{ To receive excessive wining and dining reasonably deemed inappropriate undersocially accepted conventions; and{ To engage in an organized violating act such as section chief and othermanagement-level staff letting the wrongdoings of his/her subordinate pass.
G. Rules of Reporting
The other pillar in the Ethics Law is the “Rules of Reporting.” There are three reporting
systems:(a) reporting on the donations received from business entities and other parties;(b) reporting on the dealings in the stock market during the year; and(c) reporting on the income earned during the year.
All of these rules have been introduced in order to ensure the transparency regarding theofficials’ contact with business entities and to check whether there was an act of receiving
inappropriate donations or compensations from interested parties.
The Ethics Board reviews the copies of various reports submitted by the heads of eachministry and government office.
H. Investigations of Cases Suspected to be Violating the Ethics Law and Disciplinary
Measures
Before the Ethics Law was in effect, the disciplinary measures were decided based on thediscretion of each ministry and government office. There were many criticisms that thepunishment was too light and that the public servants were extremely lenient on their fellow
workers.
Therefore, the cases suspected to be in violation of the Ethics Law are thoroughly
investigated and the subsequent disciplinary measures are strictly enforced.
To be more specific, the mechanism is set up so that the Ethics Board would be deeply
involved in the process. For example, it is required to report the investigation results to the
Ethics Board and to obtain the approval of the Board in determining the penalties.

- 101 -

I. Disciplinary Measures for Violating the Ethics Law
Any violations of the Ethics Law and Ethics Regulation are subject to disciplinary
measures whose criteria are defined in the Rules of the National Personnel Authority (22-1).
III. EFFORTS TO ENFORCE THE RULES
Regulations similar to the Ethics Law exist outside of Japan. Then why is it that scandals
and misconduct by public servants have shown a drastic decrease particularly in Japan?
The Ethics Board carries out various measures to enforce the existing rules.
A. Training and Educational Activities
More than a dozen of training workshops each year hosted by the Ethics Board are
carried out in major cities all over Japan.
In addition, the Ethics Board places great emphasis on developing training materials,
such as PowerPoint slides for explaining the system and DVDs for case studies, to fully
support the ethics training workshops carried out by ministries and government offices. The
DVDs for case studies in particular have received favorable reviews as specific cases arepresented in an easy-to-understand dramatized form.
There are somewhere between 100,000 to 200,000 people a year who participate in the
ethics training workshops held by ministries and government offices. This translates to one or
two persons out of every three national public officials in regular government service
receiving some sort of training pertaining to ethics every year.
In addition, the Ethics Board displays posters, distributes leaflets, organizes lectures andengages in various other activities particularly during the week between December 1 and 7,
which is designated as Ethics Week to increase awareness of ethics among public servants.
Since emphasis is placed on the role of top officials, Ethics Officers are required to sendout emails to all staff in their team to raise their consciousness towards ethics.
Furthermore, the Ethics Board actively engages in activities to educate those outside of
the government by preparing a variety of brochures to improve the understanding of private
businesses and other parties that deal with the public sector.
B. Responses after Misconduct Takes Place
It is not possible to undo what has already been done. Therefore, it is crucial to take steps
to minimize the damage as much as possible after misconduct takes place.
If it takes too much time to determine the disciplinary measures, people may think that
there is still something else that has not come to the surface. Also, if the punishment is toolight, the organization’s self-cleansing mechanism may be put to question.
On the basis of such facts, the Ethics Board strives to coordinate with ministries andgovernment offices to promptly carry out investigations and strictly enforce disciplinary- 102 -

measures.
C. Enhancing and Reinforcing the System to Maintain Ethics
One of the projects that the Ethics Board is currently focusing on is the establishment of
an internal reporting system. Reports from the inside enable early detection and make itpossible to take preemptive measures against suspicious cases, contributing to the preventionof misconduct. It is important to change the workers’ mindset so they realize that reporting
misconduct is vital for the sake of the organization and that it is their obligation to do so.
It is also essential to make sure that whoever informs of the misconduct does not suffer
any consequences. The informer may experience inconvenience by just revealing his or her
name, let alone end up feeling awkward in the organization. It is necessary to be considerateof the informer by keeping the identity unknown after the first contact if the name wasrevealed and also being open to anonymous reports.
Currently, all ministries and government offices have set up contacts for internalreporting. The issue at hand will be how to fully make use of the system so all workers do not
feel hesitant to utilize it when needed.
IV. CURRENT ISSUES
Every year the Ethics Board conducts a questionnaire survey that targets the generalpublic as well as public servants to examine the current state of ethics among public officials.
The results show that the public at large tends to be most critical of the ethical standardsof national public servants while the public servants themselves are the least critical.
This demonstrates the fact that the consciousness level of public servants is not at thelevel that fulfills the standards required by the citizens, which is quite problematic.
V. FUTURE AGENDA
It has been over 10 years since the Ethics Law was put into effect. It can be said that therules specified in the law to be followed by national public servants are becoming widely
known and fairly well-established.
However, it is undeniable that there is a large discrepancy between the situation
perceived by public servants and the reality seen through the eyes of the general public.
Therefore, in order to address this issue, the main focus of future efforts is to be placed on thefollowing three areas in the next 10 years.
A. Developing the Ethical Mindset of Public Servants
Merely providing the knowledge is not going to be sufficient from now on. It is
becoming more and more important to help public servants develop their ethical mindset to
one that encompasses the behavior, attitude and work ethics that are more appropriate forsomeone serving the public.

- 103 -

B. Constructing an Ethical Climate in the Organization
It is necessary to further enhance and reinforce the system to maintain ethics bypromoting the use of the reporting system, building an operation control that inhibits
misconduct and setting up an investigation system for when misconduct occurs.
C. Enforcing Strict Measures against Ethics Law Violation
It is essential to analyze the motive and cause of violating the Ethics Law in order to takeproper measures to prevent the same thing from happening.
The Ethics Board will continue to actively address these issues to achieve the objectiveof the Ethics Law of securing the citizens’ confidence in public servants.
The Ethics Board will work with other organizations to the utmost of its ability in further
increasing the ethical standards of the Asia and Pacific region.

- 104 -

PARTICIPANTS’ INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATIONS

Mr. Richard Anthony Donayre Fadullon & Mr. Medwin Sagutin Dizon, the Philippines***
Mr. Kim Santepheap & Mr. Nuon Sothimon, Cambodia***
Mr. Hoang Chi Kien & Mr. Tran Anh Tuan, Viet Nam***
Mr. Mochammad Jasin Mashuri & Mr. Feri Wibisono, Indonesia***
Ms. Vilaysinh Dainhansa & Mr. Phongsavanh Phommahaxay, Lao PDR***
Mr. Ahmad Khusairi Yahaya & Mr. Azhar Bin Hamzah, Malaysia***
Mr. San Win & Mr. Bo Maung, Myanmar***
Ms. Srisanit Leelakriangsak Pinthip & Ms. Sutisa Sukchot, Thailand- 105 -

PREVENTING CORRUPTIONEFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE MEASURES

Richard Fadullon*
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEThe Department of Justice (DOJ) derives its mandate primarily from the Administrative
Code of 1987 (Executive Order No 292). It carries out this mandate through the Department
Proper and the Department’s attached agencies under the direct control and supervision of theSecretary of Justice.
Under Executive Order No. 292, the Department of Justice is the government’s principal
law agency. As such, the Department serves as both the legal counsel and the government’s
prosecution arm and administers the government’s criminal justice system in accordance withaccepted processes. This consists of the investigation of crimes, the prosecution of offenders andadministration of the correctional system; the implementation of laws on the admission and stayof aliens, citizenship, land titling system, the settlement of land problems involving small
landowners and members of indigenous cultural communities; and the provision of free legal
services to the indigent members of society.
ADMINISTRATION OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMThe Department of Justice investigates the commission of crimes and prosecutes offenders
through the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the National Prosecution Service (NPS),* Senior Deputy State Prosecutor, Department of Justice.

- 107 -

respectively. Likewise, the Department administers the probation and correction system of thecountry through the Bureau of Corrections (BUCOR), the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP)
and the Parole and Probation Administration (PPA). It will be noteworthy to mention that of all
the departments of government, the Department of Justice has under it three (3) of the most vital
components of the criminal justice system, namely: the Law Enforcement through the National
Bureau of Investigation; the Prosecution and Defense through the National Prosecution Service
and the Public Attorney’s Office, respectively; and the Penitentiaries and Corrections through the
Bureau of Corrections.
At present, the Department of Justice is headed by the Secretary of Justice, assisted by three(3) Undersecretaries and two (2) Assistant Secretaries. Attached to the Office of the Secretary ofJustice are the following constituent units:•

Department Proper;•

Office of the Government Corporate Counsel;•

National Bureau of Investigation;•

Public Attorney’s Office;•

Board of Pardons and Parole;•

Parole and Probation Administration;•

Bureau of Corrections; and the•Land Registration Authority- 108 -

III. THE NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE (NPS)UNDER THE OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTOR GENERALThe National Prosecution Service assists the Secretary of Justice in the performance of thepowers and functions of the Department relative to its role as the prosecution arm of thegovernment, particularly in the investigation and prosecution of all criminal cases, except thoseunder the exclusive jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman. To date, there are about 1,700
public prosecutors spread in the fourteen (14) regions of the archipelago. This number though,still falls short of the 2,200 public prosecutors needed to effectively ensure the effective
administration of justice in the country.
Nonetheless, in keeping with its mandate to investigate and prosecute cases of graft andcorruption, and Joint Circular No. 95-001 between the Office of the Ombudsman and theDepartment of Justice, in 2010 alone, out of the reported 362 cases filed all over the country, 138cases against erring government officials were filed in court and are currently pending trial,
while 50 were dismissed by the prosecutor’s office. The remaining 158 are still pending
investigation.
The Department of Justice has likewise undertaken serious efforts to help deter corruption
through the following measures:
1. The conduct of basic orientation for all new prosecutors in the various Regions of thecountry for the purpose, not only of honing their prosecutorial skills and knowledge ofthe law but more importantly inculcating the necessary values needed and required ingovernment service.

- 109 -

2. The crafting of a Code of Conduct for the Prosecution Service. The creation of a manual
which practically codified the various issuances of the Department of Justice, as well as
the laws governing the conduct of public officials, with emphasis on the conduct thatpublic prosecutors should adopt during the course of the inquest/preliminary investigationand in the trial proved to be very helpful in reminding public prosecutors not only of theirrole as public officials, but more importantly their responsibilities as such.
3. The creation of the Internal Affairs Units (IAUs) in the Department of Justice proper aswell as in the various Regions of the country, tasked to conduct the investigation ofcomplaints against prosecutors and personnel of the prosecution service. Cognizant of theprinciple that public office is a public trust and that all public officers and employees
must, at all times, be accountable to the people, the Department of Justice deemed it
imperative to create the Internal Affairs Units in the prosecution service to ensure thehighest integrity and dignity of its officials and employees. Nonetheless, even prior to theconstitution of the Internal Affairs Units, administrative sanctions have been meted out toerring prosecutors and employees, ranging from penalties reprimands, suspensions andremoval from the service.
4. The creation of the Justice Sector Coordinating Council (JSCC) for the effective
coordination and sharing of information from senior representatives from the judiciary,
the Department of Justice, the Department of Interior and Local Government and otherrelated attached agencies.
Moreover, in order to raise public awareness as to the thrust and mission of the Departmentof Justice in curtailing corruption and ensuring the strict implementation of justice, the- 110 -

Department of Justice has taken steps to increase information drives with the help of tri-media(television, radio and newspaper).

- 111 -

THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN
Medwin Sagutin Dizon*
I.

CONSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM

We Filipinos believe that public office is a public trust and therefore, public
accountability is a must.
Bearing this in mind, Articles 12 and 13 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution
envisioned the Office of the Ombudsman as the constitutional accountability authority
in government with full powers to exercise extraordinary oversight and investigative
authority over actions of all public officials and employees.
By constitutional mandate, the Philippine Congress passed into law, Republic
Act 6770, otherwise known as “The Ombudsman Act of 1989” which gave the Officeof the Ombudsman specific powers such as:
1. To investigate anomalies and inefficiency;
2. To prosecute cases before courts of law;
3. To conduct administrative adjudication;
4. To render public assistance; and5. To prevent graft and corruption.
Popularly known as the government’s watchdog, the Office of the
Ombudsman is safeguarded from political influence and interference by theprovisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, to wit:
1. The appointment of the Ombudsman and her Deputies need no congressional
confirmation and they possess the rank of chairman and members, respectively, of aConstitutional Commission;* Director, Preliminary Investigation, Administrative Bureau-A, Office of the Ombudsman.

- 112 -

2. The Ombudsman and her deputies have fixed terms of Office during which theirsalaries cannot be diminished;
3. The Ombudsman is removable from Office only by impeachment; and4. The Office of the Ombudsman has fiscal autonomy.
The Office of the Ombudsman has jurisdiction over officials and employees of
the government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities, including
members of the cabinet, local government officials, officials of government owned
and controlled corporations, and private individuals who have acted in conspiracy
with the foregoing officials.
Our Ombudsman, Conchita Carpio Morales, vows to pursue these ideals anddeclares an 8-point priority within her term for 2011 to 2018. Thus, The Ombudsman
is set to:
1. Dispose of complaints and cases involving high ranking officials, those involving
large sums of money, grand corruption cases and celebrated cases;
2. Attain zero backlog;
3. Improve survival rate of cases referred for further fact-finding;
4. Enforce monitoring of referred cases;
5. Improve responsiveness of public assistance;
6. Improve anti-corruption policy and programme coordination among sectors;
7. Rationalize the functional structure of the Office of the Ombudsman; and8. Enhance transparency and credibility of the Office of the Ombudsman.

II. WAYS TO RAISE AWARENESSOver the years, various projects and programmes were introduced, developedand implemented to prevent corruption. Examples are the following:- 113 -

A. Strengthening of the Resident Ombudsmen
A Resident Ombudsman is a lawyer from the Office of the Ombudsman who
is posted to hold office in different government agencies and offices including
government owned and controlled corporations to enable the head of office to have afirst hand and holistic perspective of the corruption problem, situation andinefficiency in its operation.
Resident Ombudsmen also render mediation services, give lectures as part ofanti-corruption education and monitor submission of Statements of Assets, Liabilities,
and Net Worth of government officials and employees.

B. Integrity Development Review or IDR
In 2004, the Office of the Ombudsman piloted the IDR with assistance fromthe United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to review theeffectiveness of its own system against corruption.
The IDR consists of two major tools, namely:a.

Corruption Resistance Review – where a survey of employees andreview of relevant policies and procedures are made and assessed; andb.

Corruption Vulnerability Assessment – where risks and problems are

determined while controls and safeguards are evaluated.
At present, the IDR is exercised in almost all agencies of the government
including the Philippine Judiciary.

- 114 -

C. Creation of Corruption Prevention Units (CPUs) and Junior Graftwatch
Units (JGUs)
Corruption Prevention Units are civil society organizations that assist the
Office of the Ombudsman (OMB for brevity) in detecting corruption in thebureaucracy. Thus, any bonafide non-partisan group from any sector with identifiableleadership and structure and with demonstrated capacity to promote the interest andassist the OMB in its crusade for a clean and honest government may become a CPU.
Junior Graftwatch Units serve as the OMB’s youth arm in graft prevention andcontrol. The JGUs are designed to awaken the consciousness of young citizens andinstill honesty and efficiency to curb graft and corruption. JGUs are established inschools and communities.

D. Education
The Office of the Ombudsman continuously updates its officials andemployees by holding Strategic Planning Seminars, Research Symposium, Teaching
Exemplars, Ehem Aha Seminars, Orientation Lectures and Briefing, Research/Thesis
Assistance Program and by encouraging attendance at local and international trainings
and conferences.

E. Promotion
Programs and projects of the Office of the Ombudsman are best relayed to the
public by way of multimedia such as;- 115 -

a.

A radio program called “Magsumbong sa Ombudsman” aired every

Wednesday from 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. over DZRB Radyo ng Bayan and its provincial
stations nationwide;b.

A television program called “Ombudsman: Kakampi Mo Laban sa

Katiwalian” telecast over NB Channel 4 every Saturdays from 12:00 to 1:00 p.m.;c.

Published in 2009 is the OMB Citizen’s Charter to serve as user guideon how to avail of the services of the OMB;d.

Improved website, hotlines, E-mails and Text Messages lead toaccessibility of the services and performance of the OMB nationwide;e.

Publication and exhibits of anti-corruption materials helped indisseminating the mission and vision of the OMB in its fight against corruption. Heldin big venues such as the Philippine International Convention Center (PICC), SM
Mall of Asia, and the Asian Development Bank, the exhibit is aimed to raiseawareness and to encourage the public to get involved in the OMB’s goal; andf.

Celebration of International Anti-Corruption Day proved that theprivate and public sectors including international development partners joined hands
in reacting and formulating solutions to the problem of graft and corruption.
III. IMPLEMENTATION
According to its 2010 Annual Report, the Office of the Ombudsman resolveda total of 8,963 cases for the year 2010. 4,968 (55%) of these cases were criminalcases, while 3,995 (45%) were administrative cases. Of the criminal cases, 19%
resulted in the finding of probable cause against the respondents; the rest (81%) weredismissed for lack of evidence. On the other hand, of the administrative cases, 22%- 116 -

resulted in a finding of guilt and imposition of administrative penalty; while the rest
(78%) were dismissed.
In 2010, some 1,747 public officials and employees were criminally indicted
in court for various offenses. Of this number, 427 (24%) were high ranking officials
while 1,320 (76%) were low ranking officials. The year 2010 also recorded anincrease in the number of criminal informations filed before the Sandiganbayan
against high-ranking officials in government. A total of 281 informations were filed,up by almost 50% from last year’s 189. The total amount involved in the criminalcases for prosecution before the anti-graft court is P129.3 million. Also in 2010, theSandiganbayan rendered its decision in 121 cases which had undergone full-blown
trial.

Of this number, 40 cases resulted in conviction, and hence, registered aconviction rate of 33.1%. Consequently, a total of 67 officials accused of various
offenses were convicted by the anti-graft court. Among them are seven mayors, aformer administrator, SUC president, judges, provincial prosecutors, assistantsecretary, and a PNP director general, among others.
Conversely, a total of 190 cases involving low-ranking officials andemployees of the government were decided by the regular trial courts in the National
Capital Region, Visayas, and Mindanao. Of this number, 95 or 50% resulted inconviction.
Finally, during the year 2010, 1,523 public officials and employees weremeted administrative penalties.

A total of 504 (33%) were dismissed from theservice; 837 (55%) suspended; 117 (7.7%) reprimanded and 65 (4.3%) fined.
Moreover, 107 government functionaries were placed under preventive suspension
pending investigation while eight were merely admonished after the adjudication of
their cases.

- 117 -MISSION OF THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE TO
PREVENT AND COMBAT CORRUPTION IN
THE KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA
Santepheap Kim∗
The Ministry of Justice is the judicial headquarters of the Royal Government of
Cambodia and comprises criminal and civil sectors.
Corruption is a criminal offence in Cambodia. In principle, a crime cannot be
considered an offence unless it is stipulated in the law. Based on its mission, the Ministryof Justice has contributed to preventing criminal offences, including corruption, throughvarious mechanisms as follows.
I. BUILDING AND ORGANIZATION OF LAW
In order to ensure the prevention of corruption, the Ministry of Justice hasorganized and built some crucial laws as follows:
A. Penal CodeA new penal code of the Kingdom of Cambodia was adopted by the National
Assembly on 12 October 2009 and by the Senate on 17 November 2009, and waspromulgated on 30 November 2009. The Ministry of Justice has organized this Penal Codein order to respond to the actual situation of Cambodia, which requires a clear, complete
and well-organized Penal Code to safely combat the new offences arising in society, andother modern crimes. The Penal Code is a legal article assembling all criminal provisions,classified into accurate structures to ensure consistency, smoothness and coherence. To
enable this code to become an important legal tool it is not only convenient for court
officials and other legal enforcement officials to use and understand in-depth, but also
helps people to have a clear understanding of their own rights and limits. In particular,
they may be aware of prohibited activities [for which people can be] convicted as criminal
offences. In order to ensure the legal principles of the criminal law, the organization of thisPenal Code has been compiled in detail with discussion from Cambodian legal experts andFrench technical experts to determine general policy and the types of each offence∗

Ph.D. Deputy Director General of the Technical General Directorate, Ministry Justice, Kingdom of
Cambodia.

1- 118 -

comprehensively and specifically, in order to avoid any devastating activities frompunishment on society.
This Penal Code also specifies various offences related to bribery and corruption.
These offences include:
Bribery by employee
Bribery of employee
Bribery by governor
Inappropriate bid
Bribery committed by judge
Bribery of judge
Bribery of witness to provide fake testimony
Bribery of witness
Bribery of translator
Bribery by businesspeople
Bribery of businesspeople
Offence of inactive influential trade
Illegal exploitation of interests
Intentional destruction and dishonest embezzlement
Bribery
Destruction and embezzlement
Intimidation
Destruction and embezzlement, etc.
B. Code of Criminal Procedure
The Code of Criminal Procedure was adopted on 7 June 2007 by the National
Assembly, and on 24 July 2007 by the Senate. It was promulgated on 10 August 2007. The
Code of Criminal Procedure is a key legal article and a key means for the criminal court.
The Ministry of Justice has organized and compiled this Code of Criminal Procedure withthe aim of ensuring the sustainability of the institution in accordance with the traditions
and laws of the Kingdom of Cambodia and to provide the investigating judges with amajor role in the stages of investigation and the finding of evidence. This Code clearlystipulates principles to ensure effectiveness in the search for offenders, accusation, trial
and for respect of individual freedoms, for all criminal offences, including the offences ofbribery and corruption.

2- 119 -

C. Anti-Corruption Law
The Anti-Corruption Law was promulgated on 17 April 2010 and is now actively
being enforced. The purpose of the organization of this law is to promote the effectivenessof all services, to strengthen governance and the rule of law in leading or governing theState as well as to maintain justice that is a necessary basis for the development of society
and poverty reduction. This law aims to combat corruption by means of providing
education, prevention and enforcement of the Anti-Corruption Law, as stipulated in the
Penal Code and in this law.
The Ministry of Justice has shared numerous comments on the Anti-Corruption
Law so this law is an effective means of ensuring the suppression of corruption in all
forms, sectors and levels across the Kingdom of Cambodia.
II. EDUCATION AND DISSEMINATION OF LAW
In the current society of Cambodia, awareness of the rule of law ensureseffectiveness in implementation. Most societies in the modern era face challenges inunderstanding and disseminating the law in order to lead, govern and ensure social
security to establish safety and trust in the investment sector as well as in national andinternational trade operations.
In view of the necessity and importance of education and dissemination of law toensure effectiveness in law enforcement and to raise awareness among people, as well as
participation to prevent corruption in society, the Ministry of Justice, the headquarters of
the Royal Government in this field, has organized, compiled and published the two codes– the Penal Code and the Civil Code – for distribution to legal professionals, courts andlaw enforcement officials to extensively implement it. Moreover, we have organized many
training courses for law enforcement officials (Judicial Police, judges, prosecutors, clerksof the court and attorneys-at-law), to ensure a better understanding of what corruption iswhile fulfilling their roles and duties and so that they can clearly see the elements ofcorruption in order to ensure accurate investigations and search for evidence for the
successful and fair conviction of offenders.
III. LEGAL ENFORCEMENT
To contribute to fighting corruption in Cambodian society, the Ministry has
actively participated as a driving force to promote the accurate and fair implementation of
the Anti-Corruption Law.

3
- 120 -

According to Article 29 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Minister of Justiceis fully entitled to file a defamation complaint with the Prosecutor-General to the Appeal
Court or Deputy Prosecutor to the Phnom Penh Court of First Instance over any offence
that he has identified and could issue an injunction through written instruction to theProsecutor-General or Prosecutor to indict or reach a conclusion as per the view of theminister. Therefore, whenever corruption occurs, regardless of any individual or form, theMinister of Justice deserves the right to sue for defamation or [issue an] injunction to theProsecutor-General or Prosecutor to accuse that person in order to authorize theinvestigating judges to undertake investigation.
The Prosecution Institution at the Provincial/Municipal Courts of First Instance is
the institution to ensure the State’s public order; meaning that it acts in bringing a chargeof the offence of corruption and reaching a conclusion for the courts to enforce the law.
The offence of corruption is a special offence requiring institutions and the Judicial Police,in particular the anti-corruption unit, to enforce this law and to build up the case forforwarding it to the prosecution institution. Hence, if any sign of corruption has been
identified, prosecutors are entitled to conduct their preliminary investigation and to reachconclusions about the case to be forwarded to the investigating judge for further inquiry.
In case that a prosecutor finds that any ruling or order is inappropriate, he or she has theright to lodge an appeal to the Appeal Court. The Supreme Court is the final tribunal toexamine and make a judgment on all corruption case files or criminal case files.
So far, we have actively enforced this Anti-Corruption Law regardless of any
person, rank, complexion or race. Typically, a high-ranking official who has committed an
act of corruption is subsequently convicted under the law and some other legal
enforcement officials have also committed corruption. Thus, this reflects the real efforts
and commitment of the Royal Government of Cambodia to fight against corruption.

4- 121 -

PREVENTING CORRUPTION: EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE AND
CRIMINAL JUSTICE MEASURES

Mr. Sothimon Nuon*

I. OVERVIEW
Corruption is a complex social, political and economic phenomenon that affects all countries.
Corruption undermines democratic institutions, slows economic development and contributes togovernmental instability. Corruption takes place in all human societies and in all walks of life.
Cambodia is also experiencing this social phenomenon. The Royal Government of
Cambodia does not turn a blind eye to this problem. The Royal Government is strongly committed
to fighting corruption, formulating a separate anti-corruption law and empowering an independentanti-corruption mechanism.

