The role of international organizations in the fight against corruption

RESEARCH MATERIALS
 Anti-Corruption

Kamnazarov MM Judge of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Sarsenis A. - PhD ENU  name after L.N. Gumilev

The role of international organizations in the fight against corruption

The complex anti-corruption legal means at the international level have special significance are those that focus on ensuring the effectiveness of the global fight against transnational corruption, to achieve such quality to prevent and suppress the most dangerous for the individual states and the international community acts in which would be guaranteed by international standards of qualification of corruption offenses , unified jurisdictional parameters inevitability of prosecution and punishment of offenders, as well as fair compensation to victims subjects .

These international legal tools include universal (common to all or most of the governments) the contract is determined to generally accepted standards, as well as agreed with them regional and bilateral agreements.

Greater role in the unification of common approaches national legislation of various states in the fight against corruption played by international organizations of the UN system, the Council of Europe, the World Bank, the Organization of American States, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and other international organizations.

The United Nations (UN) Convention against Corruption.

In sight of the UN problem of corruption have been for more than two decades. And it is the understanding of the international nature of the phenomenon of corruption and its trans- nationality requires global action at the State level to neutralize the threat it poses to the security of the entire world community. It is no accident in the spotlight a global program implemented under the UN Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, is the problem of corruption.

The Global Programmes of the United Nations to assist countries in identifying, preventing and combating corruption. Under the program, the purpose of any of the national program is to, first, increase the risk and costs of corruption; secondly, to create an atmosphere of integrity, which would change the rules of the game and the behavior of its participants; thirdly, to ensure, ultimately, the rule of law. [1] In particular, the program developed mechanisms to promote greater transparency and accountability in public procurement and international commercial transactions. In addition, for those responsible for policy development for judges, prosecutors, law enforcement and financial authorities organized study.

One of the first international instruments in the area under consideration is adopted December 15, 1975 the UN General Assembly resolution which, while condemning "all forms of corruption," calls " the government as part of their national" jurisdiction to take all necessary measures to prevent such corruption and punish offenders. Further, the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, UN special resolution was adopted "Corruption in public administration " [2 ], which was formalized basic guide prepared by the UN Secretariat, " Practical measures against corruption," which stated the following: " because corruption among public officials can reduce the" no on the potential effectiveness of all kinds of government programs, hamper the development and pose a threat to individuals and groups of individuals, it is extremely important that all States:

1) review the adequacy of their criminal laws, including procedural rules, in order to respond to all forms of corruption;

2) developed administrative and regulatory mechanisms to prevent corruption;

3) establish procedures to identify, investigate and convict corrupt officials ;

4) developed legal provisions for the forfeiture of assets and property acquired through corruption;

5) take appropriate action against companies involved in corruption. [3]

The resolution encourages Member States to develop a strategy for the fight against corruption, as well as to consider the adequacy of criminal law to respond to all kinds of corruption, urges develop legal provisions for the forfeiture of funds and assets obtained through corruption, provide appropriate measures against companies involved in it.

In addition, corruption was one of the important topics of special sessions of the Ninth Congress of the United Nations (Cairo, 1995) [4].

In 1996, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a resolution on " Combating Corruption" , which calls for carefully consider the problems associated with the international aspects of corruption, especially in relation to international economic activities carried out by corporate organizations. [5] Also known UN declaration "On the fight against corruption and bribery in international commercial transactions " in 1996, according to which States undertake , inter alia, be regarded as a criminal offense of bribery of foreign public officials and cancel the tax exemption amounts received as a bribe from any private or public corporation or individual UN member state by any public official or a person elected to a representative body of another country. [6]

Thus, the United Nations has recognized the international nature of the problem of corruption and trying to find a mutually acceptable forms and methods of cupping of this phenomenon. All of the above documents are advisory in nature and does not affect the solution. However, these instruments play an important role in shaping the norms of international law with respect to the matter under consideration , as well as able to influence the domestic law of States . [7]

Milestone was the adoption by the General Assembly of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime [8 ], which is binding on 130 States Parties. The purpose of this Convention is to promote cooperation in more effective prevention of transnational organized crime and the fight against it. [9]

Transnational corruption manifests itself in the form of bribery of foreign public officials in order to obtain the possibility to maintain or continue the economic activity in a country , or receive inappropriate advantage . [10] First international agreement regulated the responsibility for taking part or profit from serious crimes, such as money laundering committed by organized criminal groups (substantial fines). [11]

The Convention gives the UN deployed a number of concepts, including organized criminal group, a serious crime, a structured group, laundering of proceeds of crime, the predicate offense, etc. (Article 2) . The Convention provides for the criminalization of participation in an organized criminal group (Article 5), the criminalization of the laundering of proceeds of crime (Article 6), also requires to criminalize acts of corruption, i.e. transmitting and receiving bribes, and otherwise take legislative and other measures to prevent and detect corruption of public officials in order to ensure an effective fight against corruption on the basis of common standards for domestic laws (Article 8 and Article 9).

The Convention was the appropriate response of the international community on the processes of criminal globalization. Mankind has a document that gives algorithms coordination in the fight against international mafia structures [12].

