Fighting Corruption: Law's Limitations

Corruption is a pervasive and complex issue that undermines human rights, the rule of law, and good governance. It takes many forms, including bribery, influence peddling, embezzlement, and abuse of power, and can occur in any sector or country. While legal reforms and international treaties are crucial in combating corruption, they are insufficient on their own. Effective implementation and enforcement are essential, requiring the capacity to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate crimes. Additionally, corruption is increasingly transnational, necessitating global cooperation and partnerships. The human rights-based approach to anti-corruption is significant, emphasizing the systemic responsibility of the state and focusing on the well-being of individuals whose rights are prioritized. Thus, the question of whether corruption can be fought by law alone is multifaceted and complex, requiring a comprehensive approach that addresses various aspects of the issue.

Corruption's impact on human rights and the rule of law

Corruption is a pervasive transnational crime that wastes public resources, destabilizes countries, and impedes good governance. It is a difficult concept to define, as it differs depending on the country or jurisdiction. For instance, some political funding practices that are legal in one place may be illegal in another.

Corruption undermines human rights and the rule of law. It erodes trust in public institutions, hinders economic development, and has a disproportionate impact on the enjoyment of human rights, particularly by marginalized or disadvantaged groups. For example, corruption can hamper access to basic social rights such as healthcare, housing, and education. It can also lead to environmental degradation, which violates the collective right to a clean environment.

Corruption in law enforcement is particularly dangerous as it impacts citizens' safety and their pursuit of justice. For instance, in Ukraine, corruption has reportedly prevented progress in investigations into several high-profile cases, including the killing of anti-corruption activist Kateryna Handzyuk. In Serbia, there has been impunity in the case of the brutal beating of Serbian investigative journalist Ivan Ninić in 2015, while journalists of the Crime and Corruption Reporting Network (KRIK) have received death threats and were targeted by smear campaigns.

The lack of independence of judges, prosecutors, and lawyers directly harms the right to a fair trial and limits the effective and efficient administration of justice. When corruption interferes with the appointment of judges and court proceedings, it violates the impartiality of the judiciary and the fair trial rights of defendants. Individuals are also deprived of equal access to justice when public officials demand bribes as a condition for accessing the judicial system.

A human rights-based approach can strengthen and fill gaps in anti-corruption law. This approach clarifies international state responsibility in respecting, protecting, ensuring, and fulfilling human rights, as well as the consequences of breaches. It requires states to prevent actions by private parties and state officials that violate rights, investigate and prosecute violations, and redress victims.

International cooperation and partnerships

Regional organizations also play a crucial role in fostering international cooperation and partnerships. The Council of Europe, for instance, has developed strong anti-corruption legal standards and tasked its specialized body, the Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO), with overseeing their implementation. GRECO utilizes a dynamic process of mutual evaluation and peer pressure to identify deficiencies in national anti-corruption policies and promote necessary reforms.

In addition to these formal agreements and organizations, information sharing and the development of best practices are vital tools in the fight against corruption. Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) and Global Corruption Barometer (GCB) are excellent examples of this. The CPI is the leading global ranking of public sector corruption, while the GCB collects first-hand data on how people experience and perceive corruption in their daily lives. By sharing this information, these initiatives shape the international anti-corruption agenda and enhance accountability and integrity.

International cooperation is also essential in addressing the transnational nature of corruption, which often involves complex case investigations, asset recovery, and multi-country networks of practitioners. For example, the US works to strengthen country systems by enhancing their abilities to cooperate internationally and building frameworks that facilitate such cooperation. These partnerships not only assist individual countries in their anti-corruption efforts but also benefit US law enforcement in pursuing schemes connected to the United States.

Furthermore, international partnerships can provide support and protection to individuals fighting corruption within their own countries. For instance, the US Department of State's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) recognizes brave and impactful advocates and reformers through its global Anti-Corruption Champions Award. By supporting these individuals and promoting accountability and integrity, INL helps to strengthen anti-corruption efforts worldwide.

The role of transparency and information access

Transparency and access to information are essential tools in the fight against corruption. Transparency helps to hold power accountable for the common good and increases trust in decision-makers and public institutions. It involves shedding light on formal and informal rules, plans, processes, and actions, ensuring that information is not only available but also easily accessible, understandable, and usable by citizens. Transparency is particularly important in exposing corruption in law enforcement, as it impacts citizen safety and their pursuit of justice. For example, in Ukraine, corruption hindered investigations into the killing of anti-corruption activist Kateryna Handzyuk.

The right to seek and receive information is a human right and serves as a safeguard against corruption. By integrating human rights into international and transnational anti-corruption law, the fight against corruption is reframed, focusing on the systemic responsibility of the state and the well-being of individuals whose rights are prioritized. This approach, known as "individualization" or "rightsification," broadens the objectives of the transnational battle against corruption, moving beyond economic stability and public order to prioritize individual rights and dignity.

