Fighting Corruption
An Urgent Task for
Aid Agencies, Missionary Societies and Churches
Christoph Stückelberger
1. Introduction: The relevance of corruption
for development.................................. 3
2.
Definition, forms and extent of corruption.................................................................. 5
2.1 What is
corruption?........................................................................................................ 5
2.2 The
international extent of corruption........................................................................... 6
2.3 The
Corruption Perception Index CPI.......................................................................... 7
2.4
Corruption within aid agencies, missionary societies and churches?..................... 8
3. Corruption
as obstacle to development...................................................................... 9
3.1 The
effects of corruption in development..................................................................... 9
3.2 Who
benefits from corruption, who suffers from its effects?................................... 11
4. The perspective
of the bible as to corruption.......................................................... 11
5. Ten
ethical criteria how to judge corruption............................................................ 12
6. Political,
legal and economic instruments against corruption............................ 14
6.1 Governmental
instruments.......................................................................................... 15
6.2
Non-governmental instruments................................................................................... 15
7. The
parties involved in fighting corruption.............................................................. 17
7.1
Multilateral organizations and Switzerland................................................................ 17
7.2 Non
governmental organizations, private sector, churches and other
religious communities........................................................................................................ 18
8. A code of
conduct for aid agencies and churches and government clauses 20
8.1 Code of
conduct 1999 from Cameroon.................................................................... 20
8.2
Governmental anti-corruption clause of SDC........................................................... 22
9. An
ecumenical program to combat corruption....................................................... 23
10. Checklist
for fighting corruption for development agencies and churches. 24
11.
Bibliography................................................................................................................... 25
Appendice:
Code against Corruption (english, french, german)............................ 28
How can the funds for public and private
development cooperation be increased? How can the funds available be used as effectively
as possible for a dvelopment respecting human dignity serving the poor and
marginalised? These two questions are part of the daily challenges that aid
organizations like "Bread for All" have to face.
Corruption is one of the large obstacles to
development; it reduces the efficiency of development efforts, undermines
justice, weakens democracy, makes the rich richer and supports dictators – less
in the area of private aid organizations, than within governmental,
multilateral and private economy relations. Corruption is a worldwide
phenomenon! No region and no country is free from corruption. Even if it is
more visible in developing and transition countries than for example in Middle
and Northern Europe, the players of corruption such as holdings in industrial
countries or governmental or private institutions, that are tolerating and
accepting corruption, are equally much involved in it!
Corruption today is a dominant issue on the
agenda of practically all institutions of international politics, in particular
since 1989. Why? In the 70s and 80s, it was extremely difficult to put this
issue on the agenda. The efforts of the United Nations undertaken between
1975-79 had no result. One of the reasons for the opening-up of today is the
end of the East-West differences and the ever-increasing liberalization of the
global markets: It was possible to free the fight against corruption from
ideologising, at the same time, the problem became more and more urgent, as
destabilisation and liberalization processes of the society became more and
more dominant. In 1994, the industrial countries started to dare developing new
solutions to the problem within the OECD-structures. The World Bank, the EU and
others have followed (see chapter 7 for more information).
It was in the early summer of 1994, when I read
a newspaper article on the foundation of "Transparency International –
Forum against corruption". The article followed me in my thoughts. I
called their head office in Berlin to ask for material of how they intended to
fight corruption. The concept of structural (both legal and voluntary) measures
and the cooperation of state civil servants, enterprises, aid agencies and
universities appealed to me. In the fall of 1994, "Bread for All" and
the Institute for Social Ethics of the Swiss Federation of Protestant Churches
hosted a conference on fighting corruption. In January 1995 an event was
organized to bring together all interested parties in Switzerland that were
involved in fighting corruption. The goal was to interlink them all. Upon the
initiative of "Bread for All", the Swiss Section of Transparency
International, Transparency Switzerland, was founded. The author has been its
co-president and president from the foundation since February 1999. Now he
serves as vice-president.
Since 1994, the governments have increased
their efforts globally to fight against corruption, as is summarised in chapter
7. Now that laws have been strenghtened and companies start to revise their
business procedures as well as the fact that some drastic cases of corruption –
in particular in large building projects – have been disclosed and highlighted
by the media, the pressure on enterprises has thus increased to focus more on
in-plant measures of the fight against corruption.