But, despite all the positivity set out in the UN Convention provisions, the international community was still a need to develop a global approach to overcome corruption, taking special anti-corruption principles and standards of conduct inherent in the first persons of the state to "corruption under Infinite Crisis ceased to be means in the art of political management "[13]. So, in resolution 55 /66 of 4 December 2000 the UN General Assembly recognized the advisability of an international legal instrument against corruption, independent of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and decided to establish an ad hoc committee to develop such an instrument in Vienna at the headquarters of the Centre for international Crime Prevention of the Office for drug Control and Crime Prevention.

The work of Special Committee was launched in January 2002.The total of seven sessions of the Special Committee. Especially hard was the sixth session, during which they discussed the key provisions of the final draft of the Convention. The final meeting of this session ended August 9, 2003, when participants in the discussion, representatives from 128 countries agreed on the text of the Convention. [14]

In the discussion of the draft Convention on the sessions of the Standing Committee of the greatest discussion were the following questions:

1. The definition of "public official ." The discussion was around the question of how broad a definition should be and whether the Convention should contain its "autonomous" definition or this concept should be determined solely by national law;

2 . Definition of "corruption". The discussion ended with the result that came to the conclusion not to offer their own definition, and include a reference to the list subject to the criminalization of acts;

3 . Question of whether the Convention should cover corruption in the private sector. Most states expressed strong support for this. According to other states, the issue is complex and fraught with a variety of conceptual, legal and procedural problems, which may not be acceptable solutions available;

4 . The question of how broad and should be mandatory provisions concerning the prevention of corruption. Most negotiators unanimously called for the inclusion in the text of the Convention extensive provisions on the prevention of corruption, which is reflected in the final draft. [15]

As a result, a global approach to the problem under discussion resulted in the adoption by the 58th Session of the UN General Assembly in October 2003, the UN Convention against Corruption, [16] which has been ratified by the Republic of Kazakhstan in May 2008. [17]

The preamble to the Convention, Parties expressed concern about the problem of corruption, the challenges it seriously impacts on global development. Noting the significant work undertaken by the UN and other international organizations in the sphere of control of corruption, the Convention confirms that it is in the basic conceptual outline based on the documents of these organizations and develops their ideas.

The objectives of this Convention are: To promote and strengthen measures aimed at more efficient and effective prevention of corruption and the fight against it, to promote, facilitate and support international cooperation and technical assistance in preventing and combating corruption with her, including the adoption of asset recovery, promote integrity , accountability and proper management of public affairs and public property (Article 1) .

Convention establishes a comprehensive set of standards, measures and rules that all countries can use to strengthen their legal norms and modes of state regulation in the field of combating corruption. It calls for the adoption of measures to prevent corruption and outlaws prevalent forms of corruption in both the public and private sector. It is a huge breakthrough, as it requires the member countries to recover the funds obtained using corrupt practices in the country in which they were abducted. These provisions - the first of its kind - will create a new basic principle, as well as a base for stronger cooperation between countries to prevent, identify and return the funds received as a result of corrupt practices.

The Convention emphasizes the need for political will on the part of the executive, legislative and judicial powers to use versatile and consistent measures of state and society to eliminate the causes and conditions that gives rise to and nourishing corruption in various spheres of life. In particular, the Convention suggests the need for a dedicated national body to fight corruption, which is seen as a manifestation of political will. Convention promotes and strengthens measures aimed at more effective prevention of corruption and acts related to it, and fights with them. [18]

For the purposes of any normative legal act is crucial terminology used, through which passed its exact meaning and content. However, it appears that the expert opinion is justified, according to which the text of the Convention contains ambiguous language and liabilities, which creates a real opportunity for political pressure, covert intervention in internal affairs under the pretext of the fight against corruption [19].
In particular, the Convention has such ambiguous language as "States Parties shall endeavor" (art. 5, 7, 8), "within their means" (art. 13), "may consider" (art. 34), "may take "(art. 27). Such terminology suggests declaratively content of the Convention, because it does not impose liability, and expresses only the will and intention; it allows you to ignore certain provisions of the Convention, to leave their application to the parties and will inevitably lead to a double standard that seems unacceptable for the purposes of the Convention. [20] Convention involves the creation of an anti- corruption in the Member of the States. However, note that it says to create a body, “that prevent corruption by means of appropriate policies, coordination, and the expansion and dissemination of knowledge about the prevention of corruption" [21] and "not on the practical units dealing directly the fight against corruption". [22]

The Convention also established agency to monitor the implementation of the provisions of the document - the Conference of States - Parties to the Convention. According to article 63 UN Secretary-General shall convene a Conference of States Parties not later than one year after the entry into force of the Convention. The Conference shall determine a plan of action to implement the provisions of the Convention, Parties hear the information on its implementation. Conference of the states - parties, if it deems it necessary, any appropriate mechanism or agency to assist in the effective implementation of the Convention.

In addition, the Convention provides for the establishment of an effective system of financial control, checking property, sources of income and expenses for public officials, the possibility of recovery of assets through the application of procedures based on the recognition that the assets are the proceeds of corruption offenses and procedures that aim to return these assets as damages from corruption in the civil procedure. However, these issues are still some uncertainties; in particular, there is a conflict of law if necessary regulatory procedures described above.