II. BACKGROUNDThe Royal Government of Cambodia has paid much attention to combating corruption since
the UN organized general elections in 1993. In 1992, Cambodia adopted a criminal law act in which
three articles were related to corruption (embezzlement, bribe taking and bribe giving). In 1999, ananti-corruption mechanism was first established in Cambodia. It was called the “Unit Against
Corrupt Practices”. In 2006, the Unit was restructured and renamed the “Anti-Corruption Unit”.
On 17 April 2010, the first separate anti-corruption law was promulgated by the King.
The new law requires the establishment of an Anti-Corruption Institution. The AntiCorruption Institution is composed of the National Anti-Corruption Council and the AntiCorruption Unit (ACU). The Royal Government has been adopting a four-pronged approach:
Education, Prevention, Law Enforcement, and International Cooperation.
*

Legal, Complaint and International Affairs Dept., Anti-Corruption Unit (ACU), Cambodia.
- 122 -

In its effort to combat corruption, the Royal Government adopted the Governance Action
Plan I and Governance Action Plan II, focusing on multi-sectoral reforms for the sake of social
development and justice. The Royal Government continues to view fighting corruption as a priority,
as mentioned in its Rectangular Strategy where Good Governance is the core element and fighting
corruption is in the first angle.
Samdech Techo Hun Sen, Prime Minister of Cambodia, stressed that “Fighting corruption is
to make each individual not want to corrupt (education), can’t corrupt (prevention), and dare notcorrupt (law enforcement).”

III. PREVENTING CORRUPTION: EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE AND CRIMINALJUSTICE MEASURES

A. Effective Institution
The characteristics of the effective institution are as follows:
The Anti-Corruption Institution is independent of other state institutions;
Separate and sufficient budgets are available for work performance;
It may request intervention and cooperation from armed force authority if necessary and isallowed to use guns in operations;
The corruption-related complaint receiving mechanism and its management are speedy;Special investigation power (article 27 of the Anti-Corruption Law): in the case of a clear hintof corruption offences, the Anti-Corruption Unit can:
¾ Check and put under observation bank accounts or other accounts which have the samefunction as bank accounts;¾ Check and order the provision or copy of authentic documents or individual documents,
or all bank, financial and commercial documents.
¾ Monitor, oversee, eavesdrop, record sound or take photos, and engage in phone tapping.

- 123 -

¾ Check documents and documents stored in the electronic data systems.
Instead of public prosecutors, the President or officially assigned representative of the ACU has
the duty to lead, coordinate and control the mission of those officials (judicial police officers)
in the investigation of corruption offences, up to the point of arresting a suspect (article 25 ofAnti-Corruption Law).

B. Education Measures
The Anti-Corruption Unit (ACU) focuses mainly on educative measures. So far the ACU
has done a great deal of dissemination of anti-corruption law, produced several anti-corruption
education centres, and organized several other anti-corruption events. These educational activities
are done on a regular basis.
Our law and regulation dissemination is aimed at the public in general and government civil
servants in particular. The other target subjects are those working at border gates, finance-related
sectors, airports, ports, license issuing authorities, law enforcement agencies, etc. Today the ACU isplanning to produce more education centres, and organize more student debates and other anticorruption events (such as concerts and poetry contest for students).
People are now aware of the new law and anti-corruption institution, and are actively joining
hands in the fight against corruption. Their participation is reflected through the submission ofseveral complaints each day by the general public.

C. Preventive Measures
In addition to the Anti-Corruption Unit (ACU), the Royal Government of Cambodia also
created other bodies and mechanisms that contribute to combating corruption, as follows:
A National Audit Authority;
The Ministry of National Assembly-Senate Relation and Inspection;
The Inspectorate of the Ministry of Economy and Finance;- 124 -

Internal Audit Departments of state institutions; andOther mechanisms of the Legislative Body.
The priority of the ACU, among other things, is to strengthen preventive policies andmeasures in order to remove opportunities for corruption. Preventive measures, unlike law
enforcement, are gentler and more effective. The preventive tools are as follows:
The Anti-Corruption Law and Criminal Code;The Law on Statute of Civil Servants;
A Code of Ethics for civil servants;
Laws in other areas; andOther relevant regulations.
The ACU has established its own Internal Investigation Section. The Section is responsiblefor investigating cases related to corruption within the Unit. All staff members working in thisSection work undercover and are not known to other staff members. They work independently andreport directly to the President of the ACU.
The ACU has taken several measures in terms of preventing corruption. The new law
requires all government employees with the rank of department director or higher to declare theirassets and liabilities. So far all employees have already made their asset declarations to the ACU,
including the Prime Minister, President of the National Assembly and President of the Senate. Focal
points of anti-corruption officials at various state ministries and institutions have also been set up inorder to facilitate asset declaration at their own agencies, and to help fight corruption therein.
Meanwhile, leaders of civil society are also obliged under the anti-corruption law to maketheir asset declaration. The ACU is considering requiring other officials ranking below director
level who work in such vulnerable areas as the financial sector to declare their assets too.
The ACU has distributed many corruption-related complaint forms to civil servants and thegeneral public throughout the country so as to facilitate their complaint submission. The form is- 125 -

indeed a tool to encourage public participation in revealing all forms of corruption. As a result, now
more and more complaints are being lodged with the ACU.
The ACU is also invited to take part in several government events, especially thegovernment employee recruitment exam process with the aim of ensuring transparency andpreventing opportunities for corruption. Recently, the ACU took part in the recruitment process oftax collecting officials for the General Department of Taxation and in inspecting the bidding
process for illegal timber. The participation was welcomed by the public as a whole and has built
more confidence in the government.

D. Effective Administration
The Anti-Corruption Unit (ACU) facilitates the public participation in the fight against
corruption by creating an effective mechanism so as to encourage corruption-related complaint
submission. The public can submit their complaints in person, drop their complaints in ACU boxes,
through electronic forms, post offices nearby free of charge, or sent to the ACU by other agencies.
Other forms of reporting complaints can also be done through our phone, fax, email, etc.
The ACU is redesigning corruption complaint forms to further facilitate the public reportingof corruption. This complaint form enables complainants to fill in all necessary information the
ACU needs. Under the anti-corruption law article 31 stipulates that, “all corruption cases lodged
with the court shall be heard quickly.”
The ACU is setting up a complaint analysis center in order to speed up the complaint
process lodged by the public. This center is to review and study all complaints, and finally makesuggestions to the President of ACU for decision before taking any action.

E. Criminal Justice Measures
So far, the Anti-Corruption Unit (ACU) has:

- 126 -

Cracked down on corruption cases committed by very senior officials in the Anti-Drug
Headquarters, provincial police commissariats, the prosecutor’s office, a prison etc., and all
were sent to court for prosecution;
Disciplined around 30 tax officials for their bad performance;
Cracked down on financial irregularities committed by officials in the Ministry of Social
Affairs and provincial Departments of Social Affairs throughout the country, who embezzled
individual benefits and from the state budget. The ACU has already disciplined those involved.
Reduced opportunities for corruption and brought more people, regardless of status, to trial;
Studied and investigated many corruption cases;
Continued to investigate more people, especially government officials.

F. UNCAC Compliance
The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) is the only legally binding,universal anti-corruption instrument. The Convention's far-reaching approach and the mandatory
character of many of its provisions make it a unique tool for developing a comprehensive response
to a global problem. The UNCAC covers five main areas: prevention, criminalization and law
enforcement measures, international cooperation, asset recovery, and technical assistance andinformation exchange.
Cambodia has worked hand in hand with the international community to fight corruption.
Thus far, Cambodia has:
Been a member of ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiatives for Asia and the Pacific since 2003;
Been a State Party to the UNCAC since 2007;
Been a party to South East Asia Parties Against Corruption (SEAPAC) since 2007, andRegularly attended meetings of the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities(IAACA).

- 127 -

With great success, Cambodia hosted the 6th SEAPAC annual meeting in November 2010,
which was attended by 9 ASEAN members.
So far Cambodia has met many provisions of the UNCAC. Cambodia has adopted a separate
anti-corruption law,1 created an independent anti-corruption institution, established easy access interms of corruption complaints to the public, and adopted the four-pronged approach, namely
education, prevention, law enforcement and international cooperation, in combating corruption.
In terms of information exchange, the ACU has done a lot to share information withSEAPAC members, both in the field of administration work and corruption related cases. ACU staff
received technical training from various countries, especially SEAPAC members.
Under the new anti-corruption law of Cambodia, all acts that were not criminalized as
corruption offences are now criminalized. Zero tolerance measures are also strictly implemented.
Offenders are prosecuted, regardless of their social status or political alignment.
Now Cambodia and Vietnam are working towards signing a Bilateral Memorandum on
Study Tour Exchange, planned to be made once a year in order to learn from one another in terms of
new knowledge and experience of combating corruption. Recently, 20 Cambodian anti-corruption
youths made a study tour to Japan in order to exchange experiences with Japanese youths.
At the moment, the ACU is cooperating with one country to investigate a foreign corrupt
offender coming into Cambodia, suspected of traversing or staying in Cambodia. The case is being
strictly and closely followed by the ACU.

IV. CONCLUSION
Though Cambodia has enjoyed full peace for only a short time, the Royal Government of
Cambodia, under the clear-sighted leadership of Prime Minister Samdech Techo Hun Sen, has maderemarkable progress in all fields, especially in enhancing Cambodian prestige in the international
arena.

1

Fifty-five articles related to corruption offences, of which 40 articles stipulated in the Criminal Code.

- 128 -

Cambodian progress today cannot be alienated from international cooperation and the Royal
Government’s strong commitment in strengthening good governance and fighting corruption.
Fighting corruption is a key to ensuring equitable division of social resources and to attracting
foreign investment.
Cambodia continues to cooperate closely with the international community, especially
SEAPAC members, to combat corruption. Despite many challenges, the ACU continues to work
untiringly to promote integrity, transparency, accountability and prosperity in Cambodian society.
The ACU is strongly committed to cooperating with the regional and international communities inorder to share new experiences and knowledge, and to join hands in fighting corruption for a betterworld.

Thanks for your kind attention!

- 129 -

OVERVIEW OF THE TASKS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE
VIETNAMESE PEOPLE’S PROCURACY IN PREVENTION OF
AND FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION
Chi Kien Hoang*
I. VIETNAMESE ANTI-CORRUPTION AGENCIESThe system of Vietnamese anticorruption agencies encompasses the Central
Steering Committee for Directing Prevention and Anticorruption led by the Prime
Minister, provincial and municipal steering committees for anticorruption which are
under the direction of the Chairman of the People’s Committees of the respective
provinces or municipalities, and specialized anticorruption units belonging to theorganizations of the government inspectorate, public security and people’s procuracy.
II. THE PEOPLE’S PROCURACY
The people’s procuracy service in Vietnam was established in 1960. In
accordance with the constitution, the institution of people’s procuracy is one of the fourorgans constituting the State Structure, organized as an independent hierarchy from thecentral to local levels, and functioning under the centralized management and control ofProcurator General of the Supreme People’s Procuracy (SPP). The people’s procuracies
perform their functions and tasks through: (i) exercising the right to prosecute andsupervise the observance of the law in investigation and adjudication of criminal cases;(ii) supervising the observance of the law in the execution of judgments and decisions of
the courts, and in the temporary detention, preventive detention, management andeducation of prisoners; and (iii) directly conducting investigation in some types ofoffences against judicial activities, committed by officials of judicial bodies. Under the
Law on the Organization of the People’s Procuracy (2002), the Investigation Agency of
SPP is the only investigating body within the procuracy sector. The Investigation Agency
has authority to investigate some types of crimes of infringing upon judicial activities,*

Chief of Division of Research, Planning and General Matters, International Cooperation Department,
Supreme People’s Procuracy of Vietnam.

- 130 -

crimes of infringing upon the legitimate activities of investigating, procuracy,
adjudicating and judgment-executing agencies, and crimes that are provided in Articles
292-314, Chapter XXII (Crimes of infringing upon judicial activities) of the Penal Code1999 (revised in 2009). Those types of crimes include making illegal decisions, applying
corporal punishment, forcing evidence or testimony, falsifying case dossiers, etc.
However, the authority of the Agency could be expanded to other types of crimes within
Chapter XXI (Positions of authority crimes) of the Penal Code 1999 (revised in 2009),
which include corruption crimes, in cases where the offenders are investigators,
procurators, judges, or other judicial staff. The investigating bodies system within the
public security (ordinary police and security police forces) sector is responsible forinvestigating the remaining types of crimes provided in the Penal Code.
Under Vietnam’s Law on Mutual Legal Assistance 2007 and numerous mutual
legal assistance treaties signed with other states, the SPP plays the role of a central
authority in mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, with its duties to receive, transfer,monitor and speed up the implementation of requests for mutual legal assistance incriminal matters, and propose revisions, supplements and further improvement to the law
on mutual legal assistance. Accordingly, the people’s procuracy has been coordinatingwith relevant domestic and foreign authorities in investigating, prosecuting and trying
criminals; particularly those who commit transnational organized crime, including
corruption.
III. THE SPECIALIZED ANTI-CORRUPTION UNIT OF THE SPP
1. Specialized anti-corruption units within the people’s procuracy sector
There are two units specializing in prosecution and supervision over investigationof corruption cases within people’s procuracies for the time being. The former belongs to
the SPP (i.e., at central level) and the latter belongs to the People’s Procuracy of Hanoi
City (i.e., at provincial level), whose personnel both are competent officials andprocurators who meet the requirements of qualification and integrity for the job.

- 131 -

2. The functioning and powers of the specialized anti-corruption unit of the SPPThe Department of Public Prosecution and Supervision over the Investigation of
Corruption Crime of SPP (hereinafter referred to as the Department) was established in
2006, and its performance must conform to the Law on the Organization of the People’s
Procuracy (2002) and the Regulations on Organization and Functioning of the
Department (newly revised in 2011). In the mean time, officials and procurators of the
Department are implementing their duties in accordance with the relevant provisions of
the domestic laws, including the Penal Code 1999 (revised in 2009), Criminal Procedure
Code 2003, the Anti-corruption Law 2005, Law on Mutual Legal Assistance 2007, etc.,
and international bilateral and multilateral treaties to which Vietnam is a party, that
include, inter alia, the United Nations Convention against Corruption.
Additionally, the Department is also functioning in effective cooperation with
relevant state agencies at the central level, such as the Office of Central Steering
Committee for Directing Prevention and Anticorruption, Ministry of Public Security,
Supreme People’s Court, Government Inspectorate, and State Audit. Thereby, theDepartment’s performance is in accordance with the coordinative regulation that issigned by those institutions on the prevention of and fight against corruption.1 Also, theDepartment is responsible for drafting regular reports submitted to the Central Steering
Committee for Directing Prevention and Anticorruption on the outcome of corruption
cases with specific statistics on quarterly, half-yearly, and yearly bases within the wholesystem of people’s procuracies.2
Under the Anti Corruption Law 2005, corrupt acts include:3(i) Embezzling properties;(ii) Taking bribes;(iii) Abusing positions of authority and/or powers to appropriate properties;

1

The Coordinative Regulation No. 01/QCPH dated 15 January 2009.
On the request of the Official Correspondence No. 16/CV-BCD dated 27 April 2007 of Central Steering
Committee for Directing Prevention and Anticorruption.
3
Article 3 of the Anti-corruption Law.
2

- 132 -

(iv) Taking advantage of positions of authority and/or powers while performing
tasks or official duties for self-seeking benefit;(v) Abusing powers while performing tasks or official duties for self-seeking
benefit;(vi) Taking advantage of positions of authority or powers to influence otherpersons for self-seeking benefit;(vii) Committing forgeries in work for self-seeking benefit;(viii) Giving bribes or bribe brokerage by a person in a position of authority
and/or with power to settle affairs of agencies, organizations, units, or localities for selfseeking benefit;(ix) Taking advantage of positions of authority and/or powers to unlawfully use
state properties for self-seeking benefit;(x) Harassment for self-seeking benefit;(xi) Failure to perform tasks or official duties for self-seeking benefit;(xii) Taking advantage of positions of authority and/or powers to cover up for law
offenders for self-seeking benefit; illegally obstructing or intervening in examinations,inspections, auditing, investigations, prosecutions, adjudications, or court judgment
enforcement for self-seeking benefit.
Meanwhile, in daily practice, the Department is authorized to handle criminalcases involving seven types of corruption crimes as provided in Articles 278 - 284,
Section A, Chapter XXI (Positions of authority crimes of the Penal Code 1999) (revisedin 2009), as follows: (i) embezzling properties (Article 278); (ii) receiving bribes (Article279); (iii) abusing positions of authority and/or powers to appropriate properties (Article
280); (iv) taking advantage of positions of authority and/or powers while performing
official duties (Article 281); (v) abusing powers while performing official duties (Article282); (vi) taking advantage of positions of authority and/or powers to influence otherpersons for self-seeking benefit (Article 283); and (vii) committing forgeries in work
(Article 284).

- 133 -

3. The annual reports of the Department
The annual work reports of the Department from 2008 to 2010 show that of thetotal number of corruption cases and defendants investigated for the above seven types ofcrime (i.e., 282 cases with 622 defendants in 2008, and 177 cases with 328 defendants inthe first 10 months of 2010),4 embezzling properties was the most prevalent offence (i.e.,
138 cases with 267 defendants and 88 cases with 157 defendants respectively) and thesecond largest number was the offence of taking advantage of positions of authority
and/or powers while performing official duties (49 cases with 182 defendants and 36
cases with 78 defendants respectively).
Those annual reports also indicate that the total number of sophisticated andserious corruption cases and defendants handled by the Department itself remained stable,i.e., 32 cases with 315 defendants, 36 cases with 269 defendants, and 35 cases with 244
defendants in 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively. In such corruption cases, there areseveral high profile cases that have been supervised and directed by the Central Steering
Committee for Directing Prevention and Anticorruption. Some of them required mutual
legal assistance from foreign competent authorities, and numerous defendants took
advantage of the positions of Vice Minister, Director General of big state-owned
enterprises, Senior Investigator, or Judge, etc., while performing official duties or
receiving bribes. The corruption crimes have been committed in a wide range of public
sectors, such as construction investment, trading, imports and exports, land use
management, large state projects, etc.
V. CONCLUSION
It could be said that the handling of corruption cases by the people’s procuracy
sector in general and by the Department in particular in the past three years was inaccordance with both of the national laws and relevant international conventions, whichguarantee the effective investigations and prosecutions of crimes and ensure that justice isdone and that the guilty shall not escape justice. The Department, functioning in close

4

The Annual Work Report of 2009 had not updated the statistics for the corruption cases and defendants
that were initiated by the investigation agencies on the above seven types of crimes in 2009.

- 134 -

collaboration with relevant state agencies, has achieved significant results. However,those annual reports also reflected the fact that the number of corruption cases that had
been detected, investigated, prosecuted and tried by the law enforcement agencies is still
moderate in comparison to other types of crime in the same period. During the fact
finding process of some complex corruption cases, the investigations still exceed theregulatory time frame.
In order to enhance the effectiveness of the people’s procuracy service in handing
corruption cases, the following major issues should be considered:(i) Continuing to establish the units specializing in prosecution and supervision
over investigation of corruption cases at the provincial people’s procuracies, especiallywhere more corruption acts have been committed, in order to set up a network within the
procuracy sector to receive and deal with corruption crime reports or information
effectively.
(ii) Enhancing the cooperation with the government inspectorates in handlingalleged acts of corruption when they are detected and sending the files to the people’s
procuracy together with the request to initiate investigations. Thereby, the government
inspectorates should be seen as one of the important channels within the executive branchwhich provide the procuracy with crime reports and information.
(iii) Considering a proposal to revise and supplement Articles 103, 104 and 126 of
the Criminal Procedure Code 2003 by setting forth the powers of the procuracy to
examine crime reports or information and initiate the investigations themselves, because
the current Code lacks stipulations of investigation agencies’ responsibilities in the casethat they do not follow directions or instructions given by the procuracies.
(iv) Strengthening discussions with investigating agencies in order to draw
lessons and experience from handling complex corruption cases to avoid undue andlengthy investigation processes.

- 135 -

(v) Raising the quality of issuing judicial requests to the heads of the institutions
or organizations within administrative, economic, or social sectors, where corrupt acts
have been committed, to take all necessary measures to prevent such violations in the
future. This is one of the remaining powers since the procuracy has no longer had thepower to supervise the operation of those institutions after 2002.
(vi) Improving facilities for specialized units of prosecution and supervision overinvestigation of corruption cases, especially applying IT in case files management within
the procuracy sector. Although the information technology has been developed for a few
years, the records system sometimes causes errors that limit its positive effects.

- 136 -ANTI-CORRUPTION IN VIETNAM
Tran Anh Tuan*

I. THE CENTRAL STEERING COMMITTEE FOR ANTI-CORRUPTION OF
VIETNAM AND THE OFFICE OF THE CENTRAL STEERING COMMITTEEIn Vietnam, all agencies, organizations, units and citizens must be responsible forpreventing and fighting corruption, including a number of key agencies: inspectorates,
auditors, investigation agencies, procuracies and courts. To promote the role of theseagencies, organizations, units and citizens in preventing and fighting corruption, on 28
August, 2006, the National Assembly Standing Committee decided to establish theCentral Steering Committee for Anti-Corruption. The Central Steering Committee
consists of 10 members, headed by the Prime Minister, with the Deputy Prime Minister
as Vice Head of the Committee, one permanent member, in charge of operations, andother commissioners including the Inspector General, the Minister of Public Security,
the Prosecutor General of Supreme People’s Procuracy, the Chairman of the Supreme
People’s Court, the Minister of Information and Communication, the Deputy-Head of
the Inspection Commission of the Central Communist Party of Vietnam, and the Vice
Minister of Defense.
The Central Steering Committee has the responsibility to direct, coordinate,inspect and urge anti-corruption activities throughout the country, including directing
and urging the inspection, auditing, investigation, prosecution and adjudication ofserious and complex corruption cases, to ensure the handling of these cases comply withthe provisions of law.

*

Deputy Director, Office of Central Steering Committee for Anti-corruption of Vietnam.

- 137 -

The Central Steering Committee for Anti-Corruption has a consulting andassisting agency, which is the Office of the Central Steering Committee (the standing
member of the Central Steering Committee also is Chief of the Office). The Office isequivalent to Ministerial level, composed of 95 members (to-date), and divided into
eight departments.
II. THE ANTI-CORRUPTION LAW AND THE NATIONAL STRATEGY ON
PREVENTING AND COMBATING CORRUPTION TOWARDS 2020
On 29 November 2005, the National Assembly of Vietnam issued the AntiCorruption Law (LAC). To implement this law, the Government and the Central
Steering Committee for Anti-Corruption have directed the authorities to conduct
research and build the National Strategy for Anti-corruption. This task was assigned to
the Government Inspectorate. The Office of Central Steering Committee for AntiCorruption (OSCAC) is responsible for coordinating with the Government Inspectorate
to build the strategy.
The strategy sets out five solutions:(i) To enhance openness and transparency in policy formulation anddevelopment and implementation of the law;(ii) To perfect the public service regimes, civil servants, improving the quality ofofficial duties performance;(iii) To perfect the mechanism of economic management, building a fair andtransparent business environment;(iv) To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of inspecting, monitoring,auditing, investigating, prosecuting and trial in the detection and handling of corruption;- 138 -

(v) To raise awareness and promote the role of society in anti-corruption.
III. THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION AND
THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTIONAGAINST CORRUPTION OF VIETNAM
On 10 December 2003, Vietnam officially signed the UN Convention Against
Corruption (hereinafter referred to as the Convention) at the Summit held in Merida,
Mexico. After nearly six years of research and assessment on the conformity of theVietnamese legal system, as well as difficulties, challenges and solutions in
implementing the Convention, on 30 June 2009, the President of the Socialist Republicof Vietnam officially ratified the Convention by Decision No. 950/2009/QD-CTN. The
Convention officially came into effect for Vietnam on 18 September 2009.
A. Law on Signing, Accession and Implementation of International Treaties of2005 and the Law on Enactment of Legal Normative Documents of 2008
In order to actively implement the Convention, Vietnam officially issued an
Implementation Plan of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (underDecision No. 445/QD-TTg, dated 7 April 2010 of the Prime Minister). This plan fullycomplies with regulations on the position and application of international treaties inVietnam. The objectives, contents and roadmaps of this plan are synchronized withthose of the National Strategy on Preventing and Combating Corruption towards 2020of Vietnam; especially, it sets the specific tasks and roadmap for institutionalization andimplementation of regulations and requirements of the Convention and serves as thebasis for the implementation process.
According to the plan, the key tasks in implementing the Convention include:- 139 -

(i) Continuing to propagate and disseminate legislation on the prevention ofcorruption and contents of the Convention. This measure will help raise the awarenessof cadres, civil servants and other classes of people on anti-corruption laws and theConventions.
(ii) Conducting research and making proposals on perfecting legal documents ofVietnam on measures to prevent corruption, including:Strengthening the independence and performance of the anti-corruption agencies;
perfecting the mechanism and rules on publicity, transparency and preventing
corruption in public procurement;
Perfecting regulations in the financial and banking sectors to prevent money
laundering;
Perfecting the mechanisms and policies for cadres, officials of anti-corruption
agencies;
Perfecting regulations on remuneration of people who have made achievements inthe prevention of corruption, as well as codes of conduct and ethics for staff, public
officials;
Perfecting audit standards, increasing transparency in the financial and accounting
sectors and transparency of assets and income of civil servants;
Building a system of criteria to evaluate and measure corruption and theeffectiveness of anti-corruption work;
Making state-administrative-management work public and transparent;
Simplifying administrative procedures and ensuring periodical reports; and- 140 -

Providing information on the situation of corruption and outcomes of anticorruption work.
(iii) Supplementing corruption offences and law enforcement regulations,
including: supplements to the Penal Code on the offences of offering bribes of foreign
public officials and public servants of public international organizations;
Researching and proposing solutions for the criminalization of acts of corruption
in the private sector for the offences of offering and taking bribes and embezzlement in
the private sector, any illegal enrichment behaviour and criminal liability of legal
persons;
Researching and proposing the concretization and perfection of the regulations onprotection of witnesses, experts and victims and regulations on international cooperationin witness protection.
(iv) Completing mechanisms for international cooperation against corruption,
including legal provisions on mutual legal assistance, extradition, transfer of sentenced
persons, joint investigation and application of special investigation techniques;
Increasing the exchange of international and regional experiences on anticorruption and Convention implementation.
(v) Perfecting the mechanism of recovery of corrupted assets, including research,
proposals to supplement the implementation of civil parts in criminal judgments offoreign courts;
International cooperation on the recovery of corrupted assets;
Modifying and supplementing regulations on transparency of assets and income;- 141 -