Civil society is also increasingly challenged
to make a contribution. Yet, most anti-corruption activities are undertaken by
governments and multilateral institutions and much less by the private sector
or non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Therefore, the so-called civil
society and thus the NGOs are expected to get involved in anti-corruption
activities. These excpectations are far from being met. At the 9th
International Anti-Corruption-Conference with 1600 participants in Durban/South
Africa in October 1999, at which the author of this paper participated, every
report that was presented by governments or multilateral institutions placed
their expectations on the civil society. Some NGOs from the South actually
participated in the Conference, however, there was no single aid organization
from the North!
Hence, the present publication is interested in
the question of how aid agencies and churches could contribute to the defeat of
corruption. Aid agencies and churches are part of the problem and part of its solution.
In the minor "corruption of acceleration" –for example when releasing
relief material from ports – churches, aid agencies and mission societies are
as much involved in corruptive cases as church leaders that are not controlled
enough by democratic forces. But in long-term development projects corrupt
activities are less frequent than for example in cases of disaster relief and
emergency aid, as the latter are dependent from providing means of transport
and protection. In contrast to private development cooperation and disaster
relief, the large state institutions and players are the ones that are
threatened by corruption. This has been shown by recent cases of ECHO, the
relief organization of the European Union, or by the German Society for Technical
Cooperation (GTZ), when more than 380 perpetrators of corruption were sentenced
to partially high terms of imprisonment for dishonestly procuring relief
resources (Pieth/Eigen, 1999, 133f).
The Eighth Assembly of the World Council of
Churches in December 1998 in Harare issued clear statements showing that the
churches increasingly recognize their respective responsibility and start
realizing that something must be done, as shown in chapter 8 and 9. I thus
propose a specific "program to fight corruption" by the churches.
This number of the “Impulse”-series is meant to
serve as a working instrument to the aid agencies and missions as well as to
the churches that are supporting them, in particular to contribute in their
fight against corruption. In addition, it is thought to serve project
coordinators, partner organizations and in negociations with enterprises or
official authorities. The fight against corruption is more than just a trendy
issue. We actually talk about the moral, economic and political credibility of
individuals, institutions and societies and about increasing the efficiency of
development efforts.
There are several definitions of corruption. One very common definition (in
particular used by Transparency International) says: Corruption is the abuse of public power for personal interests. This
definition includes most of all the active or passive bribery between a civil
servant and a private person. Yet, corruption also includes activities between
private persons, as is shown by the definition of the Swiss Agency for
Development and Cooperation: "The behaviour of people with public or
private tasks is corrupt when they violate their duties to obtain any kind of
unjustified advantages." (SDC, 1998, 3) The definition of the economic
ethic-philosopher Peter Ulrich shows how ethically explosive the issue is:
Corruption is "the undermining of the common wellbeing through particular
interests of individuals." (Maak/Ulrich, 1999, 103) Thus it becomes clear
that these definitions also include an ethical valuation (see more details in
chapter 5).
Corruption and bribery have the following characteristics:
- a means to obtain something
- the hidden and intransparent nature of the activity
- the illegal search for personal advantages
- the illegal acquisition of something which
one does not deserve
- the economically inefficient use of funds
- very often proximity to blackmail, abuse of
public power, nepotism
- the breach of confidence
- the damage of moral integrity and of general
ethos
- a breach of law with a disintegration of the
sense of justice
Thus, corruption and bribery are clearly delimited, for example from gifts,
elements of salaries and from tips. The justification of corruption as an
element of a specific "culture of gifts" is thus not tolerable. Gifts
are not given secretly, not linked to a clearly defined or blackmailed quid pro
quo-deal or are not as high as corruption payments of today (often we talk
about millions, eg. in the case of state infrastructure projects). Corruptive
payments as parts of the salary of civil servants as eg. police and customs
officers or teachers in developing countries very often simply reflect the
extremely bad financial situation of such civil servants. There is a marked
connection between the high level of corruption of one particular country and
its low wage and salary level (see Rijckehem/ Weder, 1997). Nevertheless, due
to above-mentioned characteristics, it is necessary to clearly separate bribes
from elements of pay as well as from tips.