Moreover, as rightly noted experts, the Convention provides a double standard. [23] Content of the rules of the Convention to the extent not related to the return of property and the issuance of assets is binding on member states. They accept their respective responsibilities and adapt them into domestic law. Confiscation of assets and the issuance of the same rest with the domestic legislation. Thus, in one case the provisions of international treaties take precedence over domestic law of the States Parties, in the other, the advantage goes to the national legislation. This approach makes the implementation of the prevention of transfer of funds of illicit origin derived from acts of corruption, and fight with them ineffective. And the procedure itself on this issue turns into an instrument of state policy, not international law. [24]

The UN Convention against Corruption contains a positive and creative start, but many of the provisions need to be adjusted in order to eliminate inaccuracies in the statements avoiding double standards, providing states the right to exercise discretion and deny the possibility of achieving the Convention goals. Left unresolved the question of retroactivity of the Convention, i.e. on the return of assets that were illegally acquired prior to the signing of the Convention. It remains an open question of the responsibility of States - the main subjects of public international law - violating its international obligations. The current international practice of providing legal assistance in the implementation of the Institute of extradition or surrender of accused and suspects in crimes confirms the impossibility of implementing responsibility [25].
Therefore, as the V.A. Nomokonov," UN priority should be to create the current institutional mechanism to ensure compliance with the principle «pacta sunt servanda ». Provided full support as a new tool, may in practice to improve the quality of life of millions of people throughout the world" [26].
Based on the foregoing, it is easy to conclude that the UN assumed a coordinating role in the formation of a legal foundation for the implementation of the fight against corruption efforts of the world community. In spite of the controversial and unsuccessful provisions inevitable in such bulk international instrument as a whole the UN Convention against Corruption should be characterized with the positive side. It is assumed that the Convention will be a basis for harmonization of national legislation of States Parties in accordance with the objectively necessary measures to overcome corruption, adequate to the threat it poses to the planetary scale. Previously adopted international instruments in this area had either regional (Convention OAS and the Council of Europe), or otherwise, strictly limited application (OECD Convention).
With the adoption of the UN Convention on the international community received its first global anti-corruption document values​​, which was an outstanding achievement and an essential complement the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and who is able to become an effective instrument of international cooperation in the fight against corruption.

Council of Europe Convention on combating corruption.

In 1996, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted a Programme of Action against Corruption, in which were prepared and opened for signature two conventions - Criminal Law Convention on Corruption of January 27, 1999 and the Convention on civil liability for corruption on November 4, 1999 [27].
Members of both conventions may be invited European states outside until the Council of Europe and non-European countries (USA, Canada, Japan and some other countries have participated in their development).
In order to most effectively combat such offenses parties - party to the Convention undertake to amend the rules of domestic law governing: complicity in corruption and criminal jurisdiction in such cases; liability of legal persons, sanctions and other sanctions; protection of collaborators of justice and witnesses; measures to facilitate the gathering of evidence and the confiscation of the proceeds; specialized agencies and officials to combat corruption; providing law enforcement cooperation within the country.

The preamble to the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption underlining the need to give priority common criminal policy aimed at the protection of society against corruption, including the adoption of appropriate legislation and preventive measures. Also refers to the threat posed by corruption to the rule of law, democracy, human rights, social justice, economic development, moral principles. The Convention is increased, rapid and well-functioning international cooperation in the field of criminal law of States Parties in order to prevent threats to the rule of law, democracy and human rights, good governance, the principles of equality and social justice, competition, economic development and threaten the stability of democratic institutions and the moral foundations of society.
Section II « measures the adoption of which is necessary at the national level "defines 13 types of corruption offenses - active bribery of domestic public officials (Article 2), passive bribery of domestic public officials (Article 3), bribery of members of domestic public assemblies (Article .4), bribery of foreign public officials and members of foreign public assemblies (Article 5 and  6), active and passive bribery in the private sector (Article 7 and 8), bribery of officials of international organizations (Article 9), bribery of members of international parliamentary assemblies (Article 10), bribery of judges and officials of international courts (Article 11). Individual articles provide such compositions corruption offenses - jobbery (Article 12), the laundering of proceeds from corruption offenses (Article 13), and offenses relating to transactions with accounts (Article 14), [28]. However, the Convention does not exclude the State party of any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with its national law in respect of other corruption offenses.
Analysis of criminal law, established by the Convention (Articles 2-11) indicates that the Convention extends the range of subjects of corruption crimes.
European law to the novel includes provision of the Convention concerning the liability of legal persons in relation to corruption offenses. According to Article 18 of the Convention," each party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to ensure that legal persons can be held liable in connection with the criminal offenses of active bribery, jobbery and money laundering, qualified as such in accordance with this Convention, committed for their benefit by any natural person acting in his personal capacity or as part of a legal entity, who has a leading position within the legal person, based on:
of representation of the legal person;
Representation or right to make decisions on behalf of the entity;
or to exercise control within the legal person,
as well as for involvement of such a natural person in the aforementioned crimes as an accomplice (assistant or instigator) "[29 ].

Legislation in many countries, including the Republic of Kazakhstan does not provide proper criminal liability of legal persons in relation to corruption offenses.
 