Researching and proposing measures to control the assets and incomes of cadresand public servants.
(vi) Enhancing working facilities and improving professional and corruption
crimes investigation techniques for cadres in charge of anti-corruption work andstrengthening international cooperation in training and retraining for anti-corruption
specialized staff;
Building mechanisms to exchange information, documents, data for theprevention of corruption with other countries;
Conducting a general review and evaluation of the implementation of the legal
documents on anti-corruption and conducting surveys and interviews in order to collectinformation, analyse, evaluate and propose measures to prevent corruption in the fieldsof state management.
Also in accordance with the Convention, the requirements of the Conference of
the State Parties to the UNCAC as well as the existing laws of Vietnam, theGovernment of Vietnam assigned the Government Inspectorate as the national central
authority in providing information on anti-corruption work to the international
community and as the lead agency providing advice for the Government in theimplementation of the Convention in Vietnam.
B. Inter-Sectoral Working Group to implement the Convention
Vietnam established the inter-sectoral working group to implement theConvention (on 11 March 2010 under Decision No. 434/QD-TTCP of the Government
Inspector General) and a team of government experts to review the implementation of
the Convention (on 2 June 2010 under Decision No. 776/QD-TTg of the Prime
Minister).
- 142 -

Members of the UNCAC working group and review team are researchers,
managers and practitioners representing different agencies related to the implementationof the Convention, such as the Ministry of Public Security, the Supreme People’s
Procuracy, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Office of theGovernment, the Office of the Central Steering Committee on preventing andcombating corruption and the Government Inspectorate. The heads of the working
group and review team are the leaders of the Government Inspectorate.
IV. THE RESULTS OF ANTI-CORRUPTION WORK SINCE THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRATEGY, UNCAC
In recent years, the State of Vietnam continues to show its political will and highdetermination in anti-corruption work. This is reflected through the enactment by theState of various anti-corruption proposals, policies and initiatives, including:(i) Simplification of administrative procedures (Proposal 30);(ii) Transparency of assets and income (Decree No. 37/2007/NĐ-CP, amended
and supplemented by Decree No. 68/2011/NĐ-CP);(iii) Regular rotation of working positions of public servants in several sectors andbranches (Decree No. 158/2007/NĐ-CP);(iv) The National Strategy on Preventing and Combating Corruption towards 2020
(Resolution 21/NQ-CP dated 12/5/2009);(v) Integration of anti-corruption contents into educational training programmes(Decision No. 137/2009/QĐ-TTg);(vi) UNCAC Implementation Plan (Decision No. 445/QĐ-TTg);- 143 -

(vii) Launching of Anti-corruption Initiatives Program on an annual basis;(viii) Holding an annual meeting to appraise individuals having significant
achievements in anti-corruption;(ix) Ratifying and beginning the implementation of the UNCAC, etc.
After nearly two years deploying the UNCAC implementation plan, at the time ofreview (June 2011), Vietnam has carried out synchronizing solutions to promote theimplementation of the Convention in the following areas:
A. Perfection of Institutions
Regarding the perfection of institutions, Vietnam has:z

enacted a number of laws to improve public services and public officials’
mechanisms and inspection work, such as the Public Servants Laws, Cadres Law,
Inspection Law (amended and supplemented);zissued a national action plan against money laundering and terrorism financing;z

is continuing to conduct research on a theoretical and practical basis for thecriminalization of certain acts of corruption, as well as acts of taking and giving
bribery in the private sector, and embezzling assets in the private sector;z

promulgated and launched, through its ministries, sectors and administrative levels,
the implementation of codes of conduct by officials and public servants;zissued regulations on remuneration of individuals with outstanding achievements inreporting and detecting acts of corruption;z

modified regulations on transparency of assets, income, etc.

- 144 -

z

In particular, on 2 December 2009, the Prime Minister issued Decision
No.137/2009/QĐ-TTg approving the Proposal to integrate anti-corruption contents
into educational and training programmes. This is one of the important documents
which shows the proper awareness of the Party and State in the fight against
corruption, taking prevention as the core, promoting the work of education andtraining for public servants, students, pupils in preventing and combating corruption.

B. Implementation of Concrete Measures
Regarding implementation of concrete measures on prevention of corruption,
Vietnam is:zcontinuing to speed up inspection, examining, audit, investigation, supervision inorder to proactively prevent and detect corruption;zraising public awareness through the promotion of anti-corruption communication
activities and promoting active participation of the public on the prevention andfight against corruption by improving the quality the bi-annual Anti-corruption
Dialogues between the Government of Vietnam and the community of international
donors and organizations, as well as the political-social-professional organizations;zencouraging and supporting people to actively propose initiatives to fight against
corruption through Anti-Corruption Initiative Vietnam (VACI) programme.
Through two years of implementation, the corruption situation is still complicated,

but in some areas has been restrained. The number of detected corruption cases has
shown a decreasing trend. For example: from 1 October 2010 until 31 July 2011, 183cases/349 defendants were prosecuted for corruption (a decrease of 25% in cases and
13% in number of defendants compared to the same period in 2010).

- 145 -

V. DIFFICULTIES AND CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING THE
STRATEGY, UNCAC
A. The Strategy
The difficulties and challenges in implementing the strategy are the same as infighting corruption. First, corruption happens in many fields and sectors. In addition,
corruption also occurs within some agencies who have the function of preventing andcombating corruption; therefore, the effectiveness of anti-corruption activities withinthese agencies is not high. As a result, the investigation and handling of some
corruption cases have been prolonged and difficult.
B. The UNCAC(i) Many regulations of Vietnamese laws and MLA treaties between Vietnam andother countries have not been adequate and synchronized. The process of negotiating,signing, amending, or supplementing MLA treaties between Vietnam and othercountries, the process of researching, developing or amending existing laws to adapt thepractical situation of Vietnam, and at the same time ensuring the synchronization withthe provisions of other international treaties that Vietnam has concluded will require
extensive experiences, time, labour, budget and synchronizing collaboration among
relevant authorities of Vietnam.
(ii) Vietnamese infrastructure, as well as technical conditions and international
experience in anti-corruption work, are still limited. Language barriers, lack of working
skill in international environments; and limited access to distinctive political and legal
regimes will be the obstacles and challenges for public servants of Vietnam whenparticipating in international anti-corruption cooperation efforts.

- 146 -

(iii) Awareness of the Convention and the implementation of the Convention bycertain public servants and citizens is, in general, inadequate due to limited
dissemination and research about the Convention.
Currently, the Government and the Central Steering Committee have directed theGovernment Inspectorate in collaboration with OSCAC and concerned agencies anddepartments to conduct a review of the first stage of strategy implementation, and link itwith reviewing the five-year implementation of the Anti-corruption Law in order tosupplement and perfect the strategy’s implementation plan to meet the requirements ofStage 2.

- 147 -

THE INDONESIAN CORRUPTION ERADICATION COMMISSION(KPK)
Mochammad Jasin*
I. INSTITUTIONAL HISTORIESThe Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission, or better known as KPK in
Indonesia, was established in 2003. The impetus to create KPK was the economic crises
during 1997, which subsequently also led to the downfall of President Soeharto. KPK
was established to combat the extraordinary crime of corruption in Indonesia, which is
rampant, systemic, and affecting the lives of practically everyone in the country. During
the crises, there was a sense that drastic measures were needed to tackle corruption,
which contributed to the country’s difficulties.

Before the KPK was formed, dating back to the 1950s, six institutions havehistorically been established to combat corruption. However, the lives of these previous
institutions were very short, mainly because they only focused on law enforcement. The
KPK’s much more solid track record owes much to its comprehensive contemplation of
how systemic corruption had become – law enforcement alone would never had sufficed;
the fight against corruption has to be accompanied by prevention efforts, supervision andcoordination of all law enforcement institutions involved in processing corruption cases.
And not less important is that it must include the participation of the public. All theseconcerns were provided for in Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication*

Commissioner, Vice Chairman, Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

- 148 -

Commission, which sets out the KPK’s authority, powers and duties of law enforcementin the aforementioned comprehensive manner.

In addition to the Law No. 30 of 2002, in conducting law enforcement operations the
KPK follows the main Indonesian anti-corruption laws, namely Law No. 31 of 1999 as
amended by Law No. 20 of 2001 on The Eradication of Corruption, Law No. 28 of 1999
on Corruption-Free State Governance, and Law No. 8 of 2010 on Combating Money
Laundering Crime. KPK has power to handle money laundering crime as long as thepredicate crime is corruption.
II. KPK AUTHORITIES AND FEATURES
According to the article 6 of Law number 30 year 2002, there are 5 categories of
KPK’s duties, authorities and obligations, as follows:
1. coordinate with institutions authorized to combat acts of corruption
2. supervise institutions authorized to combat acts of corruption
3. conduct preliminary investigations, investigations and prosecutions against
acts of corruption
4. conduct corruption prevention activities, and
5. conduct monitoring of state governance
KPK is authorized to conduct pre-investigation, investigations, and prosecutions against
corruption cases that:
1. involve law enforcers, state officials, and other individuals connected tocorrupt acts perpetrated by law enforcer or state officials
2. have generated significant public concern; and/or
3. have lost the state at least IDR 1,000,000,000 (USD 100,000)
KPK has some unique features compared to other law enforcement agencies. KPK is
led by 5 Commissioners, 2 Advisors, and 735 personnel. The five-person commissioners- 149 -

serve as a collegial body, which introduces greater accountability. It is much harder toinfluence the decision of a five-person body than the decision of a single individual. The
collegial character of KPK leadership also has the advantage of being able to spread theworkload among five commissioners.

KPK is independent from the executive, legislative, judiciary and any other powers.
Financially, KPK is audited by the Indonesian Supreme Audit Board (BPK) and should
be responsible to the public. In doing the tasks, KPK has the authority to supervise andcoordinate with the Attorney General Office as well as the National Police in handlingcorruption cases.

As mentioned earlier, KPK has the authority to investigate. This authority is broad
because KPK can investigate any public official for corruption, including members ofparliament, judges and even the military. Although KPK can investigate members of themilitary, it cannot prosecute members of the military. KPK has to date already succeededin convicting several members of Parliament and officials in the Judiciary, as will beelaborated in the next session. KPK essentially has all the investigative powers of a law
enforcement agency. It can conduct wiretaps on suspects, examine their bank account andtax records, as well as freeze their assets, issue hold orders and make arrests.
III. THE WORK OF KPK
A. Prevention of Corruption
The Deputy of Prevention also conducts anti-corruption coordinative efforts,
including: (i) coordination with the Minister of Home Affairs to push for the realization- 150 -

of the National Single Identification Number program, (ii) coordination with the internalmonitoring units of all government institutions (iii) coordination with government
institutions and State Owned Enterprises in stock taking all state assets under theunauthorized control of officials and former officials (the results of this particular
coordinative effort being that several officials have returned assets voluntarily), (iv)
coordinating with the State Ministry of State Owned Enterprises to obtain information on
public officials who also act as Commissaries at State Owned Enterprises (with all theconflicts of interest that entails that sort of arrangement); (v) coordinating with State
Ministry of Apparatus and Bureaucracy Reform to trigger the civil service reform.

The KPK also continues to improve the transparency of how public officials conduct
their affairs by increasing the compliance of Wealth Reporting (LHKPN), as well as theeffectiveness with which such reports are examined and confirmed. Other than this, the
KPK’s continuing dedication to monitor gratuity (the giving of gifts to public officials
which sets a precedent to corruptive behaviour down the road, or given in the interest of
maintaining corruptive relations) further supports the KPK’s push for transparency in theinterest of prevention.
Wealth Report Compliance
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011*

Number of Mandated
Reporters
102,229
116,669
84,813110,892
128,030
144,557
180,831

Number of Reporters
52,13765,44876,116
95,359104,329
118,340
146,803*as of Oct.

- 151 -

Number of Gratuity Reports
2005
50

2006
326

2007
249

2008
266

2009
335

2010
393

2011*
1155

* as of Oct.

KPK realizes that corruption sometimes is triggered by bad systems. Regarding thismatter, KPK also performs its monitoring authority that is to evaluate the administrative
management systems of state and public institutions, to provide recommendations tothese institutions, and to monitor the implementation of the recommendations. The
systems/institutions that have been reviewed by KPK include: the land agency, importadministration system, state budgeting, taxation, state treasury, management of migrant
worker, court tax, immigration, penitentiary, and funding of political party.

The priority of which administration system to be reviewed is based on the amountof the budget under the administration system, the number prone to corruption systemweaknesses, and the impact on the national economy and public service. Working closelywith the relevant institutions, KPK is now monitoring the implementation of these
institutions’ action plans.

To support the efforts to eradicate corruption, some studies and surveys have been
done to make the efforts more effective and efficient. These have included: surveys on
public perception towards KPK, integrity surveys to assess the level of public services insome institutions and local governments, anti-corruption initiative assessment surveys,
studies on good governance in local governments and disseminating the implementation- 152 -

of its principle to other regions, studies on electronic public procurement, and studies on
good corporate governance in some state owned and private companies which are listed
on stock exchanges.

For longer-term purposes, being the creation of a new generation that rejects
corruption, KPK has programs on anti-corruption education. This includes: campaigns inmany forms in mass media, development of anti-corruption modules for school, anticorruption education programs, recruitment of anti-corruption cadres, seminars, talkshow programs, and development of anti-corruption curricula for schools.
A. International Cooperation
The aforementioned Integrity Survey was also conducted after comprehensive
cooperation and capacity building of the KPK’s knowledge management of Integrity with
South Korea’s Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC). By using
concepts of measuring and improving Integrity from the South Koreans, the KPK has
initiated intense dialogue in improving the Integrity scores of the lowest scoring public
institutions. Some other tools learned from ACRC include: anti-corruption initiatives
assessment and corruption impact assessment.

The KPK has also learned much from its cooperation and correspondence with many
fellow anti-corruption agencies in the South East Asian, East Asian and South Pacificregions, such as the Malaysian Badan Pencegah Rasuah (Malaysian Anti Corruption
Commission - MACC); the Brunei Biro Mencegah Rasuah (BMR); the Thai National
Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC); the Philippine Ombudsman; the Hong Kong

- 153 -

Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC); the New South Wales Independent
Commission Against Corruption (ICAC); and the Singapore Corrupt Practices
Investigation Bureau (CPIB). Cooperation ranges from law enforcement activities in anticorruption, training activities, as well as dialogues in corruption prevention.

B. Repression of Corruption
1. Case Load
The KPK’s case load in law enforcement activities as of Dec. 15, 2009 are as follows:
Year
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011*
Total

Pre-Investigation
23
29
36
70
70
68
54
68
418

Investigation
2
19
27
24
46
37
40
32
227

Prosecution
2
17
23
19
37
34
32
36
200

Execution
0
4
14
23
23
37
34
30
165

*as of Oct.

KPK cases which have reached final decision are as follows:
Resolved
District Court
Provincial Court
Supreme Court
Total* as of Oct.

2004
0
0
0
0

2005
3
0
2
5

2006
5
4
8
17

2007
9
0
14
23

2008
9
0
14
23

2009
20
2
15
37

2010
21
2
11
34

2011
19
0
11
30

Total
86
8
75
169

Among the corruption cases handled by the KPK from 2004 – 2009, involving somehigh ranking officials as follows:•••

45 members of Parliament
8 Ministers/Head of Ministerial level
8 Province Governors- 154 -

•
•
•
•
•
•

1 Governor of central bank, 4 Deputy Governor
27 Mayors and Head of Regents/District
6 Commissioners of General Election; Judicial; Anti-monopoly Commission
3 Judges, 3 Prosecutors of the Attorney General’s Office
3 Ambassadors and 4 General Counsel, including Former Chief of National Police
Senior Prosecutor, KPK’s investigator, many high ranking goverment official
echelon I & II (Director General, Secretary General, Deputy, Director, etc.)
High ranking CEOs involved in public corruption•

2. Recovering Stolen Assets
One of the best indicators of the KPK’s success in performing its repressive law
enforcement activities is the return of stolen state assets. During its early days, the KPK
was criticized for not being able to recover assets exceeding the cost of running the KPK.
Recently, this figure has drastically been overturned. The figures are shown on the tables
below:
2005
(IDR)

2006
(IDR)

2007
(IDR)

2008
(IDR)

2009
(IDR)

2010
(IDR)

2011*
(IDR)

State Funds Lodged
6.959.166.167 12.990.522.190 48.454.936.028 411.800.133.417 142.993.950.300 189.371.372.650 134.581.573.850
to the Treasury* as of Oct.

Regarding the process of taking over an indictment or a prosecution process by the
KPK, it will be carried out by the KPK should some conditions prevail, for example: areport about an act of corruption has been ignored, the processing of the corruption casegoes on for too long/delayed without a valid reason, the handling process is itself miredby corrupt acts, or the case has been hampered by executive, legislative, or judicial
interference.
In addition to performing direct repressive law enforcement by processing cases forthe anti-corruption courts, the KPK also performs coordination and supervision- 155 -

operations involving law enforcement officers from the Police and the Attorney
General’s Office.
Coordination of law enforcement efforts is conducted by way of conducting
meetings with the Attorney General’s Office and the Police Headquarters. The results ofsuch coordinating meetings include: (i) establishing a pattern for cooperative
coordination and supervision in the area of investigations and prosecution in corruption
cases, (ii) establishing mechanisms for the taking over of corruption cases by involved
institutions, (iii) the establishment of coordination and supervision material that include
the synchronization of corruption cases data that had been reported or transferred to the
KPK, as well as establishing criteria for certain corruption cases that need to besupervised.
C. Synergy between Prevention and Repression
It has been learned from the previous anti-corruption agency that it is very important
to concurrently conduct the prevention and repression approach towards corruption.
Further, there should be a comprehensive approach of prevention and repression activities.
The activities below are some examples.

As an independent agency that is fully responsible for corruption prevention efforts,
the KPK is actively involved in triggering civil service reform at various pilot institutionsin Indonesia. The Ministry of Finance is one institution which has implemented
bureaucratic reform efforts. For certain service units under the Ministry of Finance suchas the Tanjung Priok Customs General Services Office, such salary improvements were- 156 -

substantial. Unfortunately, those salary improvements did not improve the performance
nor the integrity of the personnel. Bribery is a common transgression, even when reform
efforts were being conducted. The KPK, in cooperation with the Customs and Excise
Office’s Internal Compliance Division, performed raids at the Green Line (processing of
documents from credible companies) and the Red Line (processing documents fordangerous goods) at the Office, as well as on the vehicles used by officers working there.
The raid discovered evidence in the form of bribe money amounting to US$ 50,000 in thetimespan of several hours of operations. From the raids, it has been indicated that several
officials at the Customs and Excise Office may be processed further by the legal system.

KPK has processed a case involving an official from Bank Indonesia. In respect ofthat, the KPK also assisted Bank Indonesia by intensifying preventive efforts byanalysing Bank Indonesia internal rules that potentially create conflicts of interest.
Internal rules that are analysed by the KPK in cooperation with Bank Indonesia include
rules regarding legal protection for personnel and regarding work related travel.
IV. CHALLENGESIn recent years, corruptors’ resistance has taken place in different forms. The attacks
against anti-corruption activities were done through various methods and channels. For
example, the general courts have not been giving much support as many corruptors are
freed by their verdict. There are also some issues that have not been regulated regarding
the efforts to eradicate corruption. For example: private to private sector corruption, andthe draft Law of Criminal Procedure has not been passed. This law is important for thereason that at the moment KPK cannot have its own investigator and prosecutor. Its- 157 -

investigator must come from the Police and the Attorney General’s Office. In addition, in
the level of government decree, topics like witness protection, lawful interception, andwealth reporting have not been settled.

The newly passed law of the Anti-Corruption Court also poses new challenges to
KPK. The law requires that in some regions should be established Anti-Corruption
Courts, compared to current existing condition with only one Anti-Corruption Court in
Jakarta. This new condition would pose problems of technical coordination andsupervision because KPK does not have branch offices in those regions.

Some challenges come from the internal side as well. Firstly, the KPK’s humanresources are relatively small compared to the 220 million total population and vastgeographic conditions of Indonesia. Secondly, the current KPK office building is notreally providing enough operational space for all of its personnel. The proposed budget
for a new building has not been approved yet by the Parliament. Lastly, the KPK
currently still has to borrow the detention house from the police.

- 158 -

TWO SIDES’ MEASURES ON CORRUPTION ERADICATION:PREVENTION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
Feri Wibisono, prosecutor*
Introduction.
In the past 20 years, technological advancement and globalization have opened up
vast opportunities for the perpetration of transnational corruption and crime. White collar
crime rose significantly as a modus operandi and has become transnationally organized,
facilitated by advances in information technology. As we understand that characteristics
of business transactions and crime are always growing faster than the law, this poses anightmare for law enforcement agencies in all countries.

According to a recent study on criminology, in numerous investigated cases state
officials were found involved in corrupt practices relating to a broad variety of crimes.
Corruption is no exception, and its links to international organized crime, drug trafficking
and terrorism are plainly recognised. Those problems lead international society to pay
attention to several conventions. The preamble of UNCAC stated that :•Concerned about the seriousness of problems and threats posed by corruption to thestability and security of societies, undermining the institutions and values of
democracy, ethical values and justice and jeopardizing sustainable development andthe rule of law,•

Concerned also about the links between corruption and other forms of crime inparticular organized crime and economic crime, including money-laundering,•Concerned further about cases of corruption that involve vast quantities of assets,
which may constitute a substantial proportion of the resources of States, and thatthreaten the political stability and sustainable development of those States,•

Convinced that corruption is no longer a local matter but a transnational
phenomenon that affects all societies and economies, making international
cooperation to prevent and control it essential,* Head of Scanning Bureau, Attorney General’s office- 159 -

Also the preamble of the OECD Convention determined that bribery is a widespread
phenomenon in international business transactions, including trade and investment,
which raises serious moral and political concerns, undermines good governance andeconomic development, and distorts international competitive conditions. OECD Countries
recognising that achieving progress in this field requires not only efforts on a national
level but also multilateral co-operation, monitoring and follow-up.

Since 1998, Indonesia has made impressive strides in terms of institutional reform― the holding of direct and fair elections for the president, for provincial and local
officials, and for national and local parliaments; strengthening the roles of theseparliaments; removal of the military from government; decentralisation of power from
Jakarta to local governments; and the setting up of an array of new institutions aimed at
reducing corruption and political patronage ― e.g. independent General Elections
Commission, Supreme Audit Agency, Anti-Corruption Commission, Anti-Corruption
Court; and an Ombudsman's Office.
As in other countries in political transition, the informal norms and practices of thepast have tended to carry on into the present, including the tradition of offering gifts inreturn for services. It is no secret that Indonesia's history includes a long period whereconflicts of interest were neglected and public duties, authorities and assets were usedsystematically for private gains. Recently low civil service and parliamentary salaries
have also encouraged bribe-taking. These practices are aided by a general lack ofeffective-governance and supervisory systems. However, Indonesia has significantly
improved its corruption control measures over the past few years. There have been
hundreds of investigations per year by the Anti-Corruption Commission and otheragencies.
During the last decade the fight against corruption has gained prominence
worldwide and in Indonesia especially when the UN Convention Against Corruption(UNCAC) was opened for signature in Merida in 2003. Indonesia was part of theConvention. To mark this important commitment, in early 2006, the Indonesian House ofRepresentatives ratified the Merida Convention or UNCAC. Considering present levels- 160 -

of corruption, Indonesia feels the strong need to actively promote UNCAC.
International Cooperation
Corruption is no longer a local matter but also a transnational phenomenon that
affects all societies and economies, making international cooperation to prevent andcontrol it essential. A comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach is required tocombat corruption effectively. The eradication of corruption is a responsibility of allstates and they must cooperate with one another.
International conventions play a key role in addressing the worldwide andcross-border nature of corruption. When a suspect flees across a national border,
law-enforcement bodies can be faced with immense difficulties. Because transnational
crime thrives on differences in regulations among countries, the harmonisation ofnational legislation or effectiveness of international cooperation are of the utmost
importance. International anti-corruption conventions are increasingly important in aworld in which states and private actors have been increasingly interconnected throughtravel, communications and trade.
The UNCAC, Palermo Convention and OECD Convention deal with the same
basic areas of cooperation in the course of investigations and other law-enforcement
activities as previous instruments, including the extradition of offenders, mutual legal
assistance and less-formal forms of cooperation. The following are some examples ofsuch kinds of provisions concerning international cooperation on eradicating corruption
as transnational organized crime:
UN Convention Against Corruption
Article 43 - International cooperation
1. States Parties shall cooperate in criminal matters in accordance with articles 44
to 50 of this Convention. Where appropriate and consistent with their domestic legal- 161 -

system, States Parties shall consider assisting each other in investigations of andproceedings in civil and administrative matters relating to corruption.
2. In matters of international cooperation, whenever dual criminality is considered arequirement, it shall be deemed fulfilled irrespective of whether the laws of therequested State Party place the offence within the same category of offence ordenominate the offence by the same terminology as the requesting State Party if the
conduct underlying the offence for which assistance is sought is a criminal offence
under the laws of both States Parties.

