This week I had the privilege of attending a conference entitled "Measuring Grand Corruption and Reducing Its Power," held by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences in Cambridge, MA. The conference brought together anti-corruption experts from a variety of disciplines and countries, for intense 2.5-day deliberations on best measures to combat "grand corruption," defined as "the abuse of high-level power that benefits the few at the expense of the many and causes serious and widespread harm to individuals and society" (Transparency International, “Grand Corruption,” online: https://www.transparency.org/en/corruptionary/grand-corruption). A collection of papers arising from the conference will be published by Routledge next year.
The conference looked at a variety of topics related to anti-corruption, including how to measure corruption and domestic civil and criminal measures taken to combat it (such as unexplained wealth orders (UWOs)). A main topic was the proposal for an International Anti-Corruption Court (IACC), put forward by Integrity Initiatives International and currently being championed by Canada, the Netherlands and Ecuador. Judge Mark Wolf, head of III and original proponent of the IACC, was in attendance at the conference and we had a stimulating discussion about the proposal. It is also being promoted by the Canadian Task Force Against Global Corruption, of which I am a member.
Anti-corruption generally, and measures to combat grand corruption in particular, are currently a matter of priority in an increasing number of states and international organizations, in no small part because of recognition that corruption is either at the heart of, or an aggravator of, many other global problems, including problems with trade, global warming and the stability of developing states.
Here is a recent piece by White & Case that evaluates a proposed anti-corruption directive for the EU and compares it to US and UK law. An interesting component (to me, anyway) is the explicit consideration of corruption offences that cross borders, or in the more technical language, that use "extended territorial jurisdiction."
Comments