Most scientists oppose the criminal liability of legal persons, for other-[30]. Thus, A.V. Naumov, referring to the law-making experience of European countries (example, France in 1992), argues that the liability of legal persons may well coexist with the principle of personal responsibility and guilty to supplement it. [31]
According to Article 23 of the Convention, bank secrecy is not an obstacle for the implementation of measures to facilitate the gathering of evidence and the confiscation of proceeds of corruption. However, in accordance with Article 19 of the Convention, "Each Party shall also adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to enable it to confiscate or otherwise deprive the instrumentalities and proceeds of criminal offenses as such in accordance with this Convention or property the value of which corresponds to such proceeds."
The Parties undertake to take appropriate measures to protect witnesses and other persons cooperating with justice in the fight against corruption, and to promote the international prosecution of those accused of corruption, assist each other in providing the necessary information, the collection of evidence, confiscation extradition (article 22).
The Convention provides for the general principles of international cooperation in combating corruption - the use of multilateral and bilateral treaties and in their absence obliges the parties to provide each other the greatest possible assistance, some of its provisions. Article 27 of the Convention stipulates the procedure for extradition of persons who have committed crimes of corruption, qualified as such in accordance with this Convention.

In this connection it should be noted the importance of this Convention, as after its signature by the perpetrators of corruption offenses can no longer use the territory of these countries in order to avoid criminal prosecution (as was the case in the absence of a bilateral agreement on extradition between particular countries) [32]. Monitoring the implementation of the provisions of the Criminal Law Convention on the responsibility of the Group of States against Corruption (GSAC). [33]
However, it should be noted that the fight against corruption, which mostly takes measures under criminal law, is not effective. On the contrary, it can be dangerous to society and the state as a whole will not eliminate corruption in the state apparatus, but only to raise rates for corruption by officials. It also does not solve the problem of professional and moral training of civil servants, as well as the development of methods to minimize the corrupt behavior of officials of the state apparatus. In support of this position, you can quote the N.M. Korkunova, who once remarked that " criminal repression too costly to society both financially and morally, however, she does not destroy the criminal penalty to commit an offense in itself does not restore the trampled rights not reimburse caused criminal damage. It is necessary to resort to punitive measures when there are no other ways to counter the offense or these methods are insufficient, do not correspond to the severity of illegal encroachment. In connection with that, that's why laws with punitive sanctions called less perfect law" [34].
We proceed to consider the Convention on civil liability for corruption, which is the first attempt to define common international rules in the field of civil rights and corruption. The Convention attempts to determine the corruption (with a caveat: for the purposes of this Convention). Article 2 describes corruption as requesting, offering, giving or accepting, directly or indirectly, a bribe or other undue advantage which distorts the proper performance of duties recipient of the bribe or improper benefits. [35] The purpose of the Convention is to create effective remedies for persons who have suffered damage as a result of acts of corruption, to enable them to defend their rights and interests, including the possibility of obtaining compensation for damage.
The Convention is divided into three chapters that cover: measures taken at the national level, international cooperation and enforcement, as well as the final provisions. When ratifying the Convention, States commit themselves to incorporate its principles and standards into domestic legislation with regard to their own particular circumstances.
The Convention addresses the following questions:
- Liability ( including liability of the State for acts of corruption committed by public officials);
- Contributory negligence: a reduction of payment or denial of it depending on the circumstances;
- The legal validity of transactions;
- Protection officials who report corruption;
- Clarity and accuracy of reports and audits;
- The taking of evidence;
- Court orders to maintain the property necessary for the execution of the final decision and maintain the status quo until the issues involved;
International collaboration.
Group of States against Corruption (GSAC) will monitor the implementation of the obligations undertaken by States Parties to join the Convention. This Convention is open for states - members of the Council of Europe, the non-member States participating in its preparation (Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Holy See, Japan , Mexico and the United States), as well as the European Community. States that are not yet members of GSAC, when ratifying the Convention automatically become members of GSAC on the date of entry into force of the Convention. [36]
Thus, the Council of Europe creates a model of harmonization of legal norms aimed against both transnational and domestic anti- corruption, primarily in order to create an enabling environment for more effective mutual legal assistance in their geographic limits achievable [37].
Convention of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Anti-Corruption.
As part of the analysis of the position of the OECD documents are important in the regulation of anti-corruption issues. Legal initiatives of the organization in the fight against corruption are mainly based on two documents - Revised Recommendation on Combating Bribery in International Business Transactions, adopted May 23, 1997 by the OECD Council and the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials bodies in international business operations, adopted on 21 November 1997. [38]
The first document - source containing a complete program that includes preventive and repressive measures as criminal law and not criminal law, as well as control methods and performance analysis aimed at monitoring the implementation of recommendations. The second paper focuses on a specific issue - property crime bribery of foreign public officials in the exercise of commercial activities. One of the goals is to increase the role of governments in the prevention of bribery of individuals and companies in international business transactions. [39]
OECD (as an economic organization of developed countries, representing 70 % of exports and 90 % of foreign direct investment worldwide) that focuses on corruption, which is directly related to the economy, there is only limited ambitions in this sphere, concerning the creation of an even " playing field" commerce [40].
The Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public officials in international business transactions is considered a phenomenon that is called "active corruption" or "active bribery" in the terminology of national legislation and is a crime committed by an official who receives the bribe. This Convention shall not affect the issues of corruption and limited individual activities struggle against active corruption of foreign public officials. However, such an approach, according to Doctor of Law, Professor V.A. Nomokonova is one-sided, short-sighted, and dependent on the actions taken on the "demand side".
The purpose of the OECD Convention is the establishment of a "functional equivalent" [41]. The Convention does not apply for a significant unification: the States parties - the right of self-selection measures for the introduction of legal sanctions imposed for bribery of foreign public officials, and the results should be comparable. [42]
For example, in accordance with paragraph 3 of article 3, of the Convention, Parties are required to take appropriate measures to ensure that the bribe and the proceeds of the bribery of a foreign public official, or property the value of which corresponds to such proceeds, are subject to seizure and confiscation or that monetary sanctions of comparable effect [43 ]. Convention here demonstrates its flexibility provides the necessary freedom of action.
OECD Convention reveals the concept of "official foreign enterprise" using the criteria of the global scale (i.4 Art. 1) , which corresponds to the goal of OECD smooth "playing field" commerce.
Thus, even if each country will apply its rule, by a public official is to be understood not only by the person appointed or elected to the post and endowed in this regard, the legislative, executive or judicial powers, but also those persons who perform public functions regardless of whether they are public servants or hired by private contract. [44]
In the OECD, as well as the Council of Europe Convention provides for liability of legal persons (Article 2). However, it provides for sanctions, both criminal and non-criminal. Penalty imposed in this case on the basis of likely determine the degree of culpability than the definition of the origins of crime, giving greater freedom of choice when deciding on the amount of punishment. Jurisdiction for some of this solution can serve as the output of the technical difficulties associated with the calculation of income from bribes. [45] In addition, for each side provided the imposition of additional civil or administrative sanctions against persons subject to sanctions for the bribery of a foreign public official (Article 3 paragraph 4).
Described the importance of legal OECD initiatives aimed at combating corruption, is determined by three factors [46]. First, it reduces the influx of corrupt payments to the countries of both North and South. This directly contributes to the creation of an atmosphere conducive to the implementation of good governance and respect for fair trade. Secondly, she played the role of a catalyst to stimulate the activities of international governmental organizations, private sector and civil society in general and contributed to significant policy changes in the last 10 years. Thirdly, it could serve as a precedent for the development of management standards on a global scale [47].
Nevertheless, the OECD Convention is considered a prerequisite for the restoration of an atmosphere of healthy competition in a commercial environment. Thanks to this agreement, in addition to solving the problem of fair trade, everyone who does business abroad, will benefit from a significant reduction in major illegal payments transferred in one or another country. Citizens of these countries, as well as investors will benefit from the implementation of the principle of "rule of law", as well as better economic and social conditions and, ultimately, democracy.

