Detailed Report: International Legal Framework and Corruption Analysis

This report provides an in-depth analysis of the international legal framework designed to combat corruption, focusing on key aspects such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery, and the UN Convention against Corruption. It examines the provisions of these instruments, including sanctions, jurisdictional matters, and the importance of record-keeping and cooperation among member states. The report also discusses the UK Bribery Act and its implications, including the illegality of offering bribes to foreign officials and the concept of facilitation payments. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of corporate compliance, third-party integrity, and the challenges faced by businesses in navigating the complexities of anti-corruption laws. The report concludes by emphasizing the need for international cooperation and the role of various bodies in combating corruption, offering insights into the ongoing efforts to address this global challenge.

Chapter 5:
This chapter is in regard to the international legal framework which is against the
government body because of the increasing corruption, which is resulting into the formation of
illegal activities such as the bribery. This is also concerned with that of the related provisions
that requires enactment within the national level once it gets signed and ratified.
On the other hand, the international basis and domestic country basis corruption practices
are being carried on in different parts of the continent. The law of corrupt practices which takes
place in foreign countries owes its origins primarily to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of
1977 (FCPA). However, upon two decades after, the organization for the Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) made use of the protocol that is fighting against the bribery in regard
to the foreign public officials which is hugely for the developed nations. In the early era of 2005,
the United Nations protocol against the corruption enlarged the anti-corruption campaign.
The U.N. Conventions and OECD, and the Bribery Act of British, weaken the lonely U.S.
position on corruption, and maximize the criteria for extensive protocols. Law and practice in
regard to the foreign corrupt practices has undergone on an international basis.
Speaking about the UN, it finally came into the role play within the era of the year
2005. After a longer period of time and much of the efforts, it was still unable to acknowledge
that perhaps some government officials were responsible for their official
actions in receiving bribes from that of the foreign entities. The U.N.
convention against the corruption went far than the scope of the FCPA and
OECD enactments in order to concentrate on making bribery and receipt of
bribes illegal under national laws. It also notably included methods for

regaining bribes “hidden” abroad by the officials who received them. There is
an estimation that about 170 nations have shown interest towards the U.N.
convention, but there exists much of the nation that do not take it seriously.
Some $20 to $40 billion on a yearly basis are eliminated or beard as loss
only because of the reason of corruption. The U.N. and World Bank are
making a number of efforts together in regard to the stolen assets recovery
initiative. They are linked together by means of the U.S. Department of
Justice’s Kleptocracy Initiative.
Article 3:
This particular article outlays the stress that sanctions in regard to the
violators is required to be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive a. It is also
brought into the notice that the case of jurisdictions in which the concerning
defaulter or the criminal liability is not applicable to legal persons, the
individuals may be exposed to a number of legal penalties and punishments,
this is done to make sure that any illegal activity is not being carried on.
Jurisdiction matters are discussed in article for which provides:
Within the article 5:
It is has been outlaid that investigation, and that of the prosecution in regard
to the persons being charged with that of the bribe offering to international
officials is not be hampered by means of consideration in regard to national
effect on the relationship with that of the other state or by the identification
of the legal person involved within it.

Article 8:
This article of convention is concerned with that of the records, disclosure
reports, and financial books. It restricts the promotion of off-the-book
accounts. Moreover, the convention has also laid stress upon the
requirement for the member states to cooperate with each of the individual
in regard to fight against the bribery act.
This particular provision is addressed as the primary aspect for prohibiting
the parent companies in member states from making use of the foreign
subsidiaries as a conduit for bribery act.1
Taking into consideration the case of most of the developing economies such
as that of the Libya, the political parties and the top authorities are capable
enough to secure their individual interest.2 Considering all the payments, in
spite of the fact as of whether they are justified or not, if they are permitted
within the foreign country, may initiate bribes and in this defeats the
intention of the Convention. In economies where such payments are
permitted from their respective 'culture', the permission is granted by means
of unwritten traditions rather than any written laws.3
1 Brian C Harms, 'Holding Public Officials Accountable in the International Realm: A New
Multi-Layered Strategy to Combat Corruption' (2000) 33 Cornell Int'l LJ 159.
2D'Souza, Anna. "The OECD anti-bribery convention: changing the currents of trade." Journal
of Development Economics 97.1 (2012): 73-87.
3Carr, Indira M., and OpiOuthwaite. "The OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Ten Years On."
(2009).