Article 48 - Law enforcement cooperation
1. States Parties shall cooperate closely with one another, consistent with theirrespective domestic legal and administrative systems, to enhance the effectiveness oflaw enforcement action to combat the offences covered by this Convention. States
Parties shall, in particular, take effective measures:(a) To enhance and, where necessary, to establish channels of communication
between their competent authorities, agencies and services in order to facilitate thesecure and rapid exchange of information concerning all aspects of the offences
covered by this Convention, including, if the States Parties concerned deem it
appropriate, links with other criminal activities;(b) To cooperate with other States Parties in conducting inquiries with respect tooffences covered by this Convention concerning.
(i) The identity, whereabouts and activities of persons suspected of involvement insuch offences or the location of other persons concerned;(ii) The movement of proceeds of crime or property derived from the commissionof such offences;(iii) The movement of property, equipment or other instrumentalities used orintended for use in the commission of such offences;(c) To provide, where appropriate, necessary items or quantities of substances for- 162 -

analytical or investigative purposes;(d) To exchange, where appropriate information with other States Parties
concerning specific means and methods used to commit offences covered by thisConvention, including the use of false identities, forged, altered or false documents
and other means of concealing activities;(e) To facilitate effective coordination between their competent authorities,
agencies and services and to promote the exchange of personnel and other experts,
including, subject to bilateral agreements or arrangements between the States Parties
concerned, the posting of liaison officers;(f) To exchange information and coordinate administrative and other measurestaken as appropriate for the purpose of early identification of the offences coveredby this Convention.
2. With a view to giving effect to this Convention, States Parties shall consider entering
into bilateral or multilateral agreements or arrangements on direct cooperation between
their law enforcement agencies and, where such agreements or arrangements alreadyexist, amending them. In the absence of such agreements or arrangements between theStates Parties concerned, the States Parties may consider this Convention to be the basis
for mutual law enforcement cooperation in respect of the offences covered by thisConvention. Whenever appropriate, States Parties shall make full use of agreements or
arrangements, including international or regional organizations, to enhance thecooperation between their law enforcement agencies.
3. States Parties shall endeavour to cooperate within their means to respond to offences
covered by this Convention committed through the use of modem technology.
UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime
Article 26 - Measures to enhance cooperation with law enforcement authorities
1. Each State Party shall take appropriate measures to encourage persons who
participate or who have participated in organized criminal groups:(a) To supply information useful to competent authorities for investigative and- 163 -

evidentiary purposes on such matters as:(i)The identity, nature, composition, structure, location or activities of organizedcriminal groups;(ii) Links, including international links, with other organized criminal groups;(iii) Offences that organized criminal groups have committed or may commit;(b) To provide factual, concrete help to competent authorities that may contribute to
depriving organized criminal groups of their resources or of the proceeds of crime.
2. Each State Party shall consider providing for the possibility, in appropriate cases, of
mitigating punishment of an accused person who provides substantial cooperation in
the investigation or prosecution of an offence covered by this Convention.
3. Each State Party shall consider providing for the possibility, in accordance with
fundamental principles of its domestic law, of granting immunity from prosecution toa person who provides substantial cooperation in the investigation or prosecution of
an offence covered by this Convention.
4. Protection of such persons shall be as provided for in article 24 of this Convention.
5. Where a person referred to in paragraph 1 of this article located in one State Party
can provide substantial cooperation to the competent authorities of another State Party,
the States Parties concerned may consider entering into agreements or arrangements,
in accordance with their domestic law, concerning the potential provision by the otherState Party of the treatment set forth in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article.
Article 27 - Law enforcement cooperation

1. States Parties shall cooperate closely with one another, consistent with theirrespective domestic legal and administrative systems, to enhance the effectiveness oflaw enforcement action to combat the offences covered by this Convention. Each State
Party shall, in particular, adopt effective measures:(a) To enhance and, where necessary, to establish channels of communication between
their competent authorities, agencies and services in order to facilitate the secure and- 164 -

rapid exchange of information concerning all aspects of the offences covered by thisConvention, including, if the States Parties concerned deem it appropriate, links
with other criminal activities;(b) To cooperate with other States Parties in conducting inquiries with respect tooffences covered by this Convention concerning:(i) The identify, whereabouts and activities of persons suspected of involvement insuch offences or the location of other persons concerned;(ii) The movement of proceeds of crime or property derived from the commission ofsuch offences;(iii) The movement of property, equipment or other instrumentalities used or intended
for use in the commission of such offences;(c) To provide, when appropriate, necessary items or quantities of substances foranalytical or investigative purposes;(d) To facilitate effective coordination between their competent authorities, agencies
and services and to promote the exchange of personnel and other experts, including,
subject to bilateral agreements or arrangements between theStates Parties

concerned, the posting of liaison officers.
(e) To exchange information with other States Parties on specific means and methods
used by organized criminal groups, including, where applicable, routes andconveyances and the use of false identities, altered or false documents or othermeans of concealing their activities;(f) To exchange information and coordinate administrative and other measures taken as
appropriate for the purpose of early identification of the offences covered by thisConvention.
2. With a view to giving effect to this Convention, States Parties shall consider entering
into bilateral or multilateral agreements or arrangements on direct cooperation between
their law enforcement agencies and, where such agreements or arrangements alreadyexist, amending them. In the absence of such agreements or arrangements between theStates Parties concerned, the Parties may consider this Convention as the basis for mutual
law enforcement cooperation in respect of the offences covered by this Convention.
Whenever appropriate, States Parties shall make full use of agreements or arrangements,- 165 -

including international or regional organizations, to enhance the cooperation between
their law enforcement agencies.
3. States Parties shall endeavour to cooperate within their means to respond totransnational organized crime committed through the use of modem technology.
OECD Convention-

Article 9 - Mutual Legal Assistance
1. Each Party shall, to the fullest extent possible under its laws and relevant treaties
and arrangements, provide prompt and effective legal assistance to another Party forthe purpose of criminal investigations and proceedings brought by a Party
concerning offences within the scope of this Convention and for non-criminal
proceedings within the scope of this Convention brought by a Party against a legal
person. The requested Party shall inform the requesting Party, without delay, of any
additional information or documents needed to support the request for assistance and,
where requested, of the status and outcome of the request for assistance.

- Recommendation no 7 of the Revised Recommendation of the Council on Combating
Bribery in International Business Transactions of 23 May 1997i) consult and otherwise co-operate with appropriate authorities in other countries ininvestigations and other legal proceedings concerning specific cases of suchbribery through such means as sharing of information (spontaneously or uponrequest), provision of evidence and extradition;

Monitoring of PEPs in the Indonesian Legal System

Corruption also occurs in the criminal justice chain, and then leads to the
obstruction of investigation or criminal proceedings and the revealing and or selling ofinvestigative information in order to help perpetrators to escape prosecution. It is obviousthat this constitutes a serious security threat to the country, public trust and democracy.

- 166 -

Anti-corruption action in the field of prosecution should derive from the recognitionof the massive scale of the crime, the international nature of business-criminal networks
and the increasing trend towards reinvestment of proceeds of crime and money laundering.
More sophisticated investigation techniques should be used on a regular basis, in order todetect and disrupt the whole transnational criminal networks rather than arresting only
individual criminals, typically the final exploiters, or the “smaller fish.”Effective Monitoring of Politically Exposed Persons who are entrusted withprominent public functions and potentially taking financial benefit from their position, isthe principal effective measure to prevent and take evidence for corruption cases. The
Financial Action Task Force (FATF) defines PEPs in the 2003 Revised Recommendations
as:1
Individuals who are or have been entrusted with prominent public functions in aforeign country, for example Heads of State or of government senior politicians, senior
government, judicial or military officials, senior executives of state owned corporations
important political party officials. Business relationships with family members or close
associates of PEPs involve reputational risks similar to those with PEPs themselves.
The definition is not intended to cover middle ranking or more junior individuals in theforegoing categories.
The UN Corruption Convention also deals with PEPs, stated:2(a) 'Public official shall mean: (i) any person holding a legislative, executive,administrative or judicial office of a State Party, whether appointed or elected, whether
permanent or temporary, whether paid or unpaid, irrespective of that person’s
seniority; (ii) any other person who performs a public function, including for a publicagency or public enterprise, or provides a public service, as defined in the domestic
law of the State Party and as applied in the pertinent area of law of that State Party;(iii) any other person defined as a 'public official' in the domestic law of a State Party.
However, for the purpose of some specific measures contained in chapter II of this
1 David Chaikin and Dr. Jason Sharman, Draft of APG/FATF ANTI-CORRUPTION/AML/CFT RESEARCH PAPER,
7 September 2007, p. 42
2 Article 2 of UNCAC- 167 -

Convention, 'public official' may mean any person who performs a public function orprovides a public service as defined in the domestic law of the State Party and as
applied in the pertinent area of law of that State Party.
Indonesia has 33 provinces and 471 regencies / municipalities, then in legal terms
Law number 28 of 1999 concerning the Government Executives who are Clean and Free
from Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism stipulated both 'Government Executives’ from
central and local government agencies could be defined as Politically Exposed Persons as
defined in international terms. Local Government Executives also potentially represent
higher risks because they are either are in a position to exert undue influence on decisions
regarding the conduct of business by private sector parties, or have access to stateaccounts and funds. Government Executives in Law number 28 of 1999 shall cover: 3
1. State Functionaries in the State Supreme Institutions;
2. State Functionaries in the State High Institutions;
3. Ministers;
4. Governors;
5. Judges;
6. Other State Functionaries under the Regulations and Legislation in force (e.g.
Ambassador, Vice-Governors, Regents or Mayors);
7. Other Functionaries having strategic functions in relation to the Organizing of theState under the Regulations and Legislation in force (e.g. Members of Director-board /Supervisory-board of the State / Local-Owned Enterprises, the Central Bank,
State-owned Universities, Echelon 1 of the Civil Service or equal in the Military or
National Police, Prosecutors, Investigators, Assistants of Judges, Chief and treasury
officers of National / Local Projects.).
3 Article 2 of Law number 28 of 1999 concerning the Government Executives who is Clean and Free
from Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism- 168 -

And the Law number 28 of 1999 obliged high-ranking public officers to:
1. pronounce an oath or pledge according to his/her religion before being appointed his
position;
2. be prepared for and accept any investigation of his/her assets before, during and after
holding his/her position.
3. report and announce his/her assets before and after serving in his/her position;

and according to Law number 30 of 2002 concerning KPK regulated mechanisms ofreporting and monitoring those obligations.

The Law on the Eradication of Corruption also contains a provision that can be used toprevent public officers from taking bribes. The Article is Article 38B that obligates a
corrupter defendant to explain the sources of his/her assets that are not written in theindictment filed by the Public Prosecutor. If the defendant fails to show the lawful sourcesof these assets, the court should deem the assets as having come from corruption, so thatthe judge has every right to order the confiscation of the assets.

Strengthening measures to combat corruption

Eradication of corruption can be implemented through preventive measures andrepressive actions. The Attorney General's Office, together with National Police andIndonesia's Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) have every interest to raiseawareness of anti-corruption concepts as well as to introduce good internationalanti-corruption practices. In the Indonesian legal system, corruption is declared an
extraordinary crime. Therefore the effort to eradicate corruption must no longer be justacting against a criminal act, corruption must be prosecuted against by extraordinarymeans. Indonesia’s strategy is cross-cutting through sectors and broadly targeting
inappropriate behaviour in all segments of society, especially our public officials. Law- 169 -

Enforcement is not only focusing efforts on punitive actions via legal enforcement
mechanisms, but also on preventive measures in the form of improvement of legal
systems, massive public campaigns and anti-corruption education. Implementation of
those measures is through the following strategic steps:
First, improve the legal and judicial systems in Indonesia. Since 1999, a number of laws
targeting corruption have been enacted.
Second, strengthen capacity building and build more effective institutions andanti-corruption bodies involving a wide-range of state auxiliary bodies.

Third, manage public perceptions and expectations in combating corrupt practices tomaintain wishes for a more rapid progress of corruption eradication.
Awareness of corrupt practices has increased and free media are constantly reporting on
corruption or suspected corruption.
As a part of corruption prevention, Law Enforcement Agency has a duty to
improve the accountability of public officials by requiring public officials to betransparent to the public in declaring their assets and by effective analysis of Public
Officials Wealth Reports. According to the duties on monitoring of prominent public
official, in performing the prevention tasks, KPK is authorized to conduct measures tomonitor PEPs in order to conduct checks on reports on the wealth of government
executives and gratuity.4 Within this report public officials are also obliged to give powerof attorney to KPK with the authority to open and check their bank accounts at any time.
Mechanisms of analysis of Public Officials’ Wealth Reports and investigations ofcorruption cases relating to the targets, can be described as follows:

4 Article 13 of Law number 30 of 2002 concerning KPK- 170 -

Supervisory Role in Fighting Corruption
In the role of government oversight by authorities in the eradication of corruption,emphasis is placed on preventive measures, without ignoring the role of the repressive
actions. Preventive actions are implemented through the government's internal controls
through: performance audit, monitoring, evaluation, Review, consultation, dissemination
and assistance (technical assistance). These activities make a recommendation to theleadership of government institutions and work units that are improving the internal
control system (organization, planning, policies, and internal Review), improvement ofmethods and activities directly for corrections of irregularities encountered in the field.
Follow-up on the recommendation of this oversight activity is an effective step to prevent
criminal acts of corruption. Consultation activities, socialization and assistance aimed at
improving the supervision capacity of the object in the performance of duties, particularly
in matters relating to legislation and financial administration.

Repressive actions, implemented through the provision of recommendations to theleadership of government agencies, in the form of sanctions in connection with thediscovery of corruption or loss of the state through the audit. In addition to the- 171 -

management recommendations can be a government agency delegation of audit results to
Jaw enforcers in case of corruption.
Conclusion
Low salaries for the civil service and parliament and a lack of effective governanceand internal-supervisory systems are key-factors which lead civil servants andparliamentarians to abuse their power and position by taking bribes. Political costs forpolitically exposed persons, to maintain stability, both nationally and locally, in manycases also lead them to take money from the state budget. Decentralisation and directelections for provincial and local officials, and for national and local parliaments during
the recent transition period, has caused political figures with lack of capacity andeducational backgrounds to be elected as governors, regents and members of parliament.
Consequently they cannot manage state budgets properly as stipulated by various
regulations.
The authority to monitor the bureaucracy by examining Public Officials' WealthReports helps the law enforcement agency with its duty to investigate corruption cases.
Cooperation with the Financial Intelligence Unit and government oversight authorities
aids in effective investigations.
Thank you.

- 172 -

PREVENTING CORRUPTION:
EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATION AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE MEASURES:A LAO PERSPECTIVE
Vilaysinh DAINHANSA∗

I. INTRODUCTION
As we are all aware, corruption is a very serious crime because it concerns
government officials, some in high-ranking positions. Corruption results in serious
social concern. It erodes the rule of law; undermines good governance; hampers
economic growth; inhibits property reduction; impinges upon competitive and fairbusiness conditions, and undermines democracy and human rights. Fighting andeliminating corruption is a very necessary, difficult and complex process. Fighting
corruption requires determination and persistence from political leadership; support
from citizens; and cooperation and support from the region, international community
and international organizations.
Like other countries, the Lao PDR is experiencing the serious problem of some
negative activities within the bureaucracy. While striving for economic excellence andrapid infrastructural development, we are not immune from corruption. Malpracticewithin Government offices, especially when poorly supervised and controlled, is a realconcern for any government.
II. THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK TO FIGHT CORRUPTION
A. Laws
Recognizing the damage caused by corruption, the government has issued various
decrees, orders, regulations, instructions and laws in order to prevent and eliminate
malpractice within government offices. An important step was enacting the law on anticorruption, dated 25 May 2005. This law had been applied as a basic legal instrument inconnection with the penal law for effectively combating and preventing fraud andcorruption in the country.
According to the Anti Corruption Law, “Corruption is the act of an official who
opportunistically uses his position, powers, and duties to embezzle, swindle [or] receive
bribes or any other act provided for in Article 10 of this law, [which act is committed] tobenefit himself or his family, relatives, friends, clan, or group and causes damage to theinterests of the State and society or to the rights and interests of citizens. The official
stipulated in this law means leaders at all levels, administrative staff, technical staff, thestaff of State enterprises, civil servants, soldiers, [and] police officers, including chiefsof villages and persons who are officially authorized and assigned to exercise any rightor duty”.
The law in connection with Penal law also determined acts of corruption which cantake the following forms:∗

Prosecutor, Deputy of the Head Division, Office of the Supreme People's Prosecutor, Lao PDR.

- 173 -

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Embezzlement of State property or collective property;
Swindling of State property or collective property;
Taking bribes;
Abuse of position, power, and duty to take State property, collective property or
individual property;
Abuse of State property or collective property;
Excessive use of position, power, and duty to take State property, collective
property or individual property;
Cheating or falsification relating to technical construction standards, designs,
calculations, and others;
Deception in bidding or concessions;
Forging documents or using forged documents;
Disclosure of State secrets for personal benefit;
Holding back or delaying documents.

B. Other Legal Acts
The Prime Minister’s Instruction No. 016/PM 31 August 1998 informs the ministers,
provincial government and mayor of the Vientiane Municipality, that they must educate
public servants and Lao citizens on more thrifty and cost-effective practices. The
instruction included but was not exclusive to: saving time, saving money, saving labourand material.
The Decree No 95/PM 5 December 1995 and the instruction from the Ministry of
Finance have been followed by civil servants when procuring items or services (i.e.
construction maintenance or repairing services).
III. MEASURES FOR PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION
A. Disciplinary Measures
The Law on Anti Corruption clearly regulated measures for prevention of corruption.
However, the implementation of this law has not been effective. The law coordination
between the prosecutors’ offices and the state inspection authority at the central andlocal level is very poor. Only a few minor cases of corruption reach the court. Manycases are solved using the disciplinary measures.
The following measures are stipulated in the law:
1. Role Model of Leaders, Art. 22 Law on Anti-Corruption
Government staff at all levels, especially the leaders, shall act as role models in thestrict implementation of the laws and regulations, and shall lead in having transparent
lifestyles and no corruption.
2. Duties of the State, Art. 23 Law on Anti-Corruption
In the prevention of corruption, the State has the following duties:
1.
To educate [the public] to respect and strictly comply with the laws andregulations;2.
To improve governance mechanisms to ensure [that they are] good, effective andtransparent;3.
To define and implement policies toward government staff at each level clearly- 174 -

4.
5.

and to ensure proper living conditions;
To strictly and immediately impose discipline and punishment on offenders
charged with corruption;
To promote the public, mass media, and social organizations to participate in theprevention and countering of corruption according to regulations.

3. Obligations of other Organizations, Art. 24 Law on Anti-Corruption
Party Organizations, State organizations, the Lao Front for National Construction,
mass organizations and social organizations, at all levels from central to local level,
including State-owned enterprises, shall implement their assigned roles, rights, andduties completely, strictly, [and] immediately, shall provide evaluation and feedback toeach other on the performance of functions by their government staff, shall conduct
regular education campaigns, and shall coordinate with concerned sectors to prevent,counter and deal with corruption within the scope of their responsibilities.
4. Prohibitions for Persons who have Position, Power and Duty, Art. 25 Law on AntiCorruption
It is prohibited for persons with position, power and duty to commit any of thefollowing acts:1.
To receive money, material items, or other benefits from any individual ororganization that relates to this functions which causes damage to the interest of
the State and society, or the rights and interests of citizens;2.
To cause difficulty, hold back, delay, or interfere in dealing with any activities;
3.
To open bank accounts outside the Lao PDR without informing the concerned
authority;
4.
To act as a consultant to private enterprises in relation to his decision-making
power for personal benefit;
5.
To act as a broker to individuals or organizations for personal benefit; forinstance, by lobbying in legal proceedings, or for projects or quotas;
6.
To use his position to borrow the money of any collective that is under his
responsibility for other persons, or to provide any guarantee to other persons toborrow money from the bank;7.
To recruit, post, or appoint one’s own wife, husband, children or close relative inleading positions in those functions under his responsibility that would create
conditions for corruption, such as positions in organizational and control
activities, finance and accounting, treasury function, warehouse keeping,procurement, and contracting;8.
To incorrectly posses or use any house or land belonging to the State orcollectives in order to benefit himself or his family, relatives, groups, or clan;
9.
To disclose any State or administrative secret;10.
To use money or property of the State or collective to organize parties, to use as
gifts or to allocate to staff or other persons in contravention of laws andregulations;11.
To suppress, threaten, or obstruct any person who brings a claim, or provides
feedback, including a person who provides negative information to concerned
persons;
12.
To refer to the reputation, position, power and duty of a higher authority or otherperson for personal benefit.

- 175 -

Any government official who infringes any of the above-mentioned prohibitions
will be subject to re-education and disciplinary measures; and if the infringement
constitutes an offence, the offender shall be punished as provided in the laws and shall
pay compensation for the damage he has caused.
5. Property Declaration, Art. 265 Law on Anti-Corruption
Before or after receiving a position, power, or duty, the person who holds such
position, power, or duty as provided in art. 8 of this act, must declare his or her own
property and debts, and that of the person’s husband or wife and children who are under
his or her charge, accurately, faithfully, and honestly and must be accountable under thelaw for the contents of the declaration.
The government has issued detailed regulation on the declaration of property anddebts.
Most of these above-mentioned measures are very important to combat corruption.
However, asset declaration is a crucial foundation for the action of the Inspection
Authority. As yet, such asset declaration has not yet been implemented in the Lao PDR,
and the drafting process is underway.
B. Administrative Reform
The Government, with the support of various international organizations, has
undertaken many reform initiatives aimed at restructuring the state apparatus; improving
government mechanisms, working conditions and administrative procedures; andminimizing the steps involved in granting licenses. The introduction of new reform
initiatives are helping to minimize administrative paper work. The reduction of theextensive paperwork trail or number of “doors people have to go through” is helping tominimize and eventually, eliminate, conditions in which corruption can exist. Anothermajor area of reform is the introduction of new mechanisms, such as auditing andinspection, which demand more open and accountable work practices.
The aim of the aforementioned measures is to efficiently combat and eliminate
corruption across the bureaucracy. During the process of reform, the government intends
to build a bureaucracy of good and honest civil servants. New civil service recruits will
be elected fairly through open examinations. Civil service managers will be elected andappointed through more open, equitable and democratic processes.
A major issue that currently exists in the government staff is poor salary,compensation and benefits for civil servants. To improve the overall administrativereform, the government intends to reform salaries and other compensation of civil
servants to ensure that civil servants can maintain a decent standard of living.
In 2009, the Lao PDR ratified the convention and took a step forward insuccessfully fighting corruption.
Most importantly, people can access information about anti-corruption measuresand efforts. All the State organizations have to put the opinion boxes in front of theiroffices or in public places to ensure that people who would like to report the illegal
activities of any person or organization, can exercise their rights without any fear orreport if they saw the Government officials do something unlawful
Very important is the hotline of the National Assembly during its plenary sessions.
There are many callers and their names are protected and not disclosed to the public.
There is a committee responsible for the inspection of the report. Then the concerned- 176 -

minister or authorities have to explain or reply to the question or concerns.
Moreover, the Law on State Inspection (2007) has been adopted by the national
assembly and is an instrument to allow the state inspection authority to successfully
inspect and investigate corruption, including creating the rule on asset re-declaration.
The Central Committee of the Party (CCOP) has also issued a party resolution for
all party members to avoid and not partake in corrupt or fraudulent activities. Morerecently, the political bureau of the Central Committee issued a regulation stipulating 14
prohibitions for high-ranking officials –– outlining activities that they must not be
involved in; defining their responsibilities; and specifying the accountability that falls
under their political leadership.
In addition, in the regulations, the government has established an organization thatis responsible for preventing corruption –– the state inspection authority. This
organization is responsible for fighting corruption in the bureaucracy; and ensuringtransparency and fairness in the management of public resources, as well as prevention
and investigation of corruption.
The government has established the State Audit Office, which is responsible for
auditing the usage of state resources and public finances across the country. To help
monitor corruption of state SOEs, the government has established the Office for
Business Promotion and Implementation. Within the Ministry of Finance, theDepartment of Inspection of Finance operates and is responsible for internal auditing
and monitoring the implementation of the state budget.
C. Awareness Raising
Important measures for prevention are raising the anti-corruption awareness of thegovernment officials and the public as a whole; without the participation of the public,
fighting corruption would not be successful. Anti-corruption awareness includes anticorruption awareness at school, colleges and universities. The anti-corruption campaign
for the public can be conducted through news agencies, and print and broadcast media.
In addition, anti-corruption awareness includes seminars for government officials.

IV. MEASURES FOR COUNTERING AND DEALING WITH CORRUPTION
1.
2.
3.

There are three types of measures to deal with corruption:
Educational Measures
Imposition of Disciplinary [Measures]
Case Proceedings

The use of measures to counter the corruption of any government staff who commits
an offence [relating to corruption] is based on the severity of the offence. If it is a minor
offence, there will be educational measures and imposition of disciplinary [measures]; if
it is a serious offence, it will be subject to legal proceedings as provided under the laws.
A. Education Measures
If, through the inspection, a minor offence is found, and the offender honestly
reports [the offence], and admits to the concerned organization that he or she committed- 177 -

the offence and returns all assets that he or she took away, he or she will be subject toeducational measures and a warning.
B. Imposition of Disciplinary [Measures]
Any government staff member who commits an offence [relating to corruption]
which is not serious, but who does not willingly report or who escapes from the offence,shall be subject to the following disciplinary [measures]:1. be criticized, and be admonished by the recording of a note in his or her biographicalfile;
2. be suspended from receiving any promotion, [raise in] salary level, or reward;
3. be removed from his or her position or be demoted;
4. be dismissed from office without receiving any emoluments.
The person who is subject to the imposition of disciplinary [measures] must return
completely all of the property that was unlawfully taken.
C. Case Proceedings
If, after the inspection and investigation, there appears to be solid information andevidence, the counter-corruption organization shall make a summary of the inspection
result, complete the file of the case and then send it to the public prosecutor to consider
bringing a prosecution in court.
In the event that the public prosecutor fails[,] without reason[,] to prosecute the casein court within 30 days from the date of receiving the case file, the counter-corruption
organization has the right to submit the file to the higher level of public prosecutor toconsider and deal with the issue.
V. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED IN FIGHTING CORRUPTION
A. Party Control Committee (PCC)
As the Lao PDR has a one party system, all organizations are under the leadershipof the Lao People’s Revolutionary Party. The PCC was formerly the main inspection
agency in Laos. It operates across all levels and branches of government, often withassistance of the State Inspection Authority. After the creation of the State Inspection
Authority and State Audit Office the role of PCC changed its focus to the party’s
activities. However, some legal and regulatory provisions still provide this organization
with a dominant role.
B. The State Inspection Authority (SIA)
The State Inspection Authority was established on 30 May 2001 by the decree of thePrime Minister, No. 98/pm but was replaced by the new decree No 10/PM. The principle
functions of SIA are to prevent corruption and to undertake the investigation on
corruption. The SIA inspects: the State’s management; the ministries and equivalentorganizations; the provinces; and capital city; state owned enterprises, and joint venture
private and public enterprises to ensure that they are operating in accordance with thelaws and regulations. This organization is attached to the Prime Minister’s Office andreports directly to the Prime Minister.