World Bank against corruption [48]

Until the mid- nineties, the World Bank was not able to assist in the fight against corruption, as it was considered a purely domestic issue. Moreover, until the mid-nineties acted rules limiting the use of the word "corruption" (instead used various euphemisms). However, after World Bank President James Wolfensohn became, and new evidence has emerged showing how serious corruption impedes development, the situation has changed, and since 1997, the World Bank has played a significant role in this area [49].
As noted by Suzanne Rich Folsom, Director of Fraud, corruption and corporate wrongdoing, "corruption has a devastating impact on the ability of governments to function properly; the ability of the private sector to grow and create employment; the ability of people and energy productively to create added value; finally, the ability of society to overcome poverty. The World Bank and the Department to combat fraud, corruption and corporate wrongdoing must continue to do everything possible to ensure that the funds entrusted to the shareholders of our organization, used for proper purposes "[50 ].
In March 2007, the Board of Directors unanimously approved the Strategy Group of the World Bank, which aims to promote the expansion of client countries to improve governance and fight corruption. In December 2007, were promulgated implementation plan and the creation of the Council on improving governance and combating corruption.
The strategy calls for action in four major areas: support for good governance and the fight against corruption at the country level, the prevention of corruption in Bank-financed projects, strengthening the role of the private sector in efforts to improve governance and fight against corruption, carried out in the public sector, as well as support global efforts to reduce corruption. Globally, the Bank is a leading donor to support the efficiency of public sector management. In fiscal 2008, the Bank sent to support improved governance $ 4.7 billion, including $ 4.4 billion to improve public sector management, and $ 304 million - to strengthen the rule of law. This amounted to 19 percent of total Bank lending. [51]
In 2001, the World Bank's Department was established to combat corruption, fraud and corporate wrongdoing (INT) as an independent investigative unit. This department conducts investigations into allegations of fraud and corruption in Bank-financed projects, as well as allegations of violations committed by members of the institution, and presents its findings to the Bank's management, in particular, heads of regional departments, the President and the Sanctions Committee (if the violation was committed legal entities and individuals cooperating with the Bank ) and Vice - President for Human Resources (if the violation was committed by Bank staff ) for further action. If necessary, the Department also reports its findings to the authorities of the Member State in cases where the investigation revealed facts that may indicate that the current laws were broken state.
The main objective of the Department for Combating Corruption, fraud and corporate wrongdoing is to investigate allegations of fraud and corruption in Bank projects, as well as allegations of unethical behavior of employees, including allegations of fraud and corruption on their part, but not limited to. Currently, however, the Bank is working to achieve a more effective balance between its reactive and proactive / preventive measures. In the recently approved Strategy Governance and Anti -Corruption Department of the Bank was requested to provide wider consultation, instructions and recommendations on risk reduction in future lending operations.
In fiscal 2007, the Department introduced a new Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP). VDP allows companies involved in contracts for the implementation of the Bank's projects abandon corrupt practices; voluntarily disclose all information about unethical behavior, subject to the sanctions of the Bank; adopt a program of compliance with the requirements under which the responsible supervisor for three years has been monitoring compliance; and to avoid the revocation of a license for a public disclosure of past violations. The company enjoys privacy in exchange for full and active cooperation. [52]

