Combatting High-level Corruption in Eastern Europe

6. Building anti-corruption alliances and networks

Abstract

This chapter underlines that efforts to combat high-level corruption can be supported through a whole-of-society approach in which specialised anti-corruption institutions engage with members of civil society, the media and businesses in order to foster a culture of integrity. A whole-of-society approach promotes the development of anti-corruption coalitions or networks which can serve as a line of defense against attacks on anti-corruption reforms and can cultivate the public demand for eradicating corruption, particularly high-level corruption.

The OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public Integrity underlines that public sector institutions should engage and partner with members of civil society, the media and businesses in a whole-of-society approach to help promote a culture of integrity (OECD, 2020, p. 78[1]). The development of these partnerships is particularly important in ensuring the success of efforts to combat high-level corruption.

As previously noted, corrupt high-level officials often represent a network of powerful actors or narrow interest groups, including authorities, financial, legal and expert resources, and the media. They can use these networks of experts, social networks, and the media to influence public opinion and destroy the credibility of anti-corruption agencies.

Such corruption networks can only be confronted by developing anti-corruption coalitions or networks as a counterbalance. Anti-corruption institutions should engage in “whole-of-society” approaches by developing their cooperation with civil society and secure their support, actively using the media and social networks to raise awareness of their activities, engaging with businesses that suffer from non-competitive actions of dishonest rivals to create public demand for eradicating corruption (OECD, 2020, p. 80[1]).

Coalitions of anti-corruption institutions with civil society can serve as a line of defence against attacks on the results of anti-corruption reforms. An example is the massive civic anti-corruption campaigns in Romania in 2017-2019,1 and the protests against the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to cancel a number of anti-corruption reforms in October 2020.2

An active civil society can act as a lobbyist for anti-corruption initiatives, play a crucial role in opposing initiatives that hinder anti-corruption institutions, create media protection, and offer expert initiatives that benefit the fight against high-level corruption.

Box 6.1. Transparency International (TI) Georgia’s database of alleged cases of High-Level Corruption

Transparency International (TI) Georgia developed an online database of alleged high-level corruption offences to track allegations of corruption involving high-level officials and monitor the extent of high-level corruption in the country. The database now includes 173 allegations of high-level corruption involving 177 high-level public officials and could be used as a useful analytical detection source for law enforcement authorities.

Accordingly, allegations are included in the database if they involve a high-level official, as defined by TI Georgia, and where the reports, relayed in the media, press releases or other sources of information, provide reasonable grounds to believe that a corruption offence was committed.

These allegations are mainly collected through TI Georgia’s own investigative work, which uses a number of open-source investigative tools to uncover possible corruption schemes, including company, public procurement, and political financing registers. In addition, TI Georgia monitors the media and reports from other civil society organisations to collect allegations of high-level corruption and also relies on whistleblower reports that they receive.

Source: Transparency International Georgia, Alleged Cases of High-Level Corruption — A Periodically Updated List

https://transparency.ge/en/blog/alleged-cases-high-level-corruption-periodically-updated-list

Civil society organisations can also play an important role when law enforcement authorities are unable or unwilling to pursue or open investigations or prosecute high-level corruption cases. Authorised civil society organisations can be given procedural rights to initiate and be a party to criminal proceedings through “actio popularis” mechanisms. For example, in Belgium, France, and Luxembourg, authorised civil society organisations can file complaints and act as “partie civile” (civil party) in criminal cases. In practice, they initiate criminal proceedings, which have led to successful prosecutions of foreign high-level public officials. This could be a useful tool in combatting high-level corruption in the EaP and Eastern European countries by giving civil society the means to ensure that sensitive allegations of high-level corruption are pursued, and cases are not arbitrarily closed.

Box 6.2. Mechanism of filing civil complaints by anti-bribery associations in France

In 2013, France introduced amendments to its Criminal Procedural Code authorising accredited civil society organisations (accredited for at least five years) whose statutory purpose is to combat bribery, to be a civil party for certain offences, including corruption. In 2021, there were three accredited civil society organisations in France, namely, Anticor, Sherpa and Transparency International France.

These civil society organisations initiated a number of investigations into both domestic and foreign high-level officials. The so called “Bien Mal Acquis” case was initiated following a complaint filed by these civil society organisations into how luxury assets were acquired in France by three foreign heads of state and their relatives. In another case initiated by these civil society organisations, the former Vice President of a foreign country was convicted for money laundering and embezzlement of public funds and sentenced to four years in prison along with the confiscation of his/her assets located in France.

Source: Transparency International (2023), Working paper, Tackling grand corruption impunity, p.26.