- 178 -

C. State Audit Office (SAO)The SAO was set up by the Prime Minister’s Decree No 174MP (5 August 1998).
This was considered a major step toward strengthening the supreme audit function in
Lao PDR. The SAO is responsible for auditing the accounts and certifying theappropriateness of the accounts of the organizations under state administration, in
addition to state owned enterprises, joint ventures and projects funded by the statebudget or international grants and loans. This organization is also attached to the Prime
Minister’s Office and reports directly to the Prime Minister.
D. The Organ of the Supreme People’s Prosecutor of the Lao PDR (OSPP)The OSPP of the Lao PDR is a supervisory State Organ and is responsible formonitoring and inspecting the proper and uniform adherence to laws by all ministries,
ministry-equivalent organizations, government organizations, the Lao Front for National
Construction, mass organizations, social organizations, local administration enterprises,
and citizens and for exercising the rights of prosecution.
E. The National Assembly
The National Assembly is theoretically a legislative body, and oversees theexecutive and judiciary organizations. The Commission on Economic and Financial
Affairs oversees the preparation and implementation of the State budget. The National
Assembly adopts, revises and oversees the implementation of the national annual budget.

VI. PROSECUTION OF CORRUPTION FROM 2009 - 2011
According to the report of the Criminal Department of the Office of the Supreme
People’s Prosecutor, there were the six following cases relating to corruption in 2009:1.
Three cases of embezzlement of state property or collective property;
2.
A case of swindling of state property or collective property;3.
Forging documents and using fraudulent documents;
4.
One case of bribery.
1.
2.
3.

In 2010, there were 15 cases:
Two cases of embezzlement of state property or collective property;
Five cases of abuse of state power;
Eight cases of forging documents and using fraudulent documents.

1.
2.
3.
4.

In 2011, there were eight cases:
A case of embezzlement of state property or collective property;
Two cases of swindling of state property or collective property;
Three cases of abuse of state power;
Two cases of forging documents and using fraudulent documents.

The most important cases are the illegal logging or timber smuggling cases in 2011
and investigations in those cases are underway:
According to KPL news, tax officials confiscated 30 cubic metres of dalbergia wood,
locally known as Mai Khayoung, valued at over 270,000 USD in Donesay area,- 179 -

Pakading District, along the road No. 13, on 25 and 27 August 2011.

More than 840,000 cubic metres of kayoung were confiscated in Champassak in
August 2011; the authorities arrested 106 people reportedly involved in illegal logging
and the investigation is ongoing. Four of the arrested are identified as Vietnamese andanother one as Chinese. Twenty-eight cars and six motorcycles used by the loggers werealso confiscated.
Of the seized wood, over 526,000 cubic metres was confiscated in Pathoumphone
District; 235,163 cubic metres in Mounlapamok district; 43,153 cubic metres in Paksong
district and 38,346 cubic metres in Khong district.
The Provincial State Inspection Authority said that illegal logging and trafficking ofendangered wood in Chmapsassack province has been widespread since 2010, especiallyin Laos-Cambodia border areas or areas between Sekong - Attapeua, and Attapeu –Champassck. Loggers are locals and foreigners.
Corruption is widespread in Laos’ forestry sector, explaining why national laws arewidely flouted. In 2010, a Government prosecutor admitted that the number of forestry
officials charged with taking bribes was increasing, with payments being made toinspectors to allow cutting in excess of quotas. It has been estimated that 20 per cent oflogging companies’ total overhead in Laos is comprised of bribes to senior officials tosecure quotas.

- 180 -

- 181 -- 182 -V. CONCLUSION
The Law on Anti-Corruption clearly regulated measures for prevention ofcorruption. However, the implementation of this Law is not effective. The coordination
between the prosecutor’s office and the State Inspection Authority at the central andlocal level is very poor. Only a few minor cases of corruption reach the Court. Manycases are solved using the disciplinary measures.
The Lao PDR has enough organizations involved in anti-corruption but coordinationis still not sufficient. Currently, many of the organizations duplicate or overlap theirwork. Each organization is facing a limited budget and has very few staff to be able toperform the necessary tasks involved with stamping out corruption.
Although the Law is a major step forward, there is still poor implementation of thelaw. Fighting corruption is still complex and challenging and corruption remains
difficult to detect. Fighting corruption requires, first of all, determination and persistencefrom the political leadership and participation from citizens. It is of great importancethat civil servants involved are educated in a moral and ethical code of conduct.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

6.

7.
8.
9.

Therefore, to fight corruption successfully, the following conditions are necessary:
Political commitment: political leaders must not partake in corruption activities
and need to provide a good example to their future counterparts;
An effective anti-corruption strategy;
An efficient anti-corruption system: this includes a basic legal framework toprevent and punish those involved in corrupt activities;
A rule on asset declaration for persons of power, duty and position must be inplace and must apply to such persons before and after they receive such position,
power, or duty;
Anti-corruption awareness-raising must be continuous and must include
government officials, prosecutors, judges, lawyers and the public. There is muchto be done through the organization of seminars, workshops, newspapers,
magazines and other possible and effective propaganda means;
Joint agreement on coordination between the Office of the Supreme People’s
Prosecutor and the State Inspection Agency and other organizations concerned
must be in place to restructure, strengthen and better coordinate among thoseinstitutions involved with detecting, investigating and prosecuting corruption;
Governance and administrative reform across the country is to be continued tohelp promote transparency, accountability and eradicate all kinds of autocracy;
Civil servants need to be honest to their country and to the population and thosepeople employed in the area of finance and accountancy needs to abide by therules and regulations that pertain to finance;
Finally, to prevent corruption, public participation is necessary and all state
activities need to be open and transparent.

- 183 -

EFFECTIVE MECHANISMS TO PREVENT CORRUPTION,
INSTANCES OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF
ANTI-CORRUPTION PREVENTION MEASURES IN THE LAO PDR
Phongsavanh Phommahaxay*

I. COUNTER-CORRUPTION ORGANIZATION
A. Status and RoleThe counter-corruption organization is a State organization that has the role of preventing andcountering corruption within the country by assigning the State Inspection Authority at the centrallevel and state inspection authorities at provincial levels to implement [this task].
The counter-corruption organization is an investigation organization and performs its duties
independently.
B. Organizational Structure
The organizational structure of the counter-corruption organization consists of:
1. [Counter-corruption organization] at central level;
2. [Counter-corruption organization] at provincial level.
 The counter-corruption organization at the central level has a status equal to a ministry. The headof such organization is appointed and removed by the same procedure as a member of thegovernment. The counter-corruption organization at the provincial level has a status equal to a
provincial division. The head of the counter-corruption organization at the provincial level isappointed or removed by the head of the counter-corruption organization at the central level,
after coordination with the provincial governor and city mayor.
C. Rights and Duties of the Counter-Corruption Organization at Central Level
The counter-corruption organization at the central level has the following main rights andduties:
1. To conduct studies relating to the prevention and countering of corruption, and thereafter tosubmit to the government for consideration;
2. To direct and inspect the implementation of activities relating to the prevention andcountering of corruption within the entire country;
3. To conduct activities to prevent and counter corruption among government staff within theentire country, especially government staff under the supervision and management of thecentral level and other government staff of organizations at the central level;
4. To conduct investigations into corruption by using measures that are defined in the law oncriminal procedure;
5. [During the period] when the inspection has yet to be completed, to propose the temporary
suspension [of a person under inspection] from his position or duty or [to propose that aperson under inspection] not be removed, appointed, or have his job swapped;
6. To liaise, coordinate, and cooperate with concerned sectors at the central and local level toperform its rights and duties;*

Technical Staff of the Head Division, Government Inspection Authority, Lao PDR.

- 184 -

7. To consider, decide, and use measures against the inspected person as provided in the laws;
8. To summarize the results of activities for the prevention and countering of corruption, andthen to periodically report to the Prime Minister and the National Assembly Standing
Committee;
9. To exercise such other rights and perform such other duties as provided by laws andregulations.
II. THE ANTI-CORRUPTION INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
In 2007, the Anti-Corruption Inspection Department has established activities under thesupervision leadership of the State Inspection Authority at the central level and has the status androle as follows:
A. Status and Role
The Anti-Corruption Inspection Department is a state organization, and a technicaldepartment of the State Inspection Authority at the central level and has a status equal to the office,departments, and state organization at the central level.
B. Organizational Structure
The organizational structure of the Anti-corruption Inspection Department consists of three
Divisions as follows:
1. Inspection Anti-corruption Division
2. Investigation Division
3. Receiving Property Declaration and Property Inspection Division
C. Prevention and Countering of Corruption
1. Continue to study and propose that the Government acknowledge the legal acts implementing
anti-corruption; the law of state inspection shall be studied concerning the asset-debt declaration of
officials.
2. Establish the policy-line dissemination of party, state regulations, especially the law of anticorruption and other law, which shall be related to officials, servants and all tribal people to beaware of damage and harm of anti-corruption, they shall be allowed to supply for the informationand participated in the inspection of interception and anti-corruption.
3. Propose that the Government establish and improve the central anti-corruption agency and the
local level to consolidate the organization, fully and efficiently recruiting the officials in eachdivision as required, and improve the qualification level for the officials.
4. To stipulate the project plan, procession and technique to conduct the interception and anticorruption activities completely, and assign the responsibility to the organization and the concerned
officials to implement the said effective project plan.
5. Increasing the inspection as soon as the corruption phenomenon is discovered, and modify the law
in response.
D. Conduct of Inspection
In 2010-2011 year, The Government Inspection Authority and Counter-Corruption
Organization at the central level and provincial level have conducted the inspection 101 target. We
can discover that much state property was damaged, and so on.

- 185 -

III. INSTANCES OF SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATIONS OF
ANTI-CORRUPTION PREVENTION MEASURES
By implementing responsibilities defined in the law and regulations, the Government
Inspection Authority has contributed great efforts in preventing, countering and addressing thecorruption practices as follows:z Administrative organizations at all levels have propagated and educated their personnel and civil
servants to grasp and understand the law, regulations and the Government’s order, especially thelaw and anti-corruption, by various means such as organizing workshops or seminars at various
levels in both central and local levels, and through the print and broadcasting media;z Organizational restructuring, enhancing mandates and good governance mechanisms at the
Ministries and some organizations;z Improving the policy towards staff and civil servants in order to gradually improve living
conditions such as salary systems, social welfare policy, and defining the uses of government
administrative budget and other policies.
IV. THE PROVISIONAL PLAN ON THE ANTI-CORRUPTION ACTIVITIES OF THE
GOVERNMENT INSPECTION AUTHORITY OF LAO PDR IN THE YEARS AHEAD
To enhance strong points and improve the weaknesses mentioned above, the Government
Inspection Authority has a provisional plan on anti-corruption activities as follows:
1. Advocate and raise awareness of laws and relevant legislation related to activities on
preventing and countering corruption by organizing seminars and widely disseminate theoutcome through the media;
2. Strengthen public administration at all levels, deploy staff according to job description,
determine a clear mandate, rights and duties; study and implement appropriate policy toensure transparent performance;
3. Study how to improve the strength and comprehensiveness of the steering or supervisioncommittee, supporting mechanisms and the mandate of the Anti-Corruption
Organization at central and provincial levels;
4. Establish a strategic plan on countering corruption for 2011-2020 and a decree on
declaration of property of civil servants;
5. Revise some laws and legislation to comply with the implementation of the International
Convention;
6. Cooperate and share lessons on prevention and countering of corruption activities with
regional and international friendly countries as well as international organizations.

- 186 -

WAR AGAINST PERCEPTION:
THE ROLE OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN GAINING PUBLIC SUPPORT
Ahmad Khusairi Yahaya∗“Social media can draw in lots of people quickly through network effects. Perhaps tooquickly for most hierarchical security agencies. Research on the properties of networks
demonstrated that they can be powerful tools for encouraging anti-social opinion andbehavior. Social scientists at Syracuse University recently theorized that it would only take 10
percent of population distributed by social networks to the right places to radically alter
public opinion and large scale behaviors.”“The uprising of political revolution across North Africa managed to topple repressive
regimes and demand political voice, much to the credit of the new social media. By utilizing
YouTube, Face book, Twitter and other platforms to conveys images and first-hand reports ofthe events, protestors were able to connect in solidarity with supportive observers fromaround the world.”
Source: Reuters May 9, 2011
I. INTRODUCTION
Internet based social media has profoundly changed the way we engage with others in
the private and public sphere. Social activists, political campaigners, Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGOs), government and business communities increasingly make use of theconnective power of these communication tools to mobilize support, produce knowledge,
disseminate information, deliver services and engage with their stakeholders. Inspiring
examples for innovation, use of social media tools for fighting corruption and fostering
support from the public have emerged all over the world.
The uprising of political revolution across North Africa, which managed to topple
repressive regimes and demand political voice, happened much to the credit of the new social
media. By utilizing YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other platforms to convey images andfirst-hand reports of the events, protestors were able to connect in solidarity with supportive
observers from around the world. This is an example of how effective and powerful the social
media are in shaping today’s public opinion towards the government and its agencies.
Corruption has become a major issue and an important weapon to topple leaders andgovernment. The negative perception created by the opposition towards leaders and existing
government were disseminated through social media. The younger generation has become an
important target group for them in order to shape antagonism and hatred against a government.
A government will subsequently be labelled and perceived as corrupted and undemocratic.
War against corruption nowadays, has become more complicated when every action andpolicy introduced by any said agency is being politicized. Based on Malaysia’s experience,
corruption has become an important political agenda for the opposition to win the heart ofvoters, especially amongst the young voters between 21 to 40 years old. The practice of using∗

Chief Senior Assistant Commission, Director of Policy, Research and Planning Division, Malaysian AntiCorruption Commission (MACC).

- 187 -

corruption as political agenda has subsequently created a strong impact and it was afterwardreflected in the outcome of the 12th General Election when five of the so called stronghold
states of the Government Coalition Parties fell into the hands of the opposition.
Although, the Government of Malaysia has always regarded addressing the threat andproblems of corruption since its independence in 1957 as its main agenda and an on-goingcommitment, but these efforts indeed were toned down by the negative perception generated
by the oppositions. The Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA Malaysia), an enforcement agency
established to fight corruption, was nevertheless perceived as a “toothless tiger” which isdependent, ineffective, biased and is one-sided particularly towards the ruling party.
The Government of Malaysia under the premiership of Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul
Razak, Prime Minister of Malaysia has unflaggingly performed numerous actions for the
benefits of the country. One of the tremendous actions taken by the honourable Prime
Minister is to transform the entire government’s machineries through the strategic actions
plan namely the Government Transformation Programme (GTP).
Under the GTP, six key priority areas have been identified where challenges within eacharea have been divided into short-term priorities and long-term issues. These areas ofdevelopment are known as the National Key Result Areas (NKRAs) as below:•
Reducing Crime•Fighting Corruption•
Improving Student Outcomes•
Raising Living Standards of Low-Income Households•
Improving Rural Basic Infrastructure•
Improving Urban Public Transport
One of the main priorities under the National Key Result Areas is the systematic andconcerted measures taken by the Government to fight corruption.
Getting to the root of the anti-corruption establishment, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption
Commission or commonly known as the MACC has officially begun its operation on 1
January 2009 replacing the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) of Malaysia established in year
1967. The MACC is officially established through the enactment of the MACC Act 2009. The
transformation of MACC creates a new dimension of anti-corruption efforts in Malaysia withthe establishment of five independent committees as a check and balance mechanism tooversee the entire system of MACC including operation, prosecution, prevention,
administration, etc. The members consisting of 42 persons who are appointed by the King and
the Prime Minister of Malaysia include Members of Parliament from both the ruling andopposition parties, former Chief Justice, former Solicitor General, prominent lawyers,
members of the NGOs, from the academia, former Auditor General and others who haverendered distinguished public service or have achieved distinction in their respective
professions. The five (5) independent oversight bodies are:
•
•
•
•
•

Anti-Corruption Advisory Board;Special Committee on Corruption;
Complaints Committee;
Operations Review Panel; andConsultation and Corruption Prevention Panel- 188 -

Although the government had shown its strong political will in the fight against corruption,
this does not hamper the other parties to generate stronger perception of war against the
government through social media.
II. SOCIAL MEDIA: A NEW WEAPON OF WAR AGAINST PERCEPTION“We are in the midst of a communications upheaval more significant than the
introduction of the printing press. The change began in rarefied academic circles in the 1960s,
gathered pace with the emergence of the World Wide Web in the 1990s, but exploded into its
most decisive phase in 2004 with the arrival of Web 2.0. Web 2.0 is about opening up theinternet to ordinary users, where they add and share their content. Is signifies the transfer ofcontrol of the internet, and ultimately the platform for communication, from the few to many.”
Dr. Rob Brown, York University 2009
A. Facebook
o There are more than 600 million Facebook users as of January 2011;o If it was a country, it would have been the third largest country in the world;o Facebook monthly growth in 2011 is 3.5%;o According to Social Media Today as of April 2010, it is estimated that 41.6% of the U.S.
population has a Facebook account;
o 50% of active FB users log on to FB in any given day;o An average user has 130 friends;
o People spend over 700 billion minutes per month on Facebook;o Average users create 90 pieces of content each month;o More than 30 billion pieces of content (web links, news, stories, blog posts, notes, photosetc) shared each montho There are more than 200 million active users currently accessing FB through their mobile
phones.
B. Twittero
Since its creation, in March 2006, Twitter has gained popularity worldwide and isestimated to have 190 million users;o
Generates 650 million tweets a day;oHandles over 800,000 search queries per day;o
It is sometimes described as the “SMS of the Internet;o
The average number of tweets per hour is around 1.3 mins;o
At the current rate, Twitter will process almost 10 billion tweets in a single year;o93.6% of users have less than 100 followers, while 92.4% follow less than 100 people.
C. YouTuberdo 3 largest site on Internet;
o Number 1 largest video site on the web;o 100 million visitors per month;o 5 billion video streams every month;o 15 hours of video uploaded every minute;o With nearly 3.5 million people visiting the site every single day, the type of videos they
watch and interact with, has a huge impact on the way they view the world;tho How can we forget the videos of January 25 Egypt Revolution in YouTube?

- 189 -ooooExceeds 2 billion views a day;
24 hours of video uploaded every minute;
Every person spends 15 mins a day on YouTube;
Localized in 23 countries across 24 different languages.
III. MACC’S STRATEGIC PLAN
IN GAINING PUBLIC SUPPORT VIA SOCIAL MEDIAThe biggest challenge faced by the MACC in the year 2010 was to prevail in the eyes ofthe public as being independent, transparent and professional in its efforts to combat
corruption. The MACC strategic campaign in enhancing its public support and to reverse thenegative perception started intensively right from January 2010.
This is aligned with the MACC 2010 Aspiration that outlines “strengthening confidence
and enhance domestic and international perception on the effectiveness of the MACC in
combating corruption based on the principles of independence, transparency andprofessionalism.”Social media such as Frenz of MACC, Facebook, Twitter, Blog, YouTube, etc. weredeveloped and used consistently to disseminate information and answers (“our side ofstories”) relating to any news or issues highlighted by the public. By providing such platform,
members of the public could actively participate and obtain facts from discussion generated
through the social media. This will slowly reverse the negative perception created by theparties bearing their own personal agendas.
A. Frenz of MACC
Frenz of MACC (FOMACC) is an in-house developed SMS Gateway system that acts as
a communication tool to disseminate information to various people on educational and anticorruption campaign materials. The system currently runs SMS messages and is in the
progress stage of development to cater email groups as well. The system in the near future
will be able to disseminate short messages to recipients’ mobile as well as full text articles torecipients’ email.
The FOMACC was officially launched on 23rd April 2010 by the Chief Commissioner of
MACC. There are currently 2,000 registered recipients and it has the capability of running noless than 10,000 recipients. Recipients are segmented into groups such as MACC officers,
Public Relations Officers of various departments, MACC retiree, Media Journalists, Media
Editors, Head of Federal Government Departments, Head of State Government Departments,
Government Officials, Bloggers, Higher Learning Institution’s Anti-Corruption Secretariat,
Civil Society, the members of MACC Independent Oversight Bodies, Politicians and last but
not the least is the Certified Integrity Officers Alumni. The recipients are considered as key
communicators and they on receiving the messages could forward it to other unregistered
recipients.
The system is being managed by an administrator, who composes the text messages in no
more than 160 characters. The text message is typed in the field provided in the desk-top or
Notebook of the administrator. The administrator then sends the text message to the SMS
Server which manipulates the message in the back-end server (SMS Database) and returns themessage back to the SMS Server which then relays the message to SMS Center at the- 190 -

respective Telecommunication Companies (TELCO) through SMS Gateway. The SMS
Center then sends the message to respective recipients or users.
At present FOMACC uses a modem which has 8 SIM card slots. The modem could be
added on as the need arises. Thus, the sending of the SMS to users takes much shorter time.
The messages sent from Keycomm server queues and are sent to SMS Center immediately,
then to users. At the moment, Malaysia has 6 main Telcos namely TM, Celcom, Maxis, DIGI,
UMobile, and iTune. All these telcos have their own respective SMS Centers.
FOMACC is used to send anti-corruption quotes, articles, issues, functions, campaigns,
success stories, statistics, etc. Some of the messages sent thus far:i.
Let’s make a difference – fight corruption
By: Dato’ Abu Kassim Mohamed, Chief Commissioner of MACC
ii.
Impersonation as MACC Officer and the demand of RM50,000 from mayor. Fullreport view at www.sprm.gov.my.
iii.
Two plead guilty on charges of impersonation as MACC officer to solicit corrupt
payments. Sentenced to 1 day imprisonment and fined RM10,000 i/d 15 months
imprisonment.
iv.
Fight against corruption: there shall not be consideration on political parties whether
ruling or opposition, race, gender and sector – Tun Hamid, former Chief Justice of Malaysia.
v.

I will not walk through my mind with their feet – Mahatma Ghandivi.

Fight against giver campaign: Report any offer of bribe to MACC at 1-800-88-6000.

vii.
MACC and Government Inspectorate of Vietnam signed MoU to enhance cooperation
to fight corruption.
viii. Austrian ambassador to Malaysia, Andrea Wicke suggests cooperation between
Malaysia Anti-Corruption Academy and similar academy in Austria.
FOMACC is an innovative tool in out-reach program to educate and deter any potential
offender of corruption by constantly reminding registered and unregistered recipients ofmessages, the consequences of corruption. Likewise, messages sent to individuals who havebeen investigated for offences of corruption but not charged due to lack of evidence helps toprevent them from involving themselves in corrupt practices for fear that they are being
watched. Hence, it becomes a prevention effort.
B. Facebook
Facebook is a very popular social network in the present days. It caters to the young andyouth generations. It does attract a large number of fans and is fast becoming a new platform
for interaction. It is a very effective mode of interactive communication and has a wide
coverage.
As an enforcement entity, the MACC has to engage such social network in
communicating and educating the public on the efforts of anti-corruption. It is another form of- 191 -

out-reach tool in education and dissemination of information to deter individuals from corrupt
practices. Hence, the MACC has developed and launched its very own facebook page on 24
July
2010.
For
viewing,
one
can
visit
the
MACC’sfacebookat
http://www.facebook.com/pages/SPRM.
At present the MACC Facebook is registered with a total of 5,155 fans. It is fast growing
and tremendously gaining popularity especially amongst younger generation aged between 18
and 24. However, at the moment the dominant age group participating in discussions is
between 25 and 35 which takes up about 43% of the total followers.
The social network hits between 100 and 150 active participation per issue or discussion.
The MACC Facebook has a discussion board which periodically discusses matters on arrests,
community education information, current issues, guidance on anti-corruption, offences andsentences on corruption, etc.
C. Other MediaThe MACC has also developed and engaged in other communication mediums such as
blog-site, twitter, YouTube, and flickr.
The MACC’s official blog-spot can be viewed at http://www.ourdifferentview.com. This
site has attracted more than 65,000 viewers and has many articles and information one canlook for in countering new issues on the MACC and on corruption. Most of the articles in thesite were written and posted by MACC’s own officers. The site has also been linked by manyother independent blog-spots.
The MACC also uses twitter to disseminate short and precise information on corruption
and can be accessed by logging on into http://twitter.com/odvmacc.
The MACC has also developed and engaged YouTube to disseminate information.
Speeches, recordings of presentations and views of the Chief Commissioner and otherprominent figures on issues of corruption can be viewed through the
http://www.youtube.com/odvmacc.
The MACC also uses Flickr to disseminate information on all of MACC’s activities. It is
no doubt another popular site to disseminate photographic messages to the public. The site
can be viewed at http://www.flickr.com/photos/ourdifferentview.
IV. THE IMPACT OF USING SOCIAL MEDIA IN BUILDING POSITIVEPERCEPTION
The MACC and the issue of corruption had become important topics discussed almost
everyday in both the mainstream and the blogs. Approximately 500 write-ups in the form ofnews, articles, and comments are posted every month with an average of 16 write-ups per day.
For the year of 2010, the MACC had appointed a Media Monitoring Consultant tomonitor the entire media including the mainstream and social media. All the write-ups arefurther categorized into three categories which are Positive, Neutral and Negative.
The following are examples of each category:- 192 -

A. Positive
 PUTRAJAYA: MACC - ACB Brunei cooperation in investigation resulted in 33 arrested
for smuggling diesel to Brunei.


KUALA LUMPUR: Director of a company convicted under the offence of offering
RM3,000 to a civil servant. Sentenced to 8 years imprisonment and fined RM15,000.