Another proactive diagnostic tool used by the Department is a detailed overview of the implementation (DOR). Held in cooperation with offices in countries DOR used to analyze Bank-financed projects in terms of violations or possible violations of guidelines in the form of fraud, collusion and corruption in the procurement process, resource allocation and management of contracts or projects underway. Based on the experience gained during the DOR since 2002, the Bank and the countries identified for corrective measures to reduce the number of cases of fraud and corruption in Bank-financed projects. [53]
In fiscal 2008, an independent newspaper, headed by the former chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker analyzed in the context of the work of INT strategy of the World Bank to improve governance and fight against corruption, and confirmed that the Department should play a key role in this work. In January 2008, the Bank announced its intention to implement the recommendations of the Volcker Commission. Among them - the creation of an independent advisory board, composed of international experts should enter in the fight against corruption. This advice is intended to ensure the independence of the Department and enhance its accountability. It was also recommended that a special advisory and preventive organizational unit designed to help prevent fraud and corruption in Bank-financed projects. [54]
In keeping with the spirit of good corporate governance in the interests of its members to ensure senior management of the World Bank gave permission to publish summaries of their 2008 annual declarations of financial interests and operations in 2007. Members of senior management of the Bank is obliged to disclose this information, based on the fact that this step will demonstrate to stakeholders that the performance of official duties, they are free from any real or perceived improper influence of any factors related to their personal interests [55].
Thus, the World Bank, paying considerable attention to the problem of corruption and based on our own research, said the need to consider corruption as "a symptom of the fundamental problems of the state," and not as a primary or sole factor in determining the "ills of society" [56]. In addition, creating a global database of existing management models in the world, the World Bank has received a systematic picture of the extent of corruption and the ways in which it contributes to poverty, inequality and low levels of economic development in this regard has developed a program of key reforms needed to improve the state governance and anti- corruption.
As noted by Dr. D. Kaufman, "it is obvious that, in terms of development, the fight against corruption and good governance bring huge dividends capable of achieving approximately 400%: countries seeking even modest success in controlling corruption in the long run may expect to four times the growth of per capita income and similar progress in reducing child mortality and illiteracy. [57]
Collective responsibility requires cooperation of transnational corporations, the domestic private sector and international organizations, national governments and leaders interested in improving governance.
At one time, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan stated that "his leadership is perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development", and hence anti-corruption [58].
 

Other international anti-corruption initiatives.