The human rights perspective also introduces new mechanisms for monitoring and litigation, complementing the criminal law approach. For example, the Council of Europe has developed strong anti-corruption legal standards, with its specialized body, the Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO), overseeing their implementation through mutual evaluation and peer pressure. This process identifies deficiencies in national anti-corruption policies and prompts necessary legislative, institutional, and practical reforms.

Information access plays a crucial role in exposing corruption, as evidenced by the Global Corruption Barometer (GCB). The GCB, the world's largest public survey on corruption, collects first-hand data on citizens' experiences and perceptions of corruption, providing unique insights into bribery, abuse of power, and institutional trust. This information complements the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), shaping the international anti-corruption agenda.

However, transparency alone may not be sufficient to combat corruption. It must be accompanied by effective implementation and enforcement mechanisms, as well as international cooperation and partnerships, to address the transnational nature of corruption. Legal reforms are insufficient without the capacity to enforce them, including the ability to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate crimes.

Political corruption and its consequences

Political corruption is the use of powers by government officials or their network contacts for illegitimate private gain. It undermines democracy and good governance by flouting or even subverting formal processes. Political corruption can take many forms, including bribery, lobbying, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, parochialism, patronage, influence peddling, graft, and embezzlement. It is often facilitated by loose legislation, ill-defined powers, and a lack of accountability.

The consequences of political corruption are far-reaching and detrimental to society. Firstly, it erodes trust in public institutions and hinders economic development. This is evident in countries with the smallest per capita incomes, where foreign aid for vital services such as health care is often diverted by corrupt officials. For example, in Bihar, India, more than 80% of subsidized food aid intended for the poor was stolen by corrupt officials. Similarly, in the case of 30 Sub-Saharan African countries, capital flight from 1970 to 1996 totaled $187 billion, exceeding their external debts. Political corruption also has a disproportionate impact on marginalized and disadvantaged groups, such as minorities, people with disabilities, refugees, migrants, and prisoners, by impeding their access to basic social rights like healthcare, housing, and education.

Moreover, political corruption facilitates criminal enterprises, including drug trafficking, money laundering, and human trafficking. It also creates a state of unequal opportunities, where only those within a corrupt network gain advantages. For instance, funding for essential services such as education, healthcare, and poverty relief can become a source of personal enrichment for bureaucrats and contractors, compromising the potential of these sectors. This can lead to a loss of intrinsic motivation within organizations, demoralizing workers and managers and causing people to doubt the value of hard work and innovation.

In addition, political corruption undermines human rights and the rule of law. It increases the risk for journalists, activists, and anyone who opposes or reports on corruption, as they may become targets of violence, imprisonment, or other human rights violations. For example, Azerbaijani investigative journalist Khadija Ismayilova was imprisoned due to her criticism of government corruption. Corruption in law enforcement is particularly dangerous, impacting citizens' safety and their pursuit of justice. This is evident in Ukraine, where corruption has hindered investigations into several high-profile cases, including the killing of anti-corruption activist Kateryna Handzyuk.

Finally, political corruption can lead to political instability, as seen in the case of Africa, where new governments often confiscate the previous government's corruptly obtained assets, encouraging officials to stash their wealth abroad. It also fuels transnational crime, wastes public resources, destabilizes countries, and impedes good governance. Authoritarian regimes may even weaponize corruption to perpetuate their power and undermine democracy. Thus, the consequences of political corruption are extensive and have a profound impact on the social, economic, and political fabric of a nation.

Corruption in law enforcement

Internal affairs sections within police departments are responsible for investigating suspected police corruption or misconduct. However, it is not uncommon for Internal Affairs to cover up instances of corruption, fraud, and abuse by individual officers or groups of officers. This is often done to hide internal problems from the public and inter-departmental reviews. Additionally, Police Commissions may be complicit in these cover-ups. Certain officers who have been fired for corruption can be rehired through petitions signed by criminals and violators they had previously favoured, leading to continued selective enforcement.

The impact of corruption in law enforcement extends beyond individual cases. It erodes public trust in law enforcement agencies and undermines the cohesion of departmental policies. It also interferes with effective police service and has serious legal and human rights implications. For instance, in Ukraine, corruption has hindered progress in investigations into several high-profile cases, including the killing of anti-corruption activist Kateryna Handzyuk. Similarly, in Serbia, there has been impunity in the case of the brutal beating of Serbian investigative journalist Ivan Ninić, while journalists from the Crime and Corruption Reporting Network (KRIK) have faced death threats and smear campaigns.

To combat corruption in law enforcement, a multi-dimensional approach is necessary. Legal reforms and international treaties, such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), provide a foundation for anti-corruption efforts. However, these reforms must be coupled with the capacity to implement and enforce them effectively. This includes strengthening the abilities of countries to cooperate internationally and building frameworks for such cooperation. Additionally, individual conduct must be addressed, with consequences for corruption and incentives for reform. Increasing the representation and integration of women in higher posts within law enforcement agencies is also being explored as a strategy to combat corruption.

Frequently asked questions