PETALING JAYA: Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd (KTMB) or Malayan Railways Limited
is being investigated by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) for
allegedly awarding a multi-million ringgit contract to an "under qualified" company. The
MACC investigation director Datuk Mustafar Ali confirmed that a team of officers wassent to obtain whole lots of documents in connection with the allegation. He, however,declined further to comment when asked on investigations into the case.

B. Neutral
 KUALA LUMPUR: Austrian Ambassador to Malaysia, Andrea Wicke suggests
cooperation between Malaysia Anti-Corruption Academy and similar academy in Austria.


PUTRAJAYA: Dr Ponthip agrees to attend the TBH inquest and government of Malaysia
assures her safety.



PETALING JAYA: The government must give its full backing to the Malaysian AntiCorruption Commission (MACC) if it wants graft to be stamped out. Apart from such a
mandate, the commission must be accorded sufficient financial allocations and the right
personnel to fulfil its role as the country's graft buster. These were among therecommendations by former MACC advisor Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam, who said thecommission was not being seen as a premier government agency.

C. Negative
PUTRAJAYA: The Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission yesterday issued an apology
to the disabled community over a remark made by its head of prosecution Datuk Abdul
Razak Musa during the Teoh Beng Hock inquest on Friday.



KUALA LUMPUR: A former assistant superintendant of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption
Commission (MACC) was sentenced to six months' jail by the High Court here after the
court reverted a Sessions Court decision which had acquitted him for allegedly accepting aluxury watch from a 'middleman' linked to former Selangor state executive councillor
Datuk Saidin Tamby in 1998

KUALA LUMPUR: A senior Customs officer assisting in the investigation of a graft casefell to his death from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) building in
Jalan Cochrane, this morning.

- 193 -

IV. RESULT ON MEDIA MONITORING
January 2010
292

299

300
250
200

112

150

Tone of Articles

100
50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

February 2010
273
300
250
200

120

150

Tone of Articles

11

100
50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

March 2010
305

324

350
300
250
200
Tone of Articles

150
100

6

50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative- 194 -

April 2010
281

344

350
300
250
200
Tone of Articles

150
100

7

50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

May 2010
493
500

329

400
300
Tone of Articles

200

13

100
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

June 2010
255
232

300
250
200
150

Tone of Articles

100

3

50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative- 195 -

July 2010
328

461

500
400

46

300

Tone of Articles

200
100
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

August 2010
493

329

500
400
300
Tone of Articles

200

13

100
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

September 2010
281

344

350
300
250
200
Tone of Articles

150

7

100
50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative- 196 -

October 2010
292

299

300
250
200
150

Tone of Articles

100

12

50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

November 2010
292

344

350
300
250
200
Tone of Articles

150

17

100
50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

December 2010
289

299

300
250
200
150

Tone of Articles

100

10

50
0

Positive

Neutral

Negative

The above results especially in reducing the negative write-ups on the MACC had shown
an excellent progress. By using social media as a platform of providing fast and accurate
responses to all issues related to the MACC, the MACC managed to reduce the negative
write-ups in January 2010 from 112 write-ups to a minimum average of 15 negative reporting
through out the year of 2010.
The MACC had identified advantages of using the social media for anti-corruption
campaigns and platforms for building MACC’s image and reputation as follows:oIncreasing social networking between the MACC and the targeted group;- 197 -

Developing public trust by providing accurate responses to any queries;
Gathering information and feedback directly from the public;
Free of charge;
Forming support group;
Reaching out to bloggers who have very high influence on the society especially the cybercommunity;o A platform for voicing out opinion and ideas regarding issues relating to the commission;o Speed of information flow; ando Personal, engaging and involving.
o
o
o
o
o

VI. CONCLUSION
The responsibility of combating corruption in this era of technology has become morechallenging and complex. The advancement of technology creates a huge platform for fast
and accurate responses. It sometimes provides a huge opportunity for certain groups of people
with evil intensions to disseminate lies and hatred information in order to weaken the imageof enforcement agency such as the MACC. By weakening the credibility and reputation of socalled “sensitive and important” agency, it will also reflect the negative image and credibilityof the government. In order to win a war on corruption, the commission must also take into
consideration the war against perception. Without public support and confidence, there is no
way the commission can manage to achieve its vision and mission in creating a corruptionfree society.

- 198 -

Eradicating Corruption: The Roles and Initiatives of Royal Malaysia Police

Mr. Azha
In the era of globalization, the scope of policing has widened and Royal Malaysia
Police (RMP) needs a paradigm shift to meet the present and future challenges. While
RMP is approaching 204 years old this year, this institution needs to reinvent and rebrandto stay continuously relevant. Currently (until 30th September 2011) the population of the
RMP stands at 110,594 police personnel, with eight departments namely Management
Department, Criminal Investigation Department, Commercial Crime Investigation
Department, Narcotics Crime Investigation Department, Internal Security and Public
Order Department, Special Branch Department, Counter Terrorism Department andLogistics Department.
A key challenge for RMP is to regain the good image that has been seriously
undermined in the last decade due to mounting public perception of corruption and abuseof power, the result which came from the public inquiries conducted by a Royal
Commission in 2004-2005 and submitted its first report on the 15th May 2005. As such,our 5th Prime Minister of Malaysia saw and stressed a few challenges for the RMP to
confront, inter alia:a) To increase people’s confidence in RMP through a change in police mindset
and values, vigorous action against corruption and providing a more caring
and humane service to the community.
b) To enhance the effectiveness of work process through such measures asmodernizing work procedures, restructuring organization and deployment, andreducing bureaucracy.
1- 199 -

c) To strengthen the accountability and the sense of responsibility of seniorpolice officers for the performance of their respective departments and units aswell as their subordinates by implementing measures such as leadership by
example, instilling discipline and sensitivity towards the needs and morale ofthe staff.
A second Commission was set up in 2005 to investigate the standard operatingprocedures in relation to body searches after a video clip of a body search of a woman by
the police was released by the media. This brought new issues such as the organizational
ethics and accountability to the forefront. Studies conducted in 2008 found that thebiggest challenge faced by RMP was the issue of integrity. This was based on thestatistics that out of 6,355 disciplinary cases involving police officers between 2002-2008,
93.5% were on issues of integrity while only 6.5% were on competency.
According to research conducted in 2010 by Transparency International(Malaysia) on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) and Global Corruption Barometer(GCB) based on the score of (1 – not corrupt,

5- very corrupt), the police force wasperceived as the most corrupted institution by scoring 4.1 compared to other agencies.
May I pick the statement of Tim Newburn (1999: 14) on the corruption issue that
happened in the police force, “what is corrupted is the ‘special trust’ invested in theoccupation”. Therefore, we (RMP) are taking a very serious view and going full strides
forward on the strategies to drive change and evolve our police force according to our
vision to become “A leading enforcement agency of integrity, competent andcommitted in making the nation safe, peaceful and prosperous”.

2- 200 -

I. Malaysia’s Government Transformation Programme (GTP) - National Key Result
Areas (NKRAs)
In 2010, the Prime Minister of Malaysia marked the introduction andimplementation of Malaysia’s Government Transformation Programme (GTP) and a newchapter in our young nation’s history. This bold and unprecedented programme was aimed
to radically transform the way the Government worked so we could better serve thepeople. This entire programme is based on the premise of the government’s commitment
to “People First, Performance Now” under the 1Malaysia banner. There are six (6) pillars
or National Key Result Areas (NKRAs) in the GTP based on the people’s most pressing
concerns. These are Reducing Crime, Fighting Corruption, Improving Student
Outcomes, Raising Living Standards of Low-Income Households, Improving Rural Basic
Infrastructure and Improving Urban Public Transport. With the implementation of theinitiatives under the Fighting Corruption NKRA, the government has continued todemonstrate dedication towards eliminating corruption and graft in the nation.
The Fighting Corruption NKRA focuses on three key areas that are most prone
to corruption, which are regulatory and enforcement agencies, government procurement
and grand corruption. Under the Fighting Corruption NKRA for ‘Regulatory and
Enforcement Agencies’, RMP is working together with the other four enforcement
agencies –– namely the Malaysia Anti Corruption Commission, Royal Malaysia Custom
and Excise Department, Road Transport Department and Immigration Department –– andsubsequently came up with five initiatives on fighting corruption in the respective
agencies;i.

To Strengthen and Empower Compliance Units in Law Enforcement
Agencies –– RMP (Disciplinary Unit under Inspector General Police,
Compliance and Monitoring Unit). This unit will emphasise enforcement3- 201 -

to eradicate corruption abuse of power and compliance of rules andregulations.
ii.

Rotation of Staff in “Hot Jobs” – This involves rotating enforcement
personnel between jobs or workplace (in high-risk areas / jobs) to prevent
them from developing close relationships with and collaborating withcriminal syndicates / organisations and to strengthen good governance andvalues. A list of hot-jobs which have been identified in RMP are the
Criminal Investigation Department –– The Secret Societies / Gambling /Vice Unit, Intelligence Unit and the Police Traffic Department.

iii.

Reduce Bureaucracy / Institutionalise Control Mechanism e.g. ‘1
Reporting’ System – With the integration of ‘Police Reporting System’(PRS-for crime) and ‘Cars Accident Reporting System’ (CARS), everyone
is able to lodge their car accident report in any police station which will
benefit the people by providing more efficient and transparent systemusing the latest ICT Technology by RMP.

iv.

Reduce Discretion Through Automation – To reduce ‘direct contact’ /‘human interaction’ between the people (client) and police officer which isconsidered as one of the initiatives to reduce opportunities for corruption.
Through automation the police can increase the effectiveness of the ‘end
result’ by reducing the time on the service given and service rendered will
be more efficient, accurate and cannot be manipulated, e.g. Narcotics
Information Management System (SPIN), a biometric system mechanism
used by Narcotics Department, RMP to prevent data manipulation to those
who are under the ÂPolice Supervision OrdersÊ (OKP) under the Dangerous
Drugs Act 1952. By using this system, a systematic database will be able
to determine the number of registered OKPs compared to the manual4- 202 -

system which will increase effectiveness in monitoring them and prevent
any malpractice by any police personnel on this issue.
v.

Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) 2010 – to encourage our informers
or officers to break the ‘blue code of silence’ against fellow officers whoare involved in corrupt practices, criminal acts or other misconduct. Under
this act, the public are also encouraged to inform the relevant authorities ofany form of misused power/misconduct by police personnel. The Act also
provides immunity to informers from civil or criminal charges.

Apart from the five initiatives above, the RMP also came forward with a few more
additional initiatives, i.e. rewarding police officers when rejecting bribes. The rewards
could be monetary or a letter of commendation. RMP has shown very impressive resultswith the highest statistics of 160 cases for the year 2009 until September 2011. The
awareness among enforcement officers to reject bribes can be seen from the Malaysia
Anti Corruption Commission’s statistics, i.e. from the total arrest of 944 bribe offenders
in 2010. Arrests of those who gave bribes last year were 414 persons (43.8%) compared
to only 108 in 2009, making it the highest number in history.
The quarterly publication of ‘Integrity Bulletin’ containing advice and measurestaken in upholding integrity in the police force is another continuous campaign toeradicate corruption and abuse of power in the RMP. Initiating the Anti Corruption Poster
is part of our campaign to promote and enhance the value of integrity among police
personnel and the public. These additional initiatives will increase the public awarenessand they will be more informed on the dangers of giving and receiving bribes. In order tostay relevant, RMP has little choice but to work hard on enhancing the integrity not onlyof its human capital but also in its work culture and policing procedures.

5- 203 -

II. Inspector General Police Secretariat (Disciplinary Department) of Royal
Malaysia Police
Since 1976, RMP had practiced a system of ‘check and balance’ in order tomaintain a fair, transparent and full compliance with rules and regulations when carryingout their duties in uniform. This unit, then known as the Disciplinary Unit waspermanently reformed as the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Secretariat (Disciplinary
Department) by virtue of IGP Standing Orders KPN 87/8 dated 25th March 2004 and put
in direct command of the Inspector General of Police with a specific role to discipline the
Police Force which includes investigation of violations and subsequent action against
defaulters.
The reformation of IGP Secretariat (Disciplinary Department) under direct orders
from the Inspector General of Police shows that RMP gives priority to discipline andintegrity in order to achieve its vision and mission. The objective of this secretariat is tostrengthen police integrity towards a fair, efficient and effective police service.

III. The Role of Inspector General Police Secretariat (Disciplinary Department) of
Royal Malaysia Police
This division is headed by the Deputy Head of the IGP Secretariat (Disciplinary
Department) and has a wide framework supported by a strong team of legally qualified
and experienced officers to ensure compliance with laws, procedures and best practices
by the police personnel. This division consists of the following:a) The Implementation and Enforcement Unit
To carry out inspection on all the police units to ensure compliance with rules andregulations and subsequent remedial action or disciplinary proceedings. Within
6- 204 -

this unit is also the Operations cell which carries out special operations based on
information of corruption, abuse of power or authority or any other dereliction of
duty. This unit also works in tandem with the Narcotics Department in random
testing of police officers for suspected drug abuse to deter officers from living
unacceptable lifestyles, which will likely to lead to corruption, criminal behavior
or unethical behavior as police personnel.

b) Inspection / Monitoring “Drugs and Disciplinary Control System”
This system, which has been in place since the 1980s for the rank and filepersonnel, has been extended to include senior officers up to Superintendent. Thisis a close control system whereby every officer is put in charge and supervises a
few subordinates. Supervision in this respect is not limited to on-duty hours but
encompassing off-duty hours including lifestyle, friends, family, property anddrug abuse.

c) The Investigation Unit
This Unit is responsible for carrying out internal investigations which are based on
two factors;i.

Complaints
Investigations are based on complaints made by the public or bypolice personnel themselves, either by letters, walk-ins, telephone,through the Government Public Complaints Bureau (BPA) or any
other sources such as emails, faxes and texting.

ii.

Internal Misconduct

7- 205 -

Investigation based on internal misconduct and dereliction of duty.
All investigations are conducted without fear or favour.
Investigation is also carried out at the contingent/state level where
the final action is determined either by the State Chief Police
Officers. Cases of interest are investigated and dealt with at theFederal level, and final decisions are made by either the Deputy
Inspector General or Inspector General Police.

d) The Intelligence Unit
This unit provides intelligence and technical support for the Operations andInvestigations Unit.

e) Complaints Unit
The Complaints Unit’s primary function is to attend to and receive complaints andinformation from the public or by police officers. All complaints and information
are treated in strict confidence. All follow up actions are commenced without
jeopardizing the identity of the complainant.

f) Declaration of Assets Unit
This Unit is solely responsible for the management, investigation and recording of
declarations of assets of all Police Officers. Under the Public Officers (Conduct
and Discipline) Regulations 1993, all civil servants are required to declare theirassets (on joining the service, procurement, disposal and when otherwise required).
RMP has made this process more stringent including by having a dedicated unit tomonitor all asset declarations and conduct investigations. RMP officers must make8
- 206 -

full disclosures when making declarations unlike other civil servants who only
need to make a basic declaration.
RMP will continue to strengthen its efforts towards more serious and effective
measures, with greater intensity and focus in driving out corrupt practices in the police
force. Society’s expectation of RMP is very high indeed. They not only want a competentpolice force but expect police officers to be of high integrity. Police actions willwithstand scrutiny of the public if decisions are made with integrity, for the sake of peaceand security alone and nothing else. Sir Robert Peel, the father of modern policing in
England had said:“The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public
approval of police actions…”
No police organisation, regardless of its past glory or history, can claim success without
the support, cooperation and understanding from members of the public and community.
RMP still has much work to do in its fight against corruption to regain public confidence
and trust. There is no “one size fits all solution”. We must change and keep on developing“new formula and medicine” to fight “corruption’s disease” so as to change people’s
negative perception towards RMP. Though it is not an overnight job, we strongly believewith the Government’s will, commitment and support in the form of a zero-tolerance
policy towards corruption (political will), sharing and integrating the value of integrity
among all my fellow officers, we are on the right track towards a clean, transparent, fair
and trustworthy law enforcement agency for the people. Thank you.

9
- 207 -ADMINISTRATIVE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE MEASURES FORPREVENTING CORRUPTION IN MYANMAR
San WinDirector of the Union Attorney General’s Office,
The Republic of the Union of Myanmar
I. INTRODUCTION
In the time of globalization, corruption is a serious threat all over the world and it is a
widespread phenomenon which undermines good governance, erodes justice and the rule of law,
hampers the sustainable development of a nation and distorts competitive conditions in business
transactions. It also undermines ethical values, may even endanger national security andsometimes generates social unrest. Corruption usually links with other forms of crime,
particularly organized crime involving money laundering and vast quantities of assets. Nowadays,
corruption spreads out beyond the borders of a country. That is why most nations are striving to
get rid of corruption and all of us are fully aware of the fact that the corruption issue cannot be
solved unilaterally. As no country in the world is free from the malpractice of corruption, allcountries need to cooperate and coordinate in combating corruption.
In this seminar, the main theme is “Preventing Corruption: Effective Administrative andCriminal Justice Measures”. Corruption cases involve not only government officials but alsoprivate individuals and corporations. Also, the sources of corruption may vary from one country
to another. Likewise, countermeasures taken against corruption may be different in somerespects. Every country should have effective administrative and criminal justice measures to1- 208 -

combat corruption. Regarding the theme, Myanmar has laid down preventive measures andpolicies for effective administrative and criminal justice measures for preventing corruption.
II. MYANMAR’S LEGAL SYSTEM
Myanmar’s legal system is unique, but partly belongs to the English common law system.
But it is not a replica of the common law legal system. Myanmar had its own legal system under
the regime of the Myanmar Kings. After having lost her independence, Myanmar’s traditional
legal system was abolished and the common law legal system as modified in India wasintroduced by the British. Though Myanmar regained her independence in 1948, the legal systemremained unchanged until 1962. From 1962 to 1988, Myanmar adopted a socialist legal system.
Since the emergence of the State Law and Order Restoration Council in 1988, Myanmar has
again adopted a Legal System similar to other neighbouring countries that adopt the modified
common law legal system.
III. JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF MYANMARIn Myanmar, a new Constitution was approved through a nation-wide referendum in2008 and came into effect on 31 January 2011. According to the new Constitution, the judicial
principles are to administer justice independently according to law, to dispense justice in open
court unless otherwise prohibited by law and to guarantee in all cases the right of defence and theright of appeal under law.
Under the Constitution, the Supreme Court of the Union and different levels of Courts
have been established for the administration of justice. The Union Judiciary Law waspromulgated in 2010 and duties and functions of the judges are mentioned in the said law. For
trial of criminal cases, judges at all levels have to strictly comply with the provisions of the2- 209 -

existing laws, including the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Law of Evidence. All criminal
courts in the Republic of the Union of Myanmar have to adhere strictly to the establishedprocedure and practice of admitting documentary and material evidence and examining
witnesses, complainants and the accused.
In Myanmar, the basic legal principle in conducting criminal cases is that the burden of
proof lies on the prosecution. Until and unless the prosecution can prove the guilt of the accused,
the accused must be deemed to be innocent. If there is a reasonable doubt about the guilt of an
accused person, the accused is entitled to the benefit of that doubt and cannot be convicted.
IV. JUDICIAL MEASURES FOR PREVENTING CORRUPTION IN MYANMAR
Myanmar traditionally rejects bribery as an immoral act. The people of Myanmar regard
bribery and corruption as a sin and an injustice. Moreover, one of the social objectives ofMyanmar is “to uplift … the morale and morality of the entire nation”. Therefore, Myanmar is
implementing every possible course of action, including judicial and administrative measures inorder to combat corruption.
A. Laws Relating to Preventing and Combating Corruption
Corruption is present in every field, in any form and manner. Therefore, Myanmar hasenacted various laws regarding corruption. Myanmar enacted the following laws containing
provisions for preventing corruption:(a)

The Penal Code, 1868;(b)

The Criminal Law Amending Act, 1951;(c)

The Suppression of Corruption Act, 1948;3- 210 -

(d)The Election Law, 2010;(e)

The Defence Services Act, 1959;(f)

The Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law, 1995;(g)

The Law Taking Action against the Ownership or Sale of Property obtained by
Illegal Means, 1986;(h)

The Commercial Tax Law, 1990;(i)

The Forest Law, 1992;(j)

The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Law, 1993;(k)

The Fire Services Law, 1997;(l)

The Control of Money Laundering Law, 2002;(m)

Anti-Trafficking in Persons Law, 2004.

1. The Penal CodeThe Penal Code in Myanmar is a basic law for all crimes, including corruption. It
provides for, under sections 161 to 171, corruption offences by or relating to public servants.
Taking of gratuities by public servants other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act;
taking gratuities in order, by corrupt or illegal means, to influence a public servant; taking
gratuities for exercise of personal influence with a public servant, without consideration, fromperson concerned in a proceeding or business transacted by such public servant; disobeying
direction of the law by a public servant, with intent to cause injury to any person; framing an
incorrect document by a public servant with intent to cause injury to any person; unlawfully
engaging in trade by a public servant – are corruption offences punishable with fine or
imprisonment ranging from one year to three years, or both.

4- 211 -

2. The Criminal Law Amending Act
In addition to the Code of Criminal Procedure, Myanmar enacted the Criminal Law
Amending Act which is a more effective procedural law to freeze and confiscate effectively theassets of a person alleged to have committed corruption, if there are grounds to believe that hecommitted corruption. The law empowers the district administration officer, without seeking anorder of a court, to issue a warrant to be attached to the assets of the accused person. This speedy
action may deter or freeze the money or property obtained by the accused in a timely manner.
3. The Suppression of Corruption Act
Myanmar has also a special law for anti-corruption ― the Suppression of Corruption Act.
This law provides that the court may presume an accused guilty of corruption if he owns orowned too much money or property beyond his income where the accused cannot prove his
lawful ownership of such money or property. In addition, four kinds of offences have been
defined, such as receiving bribes habitually; obtaining habitually without or with inadequate
consideration from a person concerned in a proceeding; taking valuable things or pecuniary
advantage by abuse of his position; fraud or breach of trust on public property. The breach ofsuch prohibitions may be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend from aminimum of three years to a maximum of seven years and may also be liable to fine. The
punishment under this law is more severe and effective than the punishment prescribed under the
Penal Code. So, practically, serious corruption cases are usually prosecuted under this law.
However, the law requires obtaining prior sanction from the relevant appointing authority of theaccused before taking action.

5- 212 -

4. Election Law
In the area of political elections, the Election Law, under sections 57 and 58, describesthat any person who is found guilty of taking or giving bribes to prevent a person fromexercising the right of voting and the right to stand for election and bribes by way of money,
goods, foodstuff, position or service transfer or by using any other right in order to obtain theelectoral right by unlawful means or as gratitude for obtaining such right shall, on conviction, bepunishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or with fine not exceeding one
hundred thousands kyats or with both.
5. Armed Forces
For the armed force services, the Defence Services Act provides in sections 51 and 66
that an accused who commits corrupt acts by dishonestly receiving or retaining government
property and directly or indirectly accepting or obtaining bribes shall be punished, on conviction
by Court-Martial, with imprisonment for seven years to ten years.
Moreover, the Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law prohibits, under
section 17, a person subject to this law from demanding or accepting cash or kind in a corrupt
manner from any person. The offender who violates such provision, on conviction by a Police
Court, may be punished with imprisonment up to three years.
6. Commerce
Regarding business, the Law Taking Action against the Ownership or Sale of Property
obtained by Illegal Means authorizes the government to confiscate moveable or immoveable
property of a person who obtained such property by illegal means or from illegal business or

6- 213 -

bought with money that evaded income tax. In addition, the Commercial Tax Law prohibits,
under section 23, the giving and taking of bribes; attempting to give or take bribes; abetting thegiving and taking of bribes; or misusing, with a dishonest or fraudulent intention, any of thepowers conferred by such laws, breach of which shall be punishable with imprisonment fromthree to seven years.
7. The Forest Law
Furthermore, Myanmar has quite a few laws which contain anti-corruption provisions
such as the Forest Law. Under the Forest Law, section 46 provides that forest staff must not
accept cash or kind from any person, by reason of his power, and in a corrupt manner incontravention of the Forest Law. The person who violates such provision shall be punished withimprisonment which may extend from a minimum of one year to a maximum of seven years.
8. The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Law
According to section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Law, aperson authorized to search, arrest, seize evidence and investigate any offence under that law
shall be, on conviction, punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend from five
years to ten years if he is guilty of asking for and accepting any money or property as a gratuity
either for himself or for another person, or accepting a narcotic drug or psychotropic substanceunlawfully.
9. The Fire Services Law
For public confidence in social services, the Fire Services Law provides, under sections
31 and 37, that no member of the fire brigade, auxiliary fire brigade or reserve fire brigade shall7- 214 -

acquire any property, gift or money by way of bribe or by dishonest means, while discharging
the member’s duty during an outbreak of fire. The breach of such provisions is punishable withimprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and may also incur a fine.
10. Control of Money Laundering Law
In Myanmar, the Control of Money Laundering Law is promulgated to be in line with theinternational convention of 2002. In section 25(a) of this law, any member of the Investigation
Body who demands or accepts money or property either for himself or for any other person as a
gratuity in investigating a money laundering offence shall, on conviction, be punished withimprisonment for a term which may extend from a minimum of three years to a maximum ofseven years and may also be liable to pay a fine.
11. The Anti-Trafficking in Persons Law
Again in accordance with the international convention, Myanmar adopted the AntiTrafficking in Persons Law which has similar punishment as those mentioned above. Undersection 30, any public official who demands or accepts money or property as a gratuity either for
himself or for another person in carrying out investigations, prosecution or adjudication withrespect to any offence under this law is subject to punishment.
B. Investigation for taking Legal Action against Corruption Cases
According to the existing law of Myanmar, corruption cases are cognizable under theprovisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, such cases could be investigated by the
Bureau of Special Investigation Officers or Police Officers, with no necessity for a warrant of acourt.