To complete the overall picture look at a number of international initiatives that establishes minimum standards for member countries.
Despite the difference in the methods used, the Council of Europe Conventions objectives are quite similar with the objectives of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption of the Organization of American States (OAS) in 1996. This regional agreement (signed by a majority of members of the OAS, including the United States) is open for accession by States that are not members of the OAS. It requires that the Member States have taken measures against the ravages of corruption in the territories subject to their constitutions, and actions committed by their nationals and residents abroad. Under the agreement, actions attributable to corruption are recognized outside the law, regardless of the active (offering or giving any money or other benefits equivalent to a public official in exchange for any act or omission in the exercise of public functions) or passive (solicitation or acceptance of such a government official same or equivalent profits in the same order) forms of corruption. In the definition of corruption includes fraudulent use or concealment of property obtained as a result of the above actions, any form of participation in such activities in the form of mediation or attempts to mediate, as well as any other actions that States parties to the Convention agree to subordinate the operation of the Convention [59].
Agreement deviates from the traditional approach, introducing the concept of "illicit enrichment" as criminalization, opposable duty to explain any sudden significant increase (in relation to income earned legitimately) assets of a public official. [60] (Reservation made at the signing of the Convention, the United States, explains the incompatibilities of this requirement with the protection of the right not to incriminate itself, envisaged by the U.S. Constitution). This tool is a compromise of Latin American countries interested in the implementation of mutual assistance and extradition, and North American countries with their program criminalization bribery in international commerce.
In addition to the requirement to consider the above-mentioned acts of corruption as a crime and reporting jurisdictional basis for appropriate action by the State (including the possible extraterritorial application of laws on bribery) The Convention provides for mutual assistance and the authorities of the Parties to the Convention in the investigation and prosecution of corruption, as well as in the search and seizure of revenue received. The Convention prohibits States Parties invoke bank secrecy as a ground for refusal of such assistance. Charter of the North American Development Bank, established under the North Atlantic Free Trade Area (NAFTA), requires companies wishing to obtain loans from the Bank of this, evidence that they were not involved in bribery, and the statements that they have not been charged in obtaining or providing bribes in the last five years [61].
Considered by the OAS Convention has already been signed, but not yet entered into force. Some of the measures proposed agreement until fitted with a mechanism of implementation. Nevertheless, the OAS is currently developing a more comprehensive set of measures to combat corruption, including measures not under the criminal law. [62]
Most recently, the World Trade Organization (WTO) was prepared by the Public Procurement Agreement concerning the acquisition of goods and services, including the implementation of public works contracts and public services, to ensure openness and transparency in terms of international cooperation in the field of supply. Only 24 members of the WTO are parties to the agreement in 1994, which entered into force in January 1996, but at the ministerial meeting of the WTO in December 1996, an agreement was reached to hold talks on interim measures in this area to ensure transparency, openness and respect for due public procurement procedures until the 1994 Agreement is not widely recognized [63]. Working Group was established to ensure transparency in public procurement, in order to facilitate negotiations on the conclusion of an interim agreement.
In conclusion, we note that the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in 1996 took on the less formal level, a new version of its Rules of Conduct in 1977, representing a set of legally binding rules of conduct of business conduct. Since these rules call for the organization of public international law like the World Bank to take action against corruption, they are mainly addressed to the participants and corporations related to their behavior. They prohibit corruption in its broad meaning which includes extortion, bribery, and reward payments to agents that exceed the corresponding reward for providing legitimate services, fees and contributions to political parties, committees or individual politicians, if they are not declared and implemented in violation of the relevant law. The rules also require appropriate financial records and audit of enterprises and provide monitoring and assessment procedures within each company to ensure the establishment and application of sanctions against a director or officer, to be responsible for breaking the rules.
They also talk about the need to adopt the Code of Conduct for each company (with proposed examples). However, experience shows that such codes have little impact: while CEOs tend to suppress corruption, local staff more cynical set [64]. The Rules provide for coordination between the headquarters of the ICC and its National Committees on the above, as well as promoting the use of the rules themselves at national and international levels.