In some other cases, even if governments have the political will to implement anti-corruption reforms, they are unable to implement them effectively and promptly because the state institutions are professionally weakened or compromised by the longstanding policies of the previous governments. In such cases, civil society can actively engage governments in transforming and gaining public control over the activities of state institutions. For example, this approach is used by the presidential administration and the government of Moldova. Representatives of the two most influential civil society organisations are included in the Supreme Security Council of Moldova,3 and they provide the government with serious expert support in reforming the justice sector and fighting corruption in the country.4

A Public Control Council has been acting with the Ukrainian NABU to ensure transparency and civil control of the agency, facilitate anti-corruption co-operation between the Bureau and public associations/other civil society institutions, and facilitate the provision of objective information to the NABU Director on the public assessment of the state of implementation of the tasks and responsibilities assigned to the Bureau. The composition of the Council is renewed every two years through open and transparent competition (general public online voting).5 The recent Technical Assessment recommended revising the procedure for selecting members of the Council to ensure that only NGOs with a proven track record may nominate experienced and reputable candidates and that interrelated NGOs and those connected to political parties are not eligible to participate in the process (National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, 2023[2]). Since civil society has a limited capacity in the EaP member states, it also needs support. In such cases, informal coalitions defending anti-corruption initiatives are joined by international partners who have a very powerful arsenal of tools to curb corrupt narrow interest groups, in particular through mechanisms of international technical assistance, monitoring mechanisms for compliance with international anti-corruption instruments, assistance in conducting professional expertise, and support for civil society and business associations.

Businesses can be another partner in the coalition in support of anti-corruption reforms. In the EaP countries, where oligarchs or narrow interest groups retain influence on the private sector, many large domestic companies often tolerate corruption, relying on non-transparent business practices or the involvement of law enforcement and the judiciary in unfair competition. Small and medium-sized domestic companies in these high-corruption-risk countries also often tolerate corruption as a cost of conducting their business activities. While multinational enterprises or foreign companies operating in these countries may have robust anti-corruption compliance programmes in place, they are also confronted with increased solicitation or extorsion for bribes to operate in these countries where corruption risks are high.

At the same time, the anti-corruption potential of businesses in the EaP countries is quite significant. The role of business with integrity is critical, as it can become a powerful player with a high potential to resist the oligarchic type of economic functioning, as well as to cooperate to create competitive political platforms and promote reforms in the domain of democracy and the rule of law.

The development of stronger safeguards against private-sector corruption in the region would require extensive efforts by both governments and non-governmental stakeholders. The ACN’s Regional Business Integrity Study recommended that governments conduct a comprehensive assessment of corruption risks (including business integrity risks), develop appropriate measures against high-level corruption, and ensure effective enforcement of their existing anti-corruption laws to deter and sanction corruption involving the private sector while also coming up with positive incentives designed to prompt companies to promote integrity internally. This should be complemented by providing comprehensive and unhindered access to information to fully tap the private sector’s potential in the fight against corruption while encouraging companies to further invest in compliance programmes and ensure that integrity mechanisms fully develop and become a habitual part of a company’s mission (OECD, 2022, p. 8[3]).

Box 6.3. Business initiatives in fighting against corruption

Ukrainian Network of Integrity and Compliance (UNIC) was founded in 2017 by Ukrainian business leaders and gained support from the Business Ombudsman Council, the OECD, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. UNIC's purpose is to promote compliant business practices and improve Ukraine's business environment.

Today, UNIC serves as a platform facilitating the exchange of insights and experiences among local and international companies operating in Ukraine. Covering topics like business ethics, integrity, compliance, and anti-corruption, UNIC focuses on several key areas:

• Promoting the culture of transparent and responsible business.

• Highlighting the profound impact of business integrity on society and economic growth.

• Equipping Network participants with modern compliance practices and fostering honest business behaviour.

• Creating a community of skilled professionals adept at implementing compliance.

• Facilitating a constructive dialogue between government and businesses, actively involving companies in shaping integrity policies across public and private sectors, along with anti-corruption efforts.

Source: UNIC, https://unic.org.ua/en/about-us/

Recommendation

• Promote a whole-of-society culture of public integrity, partnering with the private sector, civil society and individuals, in particular through reinforcing cooperation between anti-corruption institutions and the private sector, civil society and the business community to tackle high-level corruption.

References

[2] National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (2023), Technical assessment of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine 2023, https://nabu.gov.ua/site/assets/files/47003/tekhnichna_otcinka_nabu_2023_en-1.pdf.

[3] OECD (2022), “Business integrity in Eastern Europe and Central Asia 2022”, OECD Business and Finance Policy Papers, No. 11, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1ed3fe17-en.

[1] OECD (2020), OECD Public Integrity Handbook, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ac8ed8e8-en.

Notes

← 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/europe/protests-rock-romania-after-government-decriminalizes-corruption.html

← 2. https://zn.ua/ukr/UKRAINE/pid-konstitutsijnim-sudom-prokhodit-aktsija-protestu-pid-budivlju-stjahujut-silovikiv.html

← 3.  https://www.moldpres.md/en/news/2023/09/14/23007193

← 4.  These are organizations such as «Institutul pentru Politici și Reforme Europene» (https://ipre.md), Centrul de Resurse Juridice Din Moldova (https://crjm.org). In particular, they have prepared a number of analytical materials on the state of the fight against corruption, the situation in the judicial system, prepared a functional analysis of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office with recommendations for legislative changes, and organized numerous expert discussions on these issues.

← 5.  https://nabu.gov.ua/en/rada-gromads-kogo-kontroliu/