8- 215 -

The Bureau of Special Investigation (BSI) is conferred with the authority to investigate
corruption cases under the provisions of the Bureau of Special Investigation and theInvestigation Department Act, and the Police Force is authorized to do so under the provisionsof the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Being a cognizable case, BSI officers and Police officers may book the case against theaccused at the respective police station, request sanction to prosecute the accused from therelevant Ministry, arrest the offender, examine the accused and witnesses, seize evidence,
construct the case, request experts’ opinions on the exhibits if necessary, submit the case to a
Law Office for legal advice, reconstruct the case in accordance with the legal advice of the said
Law Office, and then file the case before a competent court.
Usually, BSI investigates serious corruption cases and other corruption cases are referredto the Myanmar Police Force for investigation. If the case is not strong enough for filing before
the court and it is necessary to take some other action, such case is referred to the government
department concerned for taking departmental action.
C. Prosecution of Corruption Cases
When the corruption cases are sent up before the court, BSI prosecutors or Law Officersof the Union Attorney General’s Office conduct those cases. Throughout the prosecution period,
the prosecutor consults with the relevant Investigation Officer of the case to construct the casestrongly before the court. BSI may request the relevant Law Office to file revision in those cases.
If necessary, the Law Office concerned files appeals or revisions against the order and judgmentof the original or appeal Court for enhancing punishment so as to obtain effective and deterrent
punishments. If the accused is acquitted by the Court, the Union Attorney General’s Office may
9- 216 -

file for appeal against the acquittal order to the Supreme Court of the Union. BSI or the
Myanmar Police Force may apply to the relevant Law Office or Union Attorney General’s Office
to file an appeal against acquittal.
At this juncture, it may be helpful to explain briefly the role of the Union Attorney
General’s Office in prosecution of the cases. The Union Attorney General’s Office plays a vitalrole in running the machinery of justice in Myanmar. It not only has deep historical roots but isalso a strong and substantial machine. It stands as a pillar of justice in the country. The Attorney
General of the Union Law was promulgated on 28 October 2010 in accordance with section 443
of the Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2008.
Accordingly, the main duties of the Union Attorney General and Law Officers are:-scrutinizing and tendering legal advice on criminal cases to be in conformity
with the law before prosecution;-

appearing in criminal cases on behalf of the State;-appearing on behalf of the Government in civil cases in which theGovernment is a party as the plaintiff or defendant;-

filing necessary appeals, special appeals or revision to the Supreme Court inrespect to Adjudication of Courts (court decisions) at different levels that are
not in accordance with the law;-tendering legal advice to the relevant Government departments andorganizations as to whether or not the State should be a party to international
conventions and regional agreements;

10- 217 -

-tendering legal advice to the Government departments and organizations on
matters related to bilateral or multilateral treaties, memoranda ofunderstanding, memoranda of agreement, local and foreign investment
instruments and other instruments.

The Union Attorney General’s Office and Law Offices at different levels under its
guidance and supervision render legal advice not only for sound construction of corruption cases
but also provide legal advice in other legal matters. These Law Offices conduct the prosecution
cases as Public Prosecutors or Government Advocates in all courts at different levels up to theSupreme Court of the Union.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES FOR PREVENTING CORRUPTION IN
MYANMARIn order to prevent corruption, administrative actions are also effective in addition to the
judicial measures against corruption. There should be more effective internal administrative
policies to identify and deal with situations that cause corruption, to institute investigation
policies designed for detecting and taking action against the person who commits corruption andto set up deterrent punishment.
In Myanmar, the new government took office on 31 March 2011 and established thecountry as a democratic one. The President of the new government delivered his presidential
address and affirmed that the government must be a clean one with good governance to achieve aprosperous future for the nation. He did highlight that combating corruption and bribery, which
tarnish the image of the nation and the people, is the main task for his new government. He also
pointed out that nobody should abuse the mandate in the interest of friends or relatives. Here, one
11- 218 -

can observe that the new government has shown its political will to fight corruption. Moreover,people’s representatives of the Hluttaws (Parliament) can disclose, in the interests of the people,
unlawful practices including corruption of the responsible personnel.
For civil service personnel, they all are responsible for abiding by the Fundamental Rules
and Supplementary Rules. Those Rules prescribe that a government servant shall not accept
directly or indirectly, on his or her own behalf or on behalf of any other person, nor permit any
member of his or her family to accept any gift, gratuity or reward. In 1984, the Government
issued a general letter which stated that government servants who commit corruption would
receive deterrent punishment. Furthermore, the government issued a general letter in 1989 which
described that malpractice and corruption of government employees would be put to an end andaction would be taken in three steps: (a) by revoking a pension; (b) by dismissal from theservice; (c) by dismissal from service and sentencing to imprisonment.
In addition, an anti-corruption plan has been designed by the government andarrangements have been made by the respective departments and organizations. Monthly
meetings have been held in every office of the departments and organizations to keep warning
government employees regarding the anti-corruption plan of the government. Every officer incharge of the office has to submit a monthly report and the progress of anti-corruption
arrangements to the head of department.
In order to know the improvements of the anti-corruption programme and to take action
against the public officials who commit corruption or misconduct, the addresses and phone
numbers of the heads of government, departments and organizations which are to be informed orcomplained of the acts of the public servants are described in the newspapers. Some information

12- 219 -

may be suspicious, some may be reasonable, and some may be correct. In the case of a
suspicious situation, the person concerned should be given a warning or monitored as the casemay be; if necessary the person should be transferred in post or locality. If the information isverified as reasonable, it should be reported to the higher office to determine whether the person
should be forced to retire or whether other departmental actions should to be taken. If theinformation is true and correct, the person should be removed, demoted or prosecuted. If
necessary, the superior officer responsible for supervision should immediately suffer proper
punishment for his lack of supervision. Some public officials have been subject to such actions.
Also, notices stating that public officials must avoid acts of corruption have been posted
in conspicuous places in every building to remind public officials and ordinary citizens whocome to the offices. In order to have transparency, the President of the new Government statedthat the media is the fourth pillar of the society of Myanmar and he also emphasized that theworks of the Government of the Union and State or Regions should be transparent andaccountable. This statement encourages journalists to write or speak about acts of corruption andto reveal occurrences of same. Also, the Ministries call for public cooperation in realizing “Good
Governance and Clean Government” as guided by the President.
At the same time, to uplift the morale of the public servants, government departments andorganizations will honour and reward employees who abide by the directions, rules andregulations and who are duty-bound. They have laid down “the carrot and stick policy” toprevent employees from engaging in corruption.

13- 220 -

VI. CONCLUSION
In every society, corruption is undesirable and it needs to be suppressed effectively toachieve a prosperous future for all. As corruption is one of the most serious problems forsustainable development, the United Nations Convention against Corruption was adopted by theGeneral Assembly of the United Nations on 31 October 2003 and entered into force on 14
December 2005. Myanmar signed this Convention on 2 December 2005. To be in line with thisConvention, Myanmar is making its best effort to combat corruption and is implementing various
forms of preventive measures against corruption, not only by criminal justice measures but also
administrative measures. Moreover, Myanmar is always combating corruption in accordancewith the objectives set forth not only in domestic law but also in international instruments which
Myanmar has ratified. For a developed and peaceful world, our international families should findout efficient ways and means to strengthen and enhance the momentum of preventing corruption.

14- 221 -

MYANMAR AND ANTICORRUPTION
Presented by Mr. Bo Maung
Deputy Director of The Bureau of Special Investigation
Ministry of Home Affairs
I.

INTRODUCTION

These are the noble objectives of safeguarding the peace of the world: development,international cooperation and developing a harmonious society. Each and every nation of theworld accepts and works to implement these objectives. Corruption is crime that hinders theseabove objectives and it spoils human character and destroys economies. Counter corruption is
not only concerned with a country but also with the global community. Therefore, according to
the 2003 United Nations Convention on Anti-corruption, intensive measures are taken
vehemently to fight against corruption in every country. It is important to punish the offenders
effectively and it is also important to take preventive measures against corruption.
II. EFFECTIVE MECHANISMS TO PREVENT CORRUPTION
A. UNCAC
Myanmar signed the United Nations Convention against Corruption on 2 December
2005. We believe that ‘‘Prevention is better than cure”; and we will present the preventive
measures in three stages. In the first stage, we are implementing the following:(a) Enacting laws;(b) Organizing

Special Enforcement Departments and assigning duties to take action on

corruption;(c) Training and nurturing good public servants;(d) Supporting the welfare of public servants;(e) Encouraging cooperation of public and private groups and organizations;(f) Encouraging the cooperation of news media;(g) Technical and multi-level cooperation with the international community;- 222 -

B. Most Important Laws
There are two main laws and some special laws (15 laws) in Myanmar which are
instrumental in anti-corruption. The two main laws are the Penal Code (1861) and theSuppression of Corruption Act (1948).

C. Relevant Organizations
At present there is not a counter corruption commission, but the Bureau of Special
Investigation and Myanmar Police Force under the Ministry of Home Affairs are taking chargeof those duties.

The Bureau of Special Investigation primarily takes the main duty.

It

investigates offences and upon completion of gathering of evidence, lodges requests at courts
for taking legal proceedings against the alleged culprits. Respective Law Officers act asprosecution counsels and the respective Judicial Officers act as Judges. Pre-independence andpost-independence, there was an uprising, internal insurgency, and people suffered distress andpoverty and moral character was ruined, leading to corruption and bribery in the whole country.
To control and abolish the worst conditions, an organization was formed: the Public Property
Protection Police called P(4). After the Act of Special Investigation Department andAdministrative Board was enacted in 1951, P(4) then became The Bureau of Special
Investigation. The Union Auditor General is also assigned to inquire of budgets of State
Departments, in accordance with present State Constitution.

D. The Union Civil Service Board and Civil Service Training Universities
In order to train and nurture good public servants, the Union Civil Service Board isorganized in accordance with the Constitution.

The board selects honest, hardworking,qualified and able staff and trains them at two Civil Service Training Universities in Myanmar.
They are trained to have competency and efficiency necessary for government departments,
with moral character and duty consciousness cultured individually or in a team.

E. Welfare for the public servant
For the welfare of the public servant, it is important to provide sufficient remuneration
to keep moral attitudes and to perform their duties without corruption.
- 223 -

They should beprovided with appropriate salary, rations and welfare allowances. The ethics of public servants
depends on their well-being and proper balance. In Myanmar, public servants are provided an
appropriate salary and sufficient rations. The social welfare of their families is taken care of by
respective staff welfare committees.

F. Public and Private Cooperation
In the sector regarding the cooperation of public and private organizations, it is thenoble, common custom of Myanmar to donate generously, always thinking of the good deedsof others. They offer cash and valuable things in gratitude. However, it is unfortunate that thisnoble tradition has been misused to fulfill their own needs by giving bribes for their own
benefits. We have to educate the people to get their cooperation. We will let them understandthat we are really fighting against corruption and welcome their willing cooperation and givethem chances to express their views and opinions freely.

G. Media Cooperation
As regards the cooperation of news media, they stand as the fourth pillar of the nation
and are reliable as a watch group. Actually, corruption is caused because of poverty, bad moral
character and greed. The leaders of our country always give their patronage to seminars andworkshops for the alleviation of poverty. There are national workshops and seminars for
economic development and reform. Media groups take part in delivering the message to the
public and they also express their point of view of the strong and weak points within theirpotential range of media or the ethics of media. This cooperation leads Myanmar to a good
governance system and measures for anti-corruption campaigns.

H. International Cooperation
International cooperation is greatly needed to effectively suppress trans-border crimes.
It is unfortunate to see corruption committed by using high technology and complicatedmethods in the world. If Myanmar is granted more international technology and more support
than it has at present, we shall speed up the anti-corruption campaign.

- 224 -

III. EFFECTIVE WAY TO RAISE AWARENESS
To prevent corruption, there is an effective way to educate people. Corruption is like acontagious disease, easily communicable to all countries, and it badly spoils social and politicalsystems, and later the whole state policy. Therefore, it is necessary for the public to be aware of
the evils of corruption and to cooperate with state organizations, administrative organs and the
judicial system to oppose and eliminate corruption. To do so, the public should be literate andeducated to a high standard. The state constitution provides that literacy is a compulsory
educational requirement and stipulates a basic level of education for all citizens. In Myanmar,
the government implements social objectives in health and education, and the media reports thereality of the situation. At present, people can judge for themselves the good and evil of theperformance of state government. Therefore, they can discuss their wishes and express theiropinions through their respective representatives in the Hluttaw (Parliament and Congress), as
the basis of the democratic system.
IV. INSTANCES OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL
IMPLEMENTATION OF PREVENTIVE ANTI-CORRUPTION MEASURESAND JUSTICE MEASURES
We have learnt prevention of corruption and studied the weaknesses and strengths injudicial power and assume that corruption itself is a contagious disease. In reality however, noteverybody regards corruption as a social ill. Those who give bribes for their own benefits andthose who betray their own duties and take bribes do their undertaking secretly and willingly.
So it is difficult to find an eye-witness or collect evidence easily. With perseverance toovercome difficulty, necessary evidence is collected and a prima facie case can be lodged atcourt. There is urgent need for perseverance and patience from investigation teams andcooperation from the public and technological support.

However, according to religious

teaching, ‘‘there is no way to escape from the law” and ‘‘the offender has no place to hide”.
Offenders shall be punished according to the law in due course.

A. Departmental Action
In Myanmar, there is a counter measure to take departmental action against alleged
offenders even though evidence may be too weak to lodge a criminal complaint. In this- 225 -

measure, responsible public servants shall certainly face dismissal, demotion, transfer and otherdepartmental disciplinary action.

B. Information from the Public
Leaders of our country always call for the cooperation of the public in their speeches
and via newspapers and magazines. For information about bribery and corruption, the people’s
cooperation is welcomed and they are invited to inform the authorities of corruption offences
through phone, letters or in person to the Bureau of Special Investigation, the Myanmar Police
Force, or General Administration Department. Their information is kept strictly confidential
and the security of the informer is guaranteed. Real information is given by people in goodfaith, exposing many offenses and leading to action by the authorities. However, malicious,
false information has also been given on occasion.
C. Watch Groups
We acknowledge that there are weaknesses to keeping watch groups to provide
surveillance on the malicious staff and greedy businessmen who are enjoying unusual wealth orunusually increased assets without legal remuneration or profit. Therefore, those watch groups
shall be extensively organized and cooperation is being extended. As Myanmar is a member of
the UNCAC, laws are being amended appropriately. We are practicing transparency, keeping
prestige in both public and private sectors.
V. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, there are many things left to do but we constantly endeavour with all of
our might to establish good governance and clean government and it would be moreadvantageous if we were provided international assistance and technological support to secure
more effective results.

Thank you.

- 226 -

EFFECTIVE MEASURES FOR COMBATING CORRUPTION
Pinthip Leelakriangsak Srisanit∗

I. INTRODUCTION
Corruption has been considered a major and widespread problem in many nations.
Particularly, corruption causes huge damage to developing countries, such as Thailand,
especially bribery and fraud in public procurement. All countries try to find effective
measures to deal with corruption cases, including legislative and social measures.
The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) measures the perceived level of public sector
corruption in 178 countries around the world. It is a tool that ranks each country incomparison to others. A higher CPI means lower corruption or cleaner public administration(a country with CPI of 8 is cleaner than one with a CPI of 4). Thailand’s CPI in 2009 was 3.4
and in 2010 was 3.5. Thailand has improved its CPI score over the past years, though at 3.5 it
remains troublingly low and indicative of a serious corruption problem in the public sector.
Nevertheless, Thailand’s corruption situation seems to be slightly above average incomparison with those of other ASEAN countries – e.g. Myanmar, Cambodia, Lao PDR,
Philippines, and Indonesia – with their CPI 2010 scores ranging from 1.4 – 2.8.1 Even though
Thailand has fought corruption for many decades, in which various legislative and social
strategies and measures, either preventive or suppressive, have been imposed to solve thisproblem, corruption in Thailand still persists and has become more sophisticated and difficult
to address.

∗
1

Public Prosecutor, International Affairs Department of the Office of the Attorney General.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results- 227 -

II. LEGAL ASPECT
Thai legislators have enacted various laws and regulations to prevent and combat
corruption. They are divided into two categories in connection with their nature – substantive
law and procedural law.
A. Substantive Law
Regarding substantive law, there are two major types of laws in Thailand punishing actsof corruption: the Thai Penal Code and the Organic Act on Counter Corruption B.E. 2542
(1999).
The provisions of the Penal Code incriminating acts of corruption are contained inarticles 147 to 157 and those that aggravate the punishment for specific conduct of officers
are stipulated in articles 200 to 202. Article 147 punishes officers who commit embezzlementin their duties with imprisonment of 5 to 20 years or imprisonment for life and a fine of 2,000
to 40,000 Baht.2 Also, articles 148 to article 150 punish officers conducting various types ofbribery with imprisonment from 5 to 20 years or imprisonment of life or the death penalty.

2

As of the end of October 2011, the exchange rate is about 31 Baht for 1 US Dollar.

- 228 -

Article 151 criminalizes a wrongful exercise of an officer’s function which is damaging theState, and makes it punishable with a maximum term of imprisonment of life; meanwhile
article 152 punishes officers who have a conflict of interest in their duties with maximum
imprisonment of 10 years. In addition, articles 153 to 156 impose criminal sanctions, up to
imprisonment for life, on corrupted officers whose duties concern accountancy functions. The
general offence is prescribed in article 157 as misconduct in office punishable with amaximum term of imprisonment of 10 years. Moreover, aggravating circumstances arecontained in articles 200 to 202 which aim to increase punishment for corruption committed
by officers whose duties are concerned with criminal justice, such as the police, publicprosecutors or judges.
In addition to imprisonment and fine, when officers obtain money from corruption, thesebenefits shall be considered as properties which shall be forfeited by the Court’s judgment
according to article 34 (1) of Thai Penal Code. The forfeiture of properties deters others fromcommitting corruption.
The Organic Act on Counter Corruption BE. 2542 (1999) establishes an independent
organization called the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to deal withcorruption. The function of NACC will be explained in the topic of competent authorities,
below. Apart from the Thai Penal Code, the Organic Act on Counter Corruption incriminates
certain acts of corruption. For example, the conflict of interest prescribed in article 100 shallbe punished with imprisonment not exceeding three years and fines not exceeding 60,000
Baht, or both. Bribery, criminalized in article 103, shall be punished in the same manner as
conflicts of interest.
B. Procedural Law
In the sphere of procedural law, Thailand has five major laws dealing with procedure ofcorruption cases: the Thai Criminal Procedure Code, the Organic Act on Counter Corruption- 229 -

B.E. 2542 (1999), the Anti-Money Laundering Act B.E. 2542 (1999), the Act of Mutual
Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters B.E. 2535 (1992) and the Extradition Act B.E. 2551
(2008).
The Criminal Procedure Code is the principle Code which is applied to every criminal
case, including corruption. Whenever specific Acts do not mention certain proceedings, theseacts normally refer to the Criminal Procedure Code in order to apply general principles tosuch proceedings.
The Organic Act on Counter Corruption B.E. 2542 (1999), not only establishes the
National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) in order to deal with corruption but it also
gives it powers of initial investigation of corruption in Thailand.
In connection with the Anti-Money Laundering Act B.E. 2542 (1999), it is an additional
measure combating corruption. Corruption is one of the predicate offences for the purpose offorfeiture of assets obtained from corruption. This act establishes the Anti-money Laundering
Office (AMLO) having authority to temporarily restrain, seize or freeze the assets involved incorruption. This measure is categorized as a civil forfeiture system without requiring aconviction.
The Act of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters B.E. 2535 (1992), being in linewith the UN Model Law on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters and international
standards, provides a basic principle of international cooperation with other countries toproceed with criminal litigation from the beginning of investigation to the end of the court
trial. Many types of assistance can be provided, such as locating persons, searching andseizing objects or documents as evidence, taking statements of witness and confiscating
assets.
Under the Extradition Act B.E. 2551 (2008), Thailand is able to extradite a person to arequesting country, and also make a request to foreign countries to extradite a fugitive to- 230 -

Thailand. At present, we now have bilateral treaties with 13 countries regarding mutual legal
assistance and 14 countries in relation to extradition. However, the rule of reciprocity isapplied in cases of nonexistence of a treaty between the requesting and the requested country
for the purpose of providing the broadest possible cooperation. In addition, Thailand signed a
Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with ASEAN countries in 2006. The process is now pending
review and adoption by the domestic legislation.

III. COMPETENT AUTHORITIES CONCERNED
Many government authorities have been set up for monitoring, preventing andefficiently suppressing corruption, including the National Anti-Corruption Commission(NACC), Office of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC), Office of the
Attorney General (OAG), Ombudsman, Office of the Auditor General, Royal Thai Police,
Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO), Department of Special Investigation (DSI) andSupreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons Holding Political Positions. These
organizations have the mutual objectives of ensuring transparency, fairness, accountability
and guaranteeing civil rights. This paper will, however, only focus on the roles and functionsof some of these agencies, as follows.
A. National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC)
To strengthen efforts in combating corruption, the 1997 Constitution and the Organic
Act on Counter Corruption B.E. 2542 (1993) added checks and balances on the State by
establishing the National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) as an independentagency. The NCCC has a number of duties and responsibilities both in prevention andsuppression areas. This commission is responsible for inquiring into all kinds of corruption
offences committed by all levels of government officials. As a consequence, the NCCC has
encountered a caseload problem. The best way to solve this problem is to limit the NCCC’s- 231 -

exercise of its power only to corruption cases conducted by politicians and high ranking
government officials. So, the 2007 Constitution changed the official title of the NCCC to the
National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and it has been invested with only threefunctions: (1) declaration and inspection of assets and liabilities, (2) prevention of corruptionand (3) suppression of corruption.
The NACC is responsible for corruption cases against persons holding political
positions, i.e. the Prime Minister, Ministers, Members of the Senate, Members of the Houseof Representatives, and high ranking government officers who are accused of being unusuallywealthy, committing an offence of abuse of power and authority according to the Penal Code,or committing an offence of dishonesty in office or corruption according to other laws. The
role of the NACC is to perform the initial investigation of corruption cases. After completionof an inquiry file, the NACC will forward the investigation file with adequate legal
background to the government agency for which the accused works to start the disciplinary
action if the disciplinary offence is well-founded. Otherwise, if the NACC found grounds fora criminal offence, it would refer the inquiry file to the Office of the Attorney General forfurther criminal prosecution.
B. Office of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC)
Due to the caseload of the NCCC, the 2007 Constitution established the NACC and
Office of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC) to deal with corruption cases.
3

The PACC is the newest investigation authority under the Ministry of Justice. This office is
responsible for the corruption cases conducted by lower-ranking government officials. Aftercompletion of inquiry files, the case shall be referred to the agency concerned in the sameprocess as the NACC as mentioned above. However, the PACC has not yet begun executing3

http://www.pacc.go.th/index.php?mod=about_profile- 232 -

its full functions, pending the drafting of regulations; meanwhile the NACC temporarily
handles its cases.
C. Office of the Attorney General (OAG)
According to the current Constitution, the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) is anindependent organization. The OAG is authorized to suppress corruption in both private andpublic sectors. Therefore, the Office of Attorney General plays an important role in deciding
whether to prosecute all of the corruption cases in Thailand.
After conclusion of an inquiry file by the NACC, if a corruption offence is found, thecase shall be submitted to the Attorney General for further criminal prosecution. Then, if
there is sufficient evidence for the prosecution’s charge of corruption, the Attorney Generalshall prosecute the accused before the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons
Holding Political Positions in a case where the accused is a politician or to another competentcourt in a case where the accused is a State official. On the other hand, in case of insufficientevidence, the OAG and the NACC shall set up a joint working committee to collect further
evidence necessary for the Attorney General. After receiving such further evidence, theAttorney General will make a prosecution order. However, if the joint working committee
fails to reach the point, the NACC by itself has the power to file the case with the competentcourt or ask a private lawyer to do so.4
In addition, the Attorney General acts as the central authority of international
cooperation in criminal matters in the areas of mutual legal assistance and extradition, as
mentioned above in part II above.
D. Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons Holding Political Positions
There are five specialized courts in Thailand: the Labor Court, the Tax Court, theCentral Intellectual Property and International Trade Court, the Bankruptcy Court and the4

The Organic Act on Counter Corruption 1999, Section 97.