[1] See : V. Kvashis Crime and Justice: Meeting the Challenges of the XXI century. Russian justice. 2000. № 9. p. 36.
[2] Havana, 27 August - 7 September 1990
[3] S. Tsagikyan Proceedings of International Workshop on combating corruption in Armenia
Tsakhadzor October 9, 1999
[4] Background paper on the international fight against corruption, the UN secretariat. A / CONF. 169/14.13 Apr. - 1995; Experience in the implementation of practical measures to fight corruption of public officials. A / CONF. 169 / L. 20/Add. 3. 6 May. - 1995. Ninth UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders. - Cairo, Egypt, April 29 - May 8, 1995 A / CONF. 169/16. - p. 78-83.
[5] See : B. Ashavsky International Code of Conduct for Public Officials . Clean hands. 1999. № 2 . p. 95-98 .
[6] B. Ashavsky United Nations Convention against Corruption . Clean hands. 1999 . № 1. p. 87-89 .
[8] Palermo , Italy , 12-15 December 2000 See more about the Convention: VG Mikhailov Palermo UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime . Russian justice. 2001 . № 7. p. 20.
[11] See : Pavel AG , Ivanov M. Comparative study of corruption and official crimes. Vladivostok, 2001 . p. 114.
[ 12] See : Karpovich OG Analysis of modern international approaches to combating corruption. International public and private law number 3 (42 ) . 2008 p 38.
[ 13] See : Ovchinsky VS XXI century against the mafia. Criminal globalization and the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime . Moscow, 2001 . p.47
[14] See : Karpovich OG Ordinance. Op. International public and private law number 3 (42 ) . 2008 p 39.
[ 15] See : Vlassis D. Development of the project of the UN Convention against Corruption. Forum on Crime and public safety. V.2 . Number 1. UN New York, 2002 . p. 171.
[16] See further : http://www.uno.org, http://www.transparencykazakhstan.org/UserFiles/file/33c.pdf, UN documents . A/58/422 .
[ 17] See Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 4, 2008 N 31 -IV. Kazakhstan Pravda on May 6, 2008
N 95 ( 25542 ) .
[18 ] See: Nomokonov VA Ordinance. Op. Vladivostok 2004 p.80
[ 19] See : About the Federal Law " On Combating Corruption" and the draft United Nations Convention against Corruption. -
Moscow, 2002 . Pp. 18 . Quoted . on Corruption in the world and mezhdunarodgaya strategy to combat it. Ed. Nomokonova VA Vladivostok in 2004. p. 80.
[20] VA Nomokonov Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004. p.80.
[21 ] the same. p.81 -82 .
[22 ] the same.
[23 ] See: About the Federal Law " On Combating Corruption" and the draft United Nations Convention against Corruption.
Moscow, 2002 . p. 31.
[24 ] the same . p.82 .
[25 ] See : Globalization general , organized crime and corruption . Materials "round table" . State and law. 2001 . № 12. p. 95 .
[26] V.A. Nomokonov Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004 . p.83 .
[27 ] See details Conventions Shvets, V. Some aspects of international legal cooperation among member states of the Council of Europe in the fight against corruption . Journal of Russian law. 2000 . № 7. p. 65-73 .
[28 ] See the Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on Corruption . Clean hands. 1999 . № 3 .p. 69-79 . See also : http://www.transparencykazakhstan.org/UserFiles/file/33b.pdf
[29] Clause 1, Article . 18 Criminal Law Convention on Corruption . January 27, 1999 in Strasbourg . http://www.transparencykazakhstan.org/UserFiles/file/33b.pdf
[30] For details see: Pavel AG , Ivanov M. Comparative study of corruption and official crimes. Vladivostok, 2001 . p. 116-117 .
[31] See: Naumov AV liability for corruption offenses under the laws of Russia , European countries and the United States ( comparative legal analysis ) . Organized crime and corruption . 2000 . № 1. p. 93.
[32 ] See: Fundamentals of the fight against corruption ( system -wide ethics ). M., 2000. p. 197.
[33 ] See : http://www.prime-tass.ru/news/show.asp?id=607152&ct=news
[34 ] See: Korkunov NM Russian state law . T. 2 . Part feature. St. Petersburg . , 1909 . p. 694.
[35] VA Nomokonov Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004 . p.86 -87 .
[36 ] See : http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/RUS/Summaries/Html/174.htm
[37] VA Nomokonov Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004 . p. 85 .
[38] See further : http://www.transparencykazakhstan.org/UserFiles/file/33f.pdf
[39 ] the same .
[ 40 ] See : Mark Pete. International measures to combat corruption. Basel . August 12, 1999 . C 2 . Quoted . by Nomokonov V.A. Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004 . p. 88 .
[41 ] See : Mark Pete. Ukaz.soch . August 12, 1999 . C. 6. Quoted . by Nomokonov V.A. Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004 . p. 88 .
[42 ] See : Mark Pete. Stop the old business practices. Fight against bribery and corruption. Basel : Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001 . p. 73-74 .
[43] See further : http://www.transparencykazakhstan.org/UserFiles/file/33f.pdf
[44] V.A. Nomokonov Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004 . p.90 .
[45] V.A. Nomokonov Decree op. Vladivostok in 2004 . P.91 .
[46] For details see: Mark Pete. Stop the old business practices. Fight against bribery and corruption. Basel: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001 . p. 68-70 .
[47] M.A. Gilevskaya Corruption: National and international media reaction. http://www.law.edu.ru/doc/document.asp?docID=1222884&subID=100087759, 100,087,761
[48] ​​Actions against corruption within the World Bank and assistance to Member States in the fight against corruption, for details see: I. Shihata World Bank against corruption. Clean hands. 1999 . № 1, 2, 3 .
[49 ] See: D. Kaufman Fighting corruption in a broader context of development and management . Proceedings of International Conference September 9-11, 2003 in Merida ( Yucatan, Mexico ) . Institute of World Banka.http :/ / www.worldbank.org / wbi / governance / pdf / merida_wbstatement-r.pdf
[50] The World Bank continues to lead the fight against corruption , according to the report . newsletter №:2007/213/INThttp://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTRUSSIANHOME/EXTTOPICSINRUS/E...
[ 51 ] See : Improving governance and reducing corruption . The World Bank Annual Report 2008 . S. 21.http :/ / siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTANNREP2K8/Resources/5164353-1222371156065/Russian.pdf
[52]http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTRUSSIANHOME/NEWSRUSSIAN/0,,c...
[53]http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTRUSSIANHOME/NEWSRUSSIAN/0,,c...
[54 ] See: Initiative for the return of stolen assets. The World Bank Annual Report 2008 . S. 22.http :/ / siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTANNREP2K8/Resources/5164353-1222371156065/Russian.pdf
[55 ] the same . With 22.
[56] The quality of growth. 2000 . Moscow, 2001 . p.174 .
[57 ] See: D. Kaufman Fighting corruption in a broader context of development and management . Proceedings of International Conference September 9-11, 2003 in Merida ( Yucatan, Mexico ) . Institute of World Banka.http :/ / www.worldbank.org / wbi / governance / pdf / merida_wbstatement-r.pdf
[58 ] Global Corruption Report 2003 . Transparency International. http://www.globalcorruptionreport.org
[59] See: I. Shihata Fighting corruption requires management of the country's high moral standards. Clean hands. 1999 . № 2 . p. 38 .
[ 60 ] See : Mark Pete. International measures to combat corruption. Basel, August 12,1999. p.5.
[61] See: I. Shihata Fighting corruption requires management of the country's high moral standards. Clean hands. 1999 . № 2 . p. 38 .
[62] For details see: Pinto - Duschinsky, M. Russia and corruption : who wins? Political Corruption : Lessons for Russia on the basis of international experience ( view from abroad) . Clean hands. 2000 . № 4 . p. 22.
[63] See: I. Shihata Fighting corruption requires management of the country's high moral standards. Clean hands. 1999 . № 2 . p. 40.
[64] For details see: On the problem of international corruption. Fighting crime abroad (by the foreign press). 2001. № 8. p. 6-7.