However, in regard to the FCPA, as held by some segment of people
undertaking payments to the foreign government officials, has been
addressed as the criminal activity if there lies a sense of "corrupt intention"
in order to obtain or retain business.4
On the other contrary, the anti-bribery provisions as outlaid within the FCPA
do not permit the use of mails intentionally or any other source of commerce
for making use of dishonestly, amounting to an offer or payment that has
been came into effect as a result of promise to be paid or the authorization
of payment in monetary format or anything else of value to a person.
The official companies that has been listed within the list of securities within
the US stock exchange, (a) should maintain a separate book keeping for the
purpose of maintain the records and keeping tracks of each monetary
transaction, (b) formulate a separate team for the maintenance of accounts.
On the other hand, the act and regulations as of that the US stands for
the same definition of "foreign public official". It also states that the bribery
occurs when the applicable national law of the foreign public official do not
permit orders that requires the official. Besides, a major proportion of focus
has been laid upon the bribe. This business undertaking is an outcome of the
narrower test, as compared to that of the general offenses. However, at the
same time, the broad focus to influence rather than inducing for the
improper performance" as in case of offense. According to the UK, BA it has
been addressed as an illegal act of offering.
4 Ibid.

Bribe for the foreign official, if the bribe is offered in regard to the
business undertakings it is to be legal in the eye of law. It is estimated
hypothetically, that the act of bribe may be provided by the corrupted body
to the foreign official for the sole purpose of encouraging the transformation
within the policy with the intention to reflect the general interests of the UK.
The recent price water house coopers event brought into focus the risk
associated with that of the third-party integrity risk to companies.5 It was
claimed that on an average the FTSE 100 Company, comprises of over
50,000 external entities. On a constant basis it communicates with that of
the big MNC’s which can be over 100,000.
Besides, Section 7 comprises of defence in regard to the business firm
which is available if the concerning business firm is able to justify the fact
that “adequate procedures” were in position to eliminate any occurrence of
bribery situations.
This specific topic of payment facilitation has formulated much of the
conflict among the business firms, it is because of the argument that is being
brought into the matter that such payments are very general in nature.
Facilitation payments are otherwise addressed as the small bribe that is
being paid to facilitate routine Government action.
For example, this comprises of the lorry drivers that is being required
to undertake small amount of payments in order to get through the borders.
5Managing Third Party Risk: Only As Strong As Your Weakest Link (2017) PwC
<http://www.pwc.co.uk/services/forensic-services/insights/managing-third-party-risk.html>.

It also comprises of the payments that is been given to the officials in order
to accelerate the manner of availing the trading license or passport.
Facilitation payment on the other contrary is also considered as the
unlawful in regard to the previous legislation. Moreover, it is also addressed
as against the US at FCPA, the UK BA is not comprised of any exemption
regarding such payments.6 The position is concerned with that of the
recommendations as proposed by the OECD in the era of the 2009 when it
was acknowledged that small facilitation payments also had corrosive effect,
especially on the sustainable economic development of the nation and the
rule of law and requests
The nature of promoting the facilitation of payments is very low.
Besides, the corporations could not be relied upon this. Besides, the
Government addresses the issues of international basis commerce within
specific regions of the economy. This needs partnership among the various
international bodies, anti-bribery lobby, different governments, as does
representative bodies and sectoral organizations.
Such figures are not considered to be utility means against which the
corporations can maintain their facilitation payments and that of the
differences within the diversified cultural requirements, the extortion
element, and exchange rates of much facilitation payments. On the other
6Jordan, Jon. "The OECD's call for an end to corrosive facilitation payments and the
international focus on the facilitation payments exception under the foreign corrupt
practices act." (2010) 13 U. Pa. J. Bus. L. 881.

hand, the offense of violation to the act as prescribed within the common law
may also be available as circumstances are present, according to which the
individual is not having any alterative choices rather than to undertake
payment for the sole purpose of protecting themselves from the loss of life,
liberty or limb.
This is because of the availability of the limited resources of Serious
Organized Crime Agency (SOCA), the SFO to fully execute the law and due to
a huge extent of caution as an interest to increase the reporting of criminal
activity is likely to result within the no prosecution or investigation. Since,
UKBA came into force, the individual business unit is liable to report to the
SOCA or its planned successor body, the National Crime Agency (NCA), of
any facilitation payments made. The primary risk for business individuals is
concerned with that of undertaking small facilitation payments.
The additional region of concern is the corporate hospitality and that of the
ability that stays within the hand of such hospitality for the promotional
activity or for other business expenditure in order to amount for the bribery
act under the UKBA. However, media articles on the matter have been
inaccurate and sensationalist.7
7 Nicholas Lord, Regulating Transnational Corporate Bribery in The UK And Germany (Cardiff
University School of Social Sciences, 2011) <https://orca.cf.ac.uk/26844/1/Nicholas
%20Lord_PhD%20Thesis_May%202012%20-%20NEW.pdf>.

For instance, the reasonable travel and accommodation expenses that
permits an individual international individual to visit workplace, or hospitality
comprises of the fine dining within the prescribed location, it will not lead to
the occurrence of any necessary inferences. It is to be taken into account
that such act is to be considered as the bribery act under the section 6.