- 233 -Juvenile and Family Court. At present, there is no permanent specialized court for corruption
cases. However, the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons Holding Political
Positions has been established since 1999 by the 1997 Constitution and Article 8 of theOrganic Act on Criminal Procedure for Persons Holding Political Positions B.E. 2542 (1999)
for the mission of fair and speedy trial of corruption offences committed by politicians.5
This specialized division of the Supreme Court has power and duties to try andadjudicate cases against persons holding political positions who have been accused of
becoming unusually wealthy, committing an offence of malfeasance in office according to
the Penal Code, committing an offence of dishonesty in office or corruption according toother laws. This court consists of nine Judges of the Supreme Court who are selected by aplenary session of the Supreme Court on a case-by-case basis. The trial in this specialized
division Court is founded upon an inquisitorial system.6 The orders and decisions will befinal and disclosed. Nonetheless, the decision can be appealed to a plenary session of theSupreme Court, but only if there is fresh evidence in the case.7
Statistics indicated that few cases were submitted and disposed by this specialized
division of the Supreme Court: one case in 2001, two cases in 2002, one case in 2003, onecase in 2004, two cases in 2007, 20 cases in 2008, nine cases in 20098 and 10 cases in 2010.9

IV. PERSPECTIVE ON COMBATING CORRUPTIONAs I have already mentioned in part II, the magnitude of punishment of corruption
offences, according to the Thai Penal Code and others, is currently at the highest level, i.e.
the death penalty and life imprisonment, yet it nevertheless seems that the number of
corruption cases in Thailand has not declined.
5

http://www.supremecourt.or.th/webportal/maincode/index.php?lang=en&base=24
Ibid.
7
Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2007, Article 278.
8
http://www.supremecourt.or.th/webportal/maincode/index.php?lang=en&base=249
http://www.supremecourt.or.th/file/criminal/new%201.pdf
6- 234 -

In order to solve this problem, two alternative solutions are proposed for further
consideration. Firstly, we increase the magnitude of punishment to deter the government
officer from committing corruption. Secondly, we increase the probability of prosecution ofcorruptors for the same reason. Both of these solutions could discourage the corruptors but
the further question is which one is suitable for Thailand?
Becker’s Economic Model of Crime10 offers that we should raise an offender’s costs andlimit an offender’s benefits in order to reduce an offender’s incentive for engaging in acriminal act. Becker’s model is relevant to Cost-Benefit analysis, which is generally acceptedby current core Economists. He further suggests that an offender’s costs consist of the
combination of the Magnitude of Punishment and the Probability of Punishment. If we raise
the Magnitude of Punishment, such as increasing of periods of imprisonment, an offender’scost would consequently be raised. It would be the same if we raise the Probability of
Punishment by strengthening police units or using modern technology in criminal
investigation. In accordance with Becker’s recommendation, increasing the Magnitude of
Punishment would less affect government budgets. On the other hand, the government wastes
its budget by investing in law enforcement sectors (including investigators, publicprosecutors and criminal courts) to increase the probability of punishment. Therefore, Becker
prefers increasing the Magnitude of Punishment because it is more economical, compared tothe other solution.
To combat corruption in Thailand, I believe that increasing the probability ofpunishment is more suitable for the following three reasons:Firstly, according to Article 149 of Thailand’s Penal Code, we have already increased,since 1959, the magnitude of punishment to the highest level (death penalty) which would beapplied for those who were found guilty of bribery (although the amount of fine is still out of
10

Gary S. Becker, “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach”, in Essays in the Economics of Crime andPunishment,1974 at www.nber.org/chapters/c3625.pdf- 235 -

date and too low). However, it is obvious that such measures could not effectively eradicate
the extent of corruption in Thailand. Therefore, the probability of prosecution of corruptors
should be increased to reduce corruption.
Secondly, on the aspect of evidence, corruption leaves few traces for detectives toinvestigate. This situation would have a dilutive effect: the severity of capital punishment
would be diluted in the eyes of corruptors because of a lack of evidence.
Finally, corruption is categorized as a “victimless crime” from which only the Statesuffers. Consequently, nobody files complaints to the police when there is corruption.
Offenders are not intimidated by capital punishment because they are certain that theirwrongs have not been noticed by others. However, in order to facilitate reporting ofcorruption and broaden the perceptions of concerned authorities, Thai law has alreadyintroduced an effective process in which citizens can directly report corruption to NACC or
PACC to start the process, as I mentioned above.
For these three reasons, I propose a reinforcement of all law enforcement units to be thebest solution for combating corruption in Thailand. Although the government must invest agross budget in every law enforcement unit, enlarging or adding organizations, using modern
investigative methods as well as effective international cooperation, the outcome of suchinvestment would be more profitable for the country. Since corruption poses a serious harm
to society, a high investment in combating corruption would absolutely not be wasteful.

- 236 -

V. CONCLUSION
Corruption is not restricted to a particular country or a region, but it appears to be a
global problem. It is a serious transnational phenomenon which significantly undermines
economic and social development. In addition to law enforcement agencies combating
corruption by using various sanctions, social networks or solidarity of the people could
effectively strengthen anti-corruption measures by giving information to the justice agencies.
Finally, the education of children could be a sustainable measure in which the government
should invest. The academic curriculum should be integrated with moral values of citizens aswell as anti-corruption measures for children who will become the government officers of the
future.

- 237 -

THAILAND’S EFFORTS IN PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION

Sutisa Skchot
Public Prosecutor
International Affairs Department
Office of the Attorney General
ThailandCorruption is an international problem which can be found in almost every country. It
obstructs countries’ progress in many ways. Every country has focused on the problem and tried
to solve and prevent it. We can see the problem-solving methods attempted both domesticallyand internationally, such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption 2003 (UNCAC)
and the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International BusinessTransactions (OECD). All these attempts are to build up cooperation in elimination ofcorruption. However, the most important thing in elimination of corruption is “prevention”.
According to the concept of “prevention”, Thailand has issued many measures to build strong
barriers to corruption. An overview of the measures follows.

I. LEGAL MEASURESThe principal law dealing with prevention of corruption is the Organic Act on Counter
Corruption, B.E. 2542 (1999), which was enacted in order to authorize the National Counter
Corruption Commission (N.C.C. Commission) to inspect assets and liabilities of persons holding
political positions and other state officials, and to investigate and prosecute persons holding
political positions and state officials in the allegation of unusual wealth or malfeasance in office.
This Act is one of the measures against corruption. Moreover, the Act also provides measures tocounter corruption, such as inspection of assets and liabilities and imposition.
A. Inspection Assets and Liabilities
The Act provides that persons holding political positions and state officials shall submit theaccounts showing particulars of their assets and liabilities and those of their spouses and children
who have not yet become sui juris to the N.C.C. Commission upon taking and vacating office. It
is separated as follows:1- 238 -

1. Declaration of an Account Showing Particulars of Assets and Liabilities of Persons Holding
Political Positions
The Act prescribes that the person holding a political position shall submit the account ofassets and liabilities, in Thailand and abroad, and those which are not in possession of thedeclarant, his or her spouse and his or her children who have not become sui juris, to the N.C.C.
Commission on each occasion of taking or vacating office, and also as from the date of the
expiration of one year after the vacation of office. All the accounts of assets and liabilities shallbe provided in accordance with the form prescribed by law, together with supporting documents
evidencing the actual existence of such assets and liabilities, as well as a copy of the declarant’s
personal income tax return for the previous fiscal year. The declarant shall certify the accuracy of
the account and copies of the submitted documents by affixing his or her signature on every page
thereof. In case any person holding a political position intentionally fails to submit an accountshowing particulars of assets and liabilities and supporting documents to the N.C.C. Commission
or intentionally submits such account and supporting documents with false statements being
included therein or fails to disclose facts which should have been disclosed, such person shallvacate Office.
All accounts of assets and liabilities shall be disclosed to the public. In cases where theinspection report reveals an unusual change of property, the N.C.C. Commission shall request
the person holding the political position to explain the acquisition of such property before the
N.C.C. Commission passes a resolution that such person has an unusual increase of property.
2. Declaration of an Account Showing Particulars of Assets and Liabilities of State Officials
The Act provides that the persons holding certain positions ― President of the Supreme
Court of Justice, President of the Constitutional Court, President of the Supreme Administrative
Court, Attorney General, Election Commissioner, Ombudsman, Judge of the Constitutional
Court, Member of the State Audit Commission, Vice President of the Supreme Court of Justice,
Vice President of the Supreme Administrative Court, Chief of the Military Judicial Office, Judgeof the Supreme Court of Justice, Judge of the Supreme Administrative Court, Deputy Attorney
General and persons holding high-ranking positions ― have the duty to submit to the N.C.C.
Commission, every three years and five years while being in office and upon vacating office, anaccount showing the particulars of their assets and liabilities.
The general procedure of declaration of an account showing particulars of assets andliabilities of state officials is the same as a declaration by persons holding political positions. But
the differences between declaration of state officials and persons holding political positions are
the duration of declaration submitting and length of disbarment from office. For the state official
who is inspected and found corrupt, he or she is disbarred from the position as a state official for
five years as of the day of vacation of position. But for a corrupt person holding a political
position, such a restriction is not prescribed by law.
2

- 239 -

The declaration of account provided by the Act benefits the prevention of corruption
because the declaration process requires such persons to declare their assets, liabilities, changesof assets as well as income tax payments. So it causes difficulty in making up the account. This
process benefits the inspection of corruption as well. Moreover, the Act prescribes that theaccount of assets and liabilities shall be disclosed to the public. The people and private sector canbe involved in the inspection. Normally the persons holding political positions and the state
officials holding high-ranking positions are in the limelight; therefore, when they declare theiraccount, the people can also inspect them.
Declaration of accounts by state officials and persons holding political positions cannot
totally eliminate corruption but at least it can obstruct and inspect corruption. Sometimes persons
holding political positions are removed from office or they are particularly scrutinized andknown by the public.
B. Penalty Measures
Laws concerning the prevention and suppression of corruption in Thailand prescribe thepenalties as criminal offences, which are imprisonment, fine and forfeiture of property to theState. Forfeiture as a penalty for corruption has a broader meaning than a criminal penalty. It
includes seizure of business and any activities that occurred by such corruption to become theproperty of the State. The disciplinary penalties are discharge of any positions and loss of allpolitical rights and positions.
In a concrete way, the penalties will be a measure to impress upon offenders theconsequences of engaging in corruption.
II. CODE OF ETHICS
From the Constitution of Thailand B.E. 2540 (1997) to the Constitution of Thailand B.E.
2550 (2007), the exploitation of bureaucracy and politics are also recognized (the difference of
ethics and conflict of interest). The Constitution designates the Government to establish the Codeof Ethics for those who hold positions in politics by separating principles from conflict ofinterest, which is the authority of the Office of the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
However, Ethics is an issue that each organization has to address individually. According to theConstitution of Thailand B.E. 2550, Ethics are considered a substantial principle. The
disciplinary penalty is designated to control offenders and those who do not act according to theCode of Ethics.
The Code of Ethics consists of two principles: the principle of ethics and the principle ofself-discipline. Each organization shall enforce the Code of Ethics by themselves, for example:
the Rules of Prime Minister’s Office concerning Code of Ethics of Politicians B.E. 2551; theRules of Bangkok Metropolis concerning Code of Ethics of Politicians in the Administrative
Department of Bangkok B.E. 2551; the Regulations concerning Code of Ethics of Members ofthe House of Representatives and Commissioner B.E.2553; the Code of Ethics of Judicial
Officials; and the Code of Ethics of Public Prosecutors.
3- 240 -

Therefore, the Codes of Ethics can be considered to be a model of self-discipline which is
an ideology to sustain and protect the citizens’ and State’s interests to the highest level. Codes of
Ethics, on the other hand, are an effort to develop politicians and officials who reject corruption.
III. CONSCIOUSNESS AND PARTICIPATIONOther than measures according to law and Codes of Ethics that are well formed, Thailand
also recognizes the significance of citizens’ participation in preventing and suppressing
corruption. Most corrupt acts cannot be done by only government officials. Some are related tothe people, particularly at the level of government officials who work closely with the people.
Therefore, educating citizens in ethnics and consciousness is exceptionally essential.
Governmental units and the private sectors are aware of the significance of this issue.
Consequently, a number of attempts have been made to inculcate in the public a rejection ofcorruption, such as raising the public’s consciousness.
Public consciousness is to encourage people’s consciousness on land ownership, and public
ownership of the land. Therefore, they are encouraged to look after the public interest andprevent anyone who will seize that for his or her own benefit. At present, people’s organizations
are awakened to monitoring the working of state officials, politicians and the government, butthese are relatively few compared with the entire population. Many people do not think that
corruption is a serious problem. They also do not feel that the public interests shall be protectedby them. The result of corruption cannot be obviously identified because it does not affect people
immediately, unlike health, education or social welfare issues, etc. which people can see and feelconcretely. So, the Thai people must change their attitude to the corruption problem. They
should understand that the corrupt official gains money from tax paid by all the people. People
have to realize that every time corruption occurs, the people suffer the most.
Children have to be educated about public consciousness in preventing and protecting
corruption, and must grow with a sense of honesty in order to be a valuable adult for society.
Instilling the concrete principle of moral and anti-corruption awareness requires action by leaders
or local organization and other related organizations1.
At present, many agencies in Thailand are launching campaigns against corruption. Public
information and appeal campaigns, educating and encouraging people to participate inpreventing corruption, are implemented via various channels: brochures, posters, television
advertisements, radio spots, and an animated anti-corruption character. The animated character
represents a person in Chorsa-Aad village, who talks to other people in the village and expresses
his opinion on anti-corruption. The aim of the animation is to educate children and adults about
corruption and to encourage them to fight against it. A radio documentary “Ethics and Business”
has been launched to educate children about their proper duties as honest citizens. Moreover, thegovernment agencies and private sector organize activities in which children can participate and1Special interview for New Year Present essay, Mr. Prechar Lertkamolmas “encourage people’s consciousness onnationalism to eliminate corruption”.

4- 241 -

express their attitudes about their society, and also corruption in their society, such as an annual
speech contest with different angles on the theme of anti-corruption.
Moreover, government agencies try to eliminate corruption from within by a campaign
called “Immaculate State Official”. They publicize their Codes of Ethics, encourage officials toprevent corruption in their agencies, and hold conferences and seminars on the issue of
prevention of corruption, etc.
The Office of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) is directly liable forprevention and suppression of corruption and has undertaken a number of projects and activities
to stimulate the consciousness of society to realize the importance of prevention and suppression
on narcotics. The activities include giving legal education, hearing complaints and coordinatingwith other units. These activities have been implemented continuously; for example, for the past
11 years, a pamphlet has been distributed every three months. This pamphlet gives information
on different angles of the NACC’s operations and special articles from experts to stimulate
thoughts about corruption and individual development.
The NACC’s website, www.nacc.go.th, was established to provide information on law,sentences for corruption offences, and the plans, projects, and duties of the NACC. Through thischannel, people can access information and news as well as contact the NACC.
An international conference organized by the NACC, the International Conference on
Counter Corruption, was held from 10 to 13 November 2010 at the Queen Sirikit Convention
Center.
Domestic contests include the Best Anti-Corruption Local Agency, and a speech contest forchildren, etc.
Not all corruption in Thailand has been totally eliminated. But we hope that the NACC,
governmental agencies, private sector and the public will succeed in controlling corruption eventhough it will not disappear completely.

5- 242 -DISCUSSIONS AND CHAIR’S STATEMENT- 243 -

PANEL DISCUSSION SUMMARY
To reflect the multidisciplinary nature of the fight against corruption, the panel wascomposed of advisers from various public agencies in Japan, namely, Mr. Junichi Izumi,of the Ministry of Finance; Mr. Hideshiro Karasawa, of the Financial Services Agency;
and Mr. Yuji Takada, of the National Public Service Ethics Board; as well the Visiting
Experts. The Panel was chaired by Mr. Haruhiko Ukawa, Deputy Director of UNAFEI.
Each of the advisers gave a brief description of his respective agency’s
anti-corruption efforts, and explained the challenges facing each agency. As Mr. Ukawa
advised, each agency could be the focus in its own right of an anti-corruption seminar,
but presented as a whole, and reflecting the theme of the Fifth Good GovernanceSeminar, their various systems demonstrated the need for a multi-faceted approach tothe fight against corruption. The advisers discussed the legislation governing theiragencies and activities.
Mr. Takada made the point that penetrating legislation and efficient systems willlead to a higher rate of detection and prosecution of corruption, not necessarily adecrease in acts of corruption. Meanwhile, the cultivation of ethics in public officials isa long-term process.
Following the presentations, the floor was opened for a Q&A session.
Participants questioned what kinds of specific conduct would breach the public
service ethics legislation of Japan, and if the legislation extended to spouses andchildren of officials. Mr. Takada explained that the legislation prohibits special
treatment and collusive relationships of any kind, which would cover familial andpersonal relationships. He added that legislating for strictly merit-based appointment
only made illegal any promotion or transfer based on collusive relationships. The Expert
from Hong Kong stated that despite the great success of the ICAC in controlling
corruption, the SAR has no ethics board, and that such a body would be beneficial.
Participants also enquired of the relationship between the regulatory agencies
and the police – the advisers responded that they are obliged to inform the police of
any information indicating a violation of the law.
The participants and Experts also discussed public procurement, and specifically,- 245 -

e-procurement. The Expert from UNODC stated that many cases that come tointernational attention relate to e-procurement. Mr. Takada noted that bad systems cancause bad morals, and said that e-procurement has been partially introduced in Japan toincrease transparency and had been particularly effective at town and prefectural levels.
In response to an enquiry from a Cambodian participant, the panellists explainedthat both systemic and personal weaknesses can lead to bid-rigging. The panel notedthat when bid-rigging was eliminated from certain industries though improved
procurement systems, the exchequer experienced savings of up to 30 per cent. This huge
reduction in cost demonstrates the great profits to be made by those willing to takeadvantage of weak systems.
The participants enquired of the Hong Kong Expert how private sector corruption
could be criminalized and controlled. The Expert responded that, as well as being bad
for business, bribery in the private sector contributes to the rise of inferior products, as
high-quality goods and services do not need bribes to prosper in the market. That
private sector corruption can increase the supply of unsafe products to the public isvalid grounds on which to criminalize it. The UNODC Expert described the
involvement of the private sector in anti-corruption efforts as ‘very significant’.
In response to a question regarding mandatory provisions of the UNCAC, theExpert from UNODC explained that her office’s philosophy as guardian of the UNCAC
is to be a support to States Parties in implementing the Convention, not to wield a“stick” in forcing its implementation. She also explained the implementation review
process.
The Expert from Hong Kong also explained ICAC’s role in reviewing legislation –it is undertaken strictly from a prevention of corruption viewpoint. ICAC will also carryout a review of government agencies’ reports, at their request, and in confidence.
The panellists also addressed the vital issue of public support for anti-corruption
efforts. The Hong Kong Expert explained that public demand led to the creation of ananti-corruption system in Hong Kong, and is needed to maintain same.
He concluded by emphasizing that both prevention and effective enforcement arevital to the anti-corruption fight. One without the other is pointless.

- 246 -

CHAIR’S SUMMARY
1. The Fifth Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries, hosted
by the United Nations Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders (UNAFEI), was held at the Main Conference Room in the
Ministry of Justice of Japan, in Tokyo from 7 to 9 December 2011.
2. Officials and experts from the following countries and organizations attended theseminar:Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, The Philippines, Thailand,
Vietnam, the Independent Commission Against Corruption of Hong Kong
(ICAC), the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the Financial
Services Agency Government of Japan, the Japan Fair Trade Commission, theJapan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), the Ministry of Finance ofJapan, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, and the National Personnel
Authority of Japan.
3. Mr. Tatsuya Sakuma, Director of UNAFEI, made an opening speech, expressing his
gratitude to the above countries and organizations for their participation.
4. Mr. Haruhiko Ukawa, Deputy Director of UNAFEI, provided an overview on combating
corruption, emphasized the importance of both prevention and enforcement, andintroduced the various objectives of the seminar.
5. In the presentations by visiting experts, UNODC gave a comprehensive presentation on
the universal legal framework of preventing corruption, in particular the UN prevention
measures, Chapter II of the UN Convention against Corruption. The presentation alsoelaborated on the implementation of the UNCAC and the importance of international
legal cooperation. UNODC pointed out the importance of partnerships between the
public and private sectors and awareness-raising of society at large to prevent corruption.
ICAC explained its strategy, in particular prevention of corruption, to keep the Hong
Kong SAR clean. ICAC emphasized the three-pronged interactive strategy: law
enforcement, prevention, and education. The presentation showed effective ways toprevent corruption through different aspects: the system approach and the humanapproach.

- 247 -

6. In the individual presentations, the participants outlined their respective countries’
various efforts in preventing and fighting corruption. Each organization from eachcountry expressed its commitment to prevent or fight corruption through domestic
legislation, administrative systems, and enforcement. A general consensus also existedon the need for strengthening of prevention of corruption, according to the respective
countries’ backgrounds.
7. Advisers invited from organizations of Japan presented preventive efforts undertaken by
their respective organizations. The Japanese Fair Trade Commission and Ministry of
Finance explained how to ensure objectivity and competition in public procurement andhow to prevent corruption. The National Personnel Authority and Financial Services
Agency of Japan showed how to ensure staff integrity.
8. A delegate from the Japan International Cooperation Agency explained her agency’s
approach to the linked concepts of good governance and anti-corruption efforts indevelopment assistance work. A delegate from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japangave a presentation on the G20 anti-Corruption Action Plan, which recognizes theimportance of building upon the existing mechanisms of the UNCAC and the OECD
Convention.
9. During the Meeting, the participants shared and identified the following views andchallenges:-

The importance of early ratification and full implementation of the UNCAC.

-

The importance of strategies that can limit opportunities for corruption by promoting
the efficiency, transparency, and accountability of governmental businesses.

-

The necessity of prompt punishment of those who commit corruption to deter people
from corrupt acts and to show the governments’ strong will to fight corruption.

-

Anti-corruption efforts require a whole governmental and multidisciplinary approachthat consists of prevention and enforcement. The prevention of corruption andenforcement are part of the effort to eradicate corruption.

- 248 -

-

Learning from other countries’ experiences and looking into emerging good practices
are useful to better prevent and fight corruption.
Tokyo, 9 December 2011

- 249 -

VISITING EXPERTS, PARTICIPANTS AND ORGANIZERS
Visiting Experts
1) Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau (Hong Kong)
Prinicpal Corruption Prevention Officer of the Corruption Prevention Department
Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC)
2) Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann (Austria)
Chief
Implementation Support Section, Corruption and Economic Crime Branch
Division for Treaty Affairs
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
Overseas Participants
Cambodia
1) Mr. Kim Santepheap
Deputy General Director
Technical General Department
Ministry of Justice2) Mr. Nuon Sothimon
Director of Legal Affairs
Complaints and International Cooperation Department
The President of the ACU（Anti-Corruption Unit)
Indonesia
3) Mr. Mochammad Jasin Mashuri
Commissioner, Vice Chairman
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK)
4) Mr. Feri Wibisono
Head of Scanning Bureau
Attorney General's Office
Lao P.D.R.
5) Ms. Vilaysinh Dainhansa- 251 -

Prosecutor, Deputy of the Head Division
Office of the Supreme People's Prosecutor
6) Mr. Phongsavanh Phommahaxay
Technical staff of investigation division
Government Inspection Authority
Malaysia7) Mr. Ahmad Khusairi Yahaya
Chief Senior Assistant Commission
Director of Policy, Research and Planning Division
Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)
8) Mr. Azhar Bin Hamzah
Assistant Chief Secretariat to Inspector General of Police (Discipline)
Royal Malaysia Police
Myanmar
9) Mr. San Win
Director
Union Attorney General's Office10) Mr. Bo Maung
Deputy Director
Bereau of Special Investigation
Ministry of Home Affairs
Philippines11) Mr. Richard Anthony Donayre Fadullon
Senior Deputy State Prosecutor
Department of Justice12) Mr. Medwin Sagutin Dizon
Director
Preliminary Investigation
Administrative Bureau-A- 252 -

Office of the Ombudsman
Thailand13) Ms. Srisanit Leelakriangsak Pinthip
Public Prosecutor
International Affairs Department
Office of the Attorney General14) Ms. Sutisa Sukchot
Public Prosecutor
International Affairs Department
Office of the Attorney General
Viet Nam
15) Mr. Hoang Chi Kien
Chief of Division
Division of Research, Planning and General Matters
International Cooperation Department
Supreme People's Procuracy of Vietnam16) Mr. Tran Anh Tuan
Deputy Director Research - General Affair - International Relation Department
Office of Central Steering Committe for Anti- Corruption
ObserverIndonesia
Mr. Bey Arifianto Widodo
Research & System Assessment Specialist
Indonesian Anti Corruption Agency
Adviser (Japan)
1) Ms. Chie Miyahara
Director,
Administration and Financial / Financial Division
Governance Group, Industrial Development and Public Policy Department
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)- 253 -

2) Mr. Fumio Noguchi
Director General
Trade Practices Department
General Secretariat, Japan Fair Trade Commission
3) Mr. Toshifumi Ishida
International Safety and Security Cooperation Division
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan
4) Mr. Hideshiro Karasawa
Deputy Director
Inspection Bureau, Planning & Research Bureau
Financial Services Agency
5) Mr. Junichi Izumi
Director for Legal Affairs, Director of the Public Sector Accounts Office
Legal Division, Budget Bureau
Ministry of Finance
6) Mr. Yuji Takada
Ethics Officer for Planning
National Public Service Ethics Board
National Personnel Authority
Organizers
1) Mr. Tatsuya Sakuma
Director
UNAFEI
2) Mr. Haruhiko Ukawa
Deputy Director
UNAFEI
3) Ms. Kumiko Izumi
Professor- 254 -

UNAFEI
4) Mr. Fumihiko Yanaka
Professor
UNAFEI5) Ms. Grace Lord
Linguistic Adviser
UNAFEI- 255 -

SEMINAR SCHEDULE
7 December

Opening Ceremony
Opening Address by Mr. Tatsuya Sakuma, Director, UNAFEI
Address by The Honourable Mr. Katsuyuki Nishikawa, Vice
Minister of Justice, Japan
Address His Excellency Mr. Tamotsu Shimotsuka, Ambassador
in charge of International Cooperation for Countering
Terrorism and International Organized Crime, Ministry ofForeign Affairs, Japan
Introduction
Introductory Remarks by Mr. Haruhiko Ukawa, Deputy
Director of UNAFEI
Individual Presentations (Philippines)
Individual Presentations (Cambodia)
Individual Presentations (Viet Nam)VE Presentation, UNODC
Individual Presentations, Indonesia
Individual Presentations, Lao PDR
Individual Presentations, Malaysia

8 December

VE Presentation, ICAC, Hong Kong
Individual Presentations, Myanmar
Individual Presentations, Thailand
Presentation by Adviser (JICA, Japan)
Adviser’s Presentation (Japan Fair Trade Commission, Japan)
Adviser’s Presentation (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan)
Panel Discussion
Discussion

9 December

Discussion
Adoption of the Chairman’s Statement
Closing Ceremony
Address by Mr. Tatsuya Sakuma, Director, UNAFEI- 257 -

APPENDIX___________________________________________________________
PHOTOGRAPHS
Commemorative PhotographOpening Address by Director Sakuma
Address by Vice Minister of Justice Nishikawa
Presentation by Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann, UNODC
Presentation by Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau, ICAC
Discussion Session(Co-chaired by Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann, Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau, and Mr. Ukawa)___________________________________________________________

UNAFEI- 259 -

Commemorative PhotographOpening Address by Director Sakuma- 260 -

Address by Vice Minister of Justice Nishikawa

Presentation by Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann, UNODC- 261 -

Presentation by Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau, ICAC

Discussion Session(Co-chaired by Ms. Jo Dedeyne-Amann, Mr. Joseph Lee Yat-Sau, and Mr. Ukawa)- 262 -