There are different forms and motives of corruption:
The corruption
of poverty – normally "petty
corruption" – has its roots in poverty (eg. when government officials
do not receive a salary at all or not enough to sustain a sufficient
livelihood).
The corruption
of power – normally "grand
corruption" – rooted in the greed to more power, influence and wealth
or in the safeguarding of the existing power and economic position.
The corruption
of procurement and the corruption of
acceleration serve the purpose to obtain goods and services that otherwise
would not be available or delivered on time, or only with much greater
administrative expenses.
Corruption is one of the biggest obstacles for
economic and humane development. It is still a growing cancer word-wide! It
hits both the North and South, the East and West. Every day, the media report
about cases of corruption: The International Olympic Committee, the Commission
of the European Union, that had to collectively resign on March 15, 1999, among
others because of alleged corruption (!), etc. One third of a World Bank credit
granted to Indonesia was lost in corrupt channels; in Cameroon the cases of
corruption can not even be enumerated anymore; in Germany the construction
trade is notorious for corrupt practises (Pieth/Eigen, 1999, p. 131-147); in
Switzerland a national research project has been undertaken; in Cental and
Eastern European countries corruption takes place openly, etc.
The extent of corruption has enormously
increased in the last years. Whereas until the middle of the eighties bribes in
international business often accounted for 5-10 per cent of the overall order
volume, it seems that nowadays this relationship has grown to 20 per cent and
more. Hence, considering the hard international competition, many companies
have reached their internal limit, this is the reason why they are more ready
today to cooperate in the fight against corruption. According estimations, the
amount of bribes comes close to the total amount of indebtedness of the Third
World! A case study published in October 1999 by Anniano Desierto, the
ombudsman of the Philippine government, shows that the country lost 48 billion
dollar through bribes during the last 20 years, more than the total amount of
the external debts of the Philippines (41 billion dollar).
Since
1995, Transparency International publishes every year a list of countries on
how corruption is perceived in one particular country by the business circles,
by the population and the international community. This so-called „Corruption Perception Index CPI“ (the
one for 1999 follows on page 7) has since its inception been constantly
reviewed as to its methods. The index is based upon at least three surveys per
country. As these figures are not available in all of the countries, the list
is far from recording every single country of the earth. Therefore, the fact
that a country is not mentioned in the CPI does not say anything on the extent
of corruption. The CPI simply shows trends. And when the index is published it
usually releases strong political reactions and even measures in the countries
that figure at the end of the index – hence, the CPI is a very effective instrument.
Those countries that appear on the negative side of the CPI are mostly
development countries.
Now,
this one-sided picture has lately been corrected by a second corruption index
of Transparency International. It was published for the first time on October
26, 1999: The Bribe Payers Perception
Index BPI not only registers the bribe receivers, but also the „senders”.
Thus, the focus is particularly on the industrial countries as these are the
countries in which multinational corporations have their head offices (more
information on the methodology and the sources of both lists are found on the
homepage of Transparency International: ti@transparency.de).
|
The
new survey is based upon a detailed intervies of approximately 770 top
executives of big corporations, auditing companies, bi-national chamber of
commerces, important commercial banks and of attorneys specializing in the
field of economic matters in 14 leading countries of emerging markets. The
survey included the interviews of foreign nationals as well as senior
executives of multinational corporations. The questions related to the
readiness of enterprises to bribe high-ranking office-holders. |
|
Aid agencies, missionary societies and churches
are part of the problem and part of the solution. In the case of small-scale
"corruptions of acceleration" for example in redeeming relief
material from ports, or in the case of the minor "corruption of
procurement" in order to obtain permissions, churches and their relief
projects and aid agencies are in general as much concerned as all the other sectors
of the society. Apart from that, there are cases of corruption of church
leaders that are not subject to democratic control mechanisms or have accumulated
excessive powers or are entangled in nepotism. However, according my
experiences and judgement, major cases of corruption are rather an exception.
Where they are exposed they increasingly lead to respective sanctions and legal
measures. Though the auditing of the accounts is usually carried out by
auditing companies – and the auditing procedures are affordable enough to be
paid by private development cooperation –, yet, audits are partially not
performed seriously enough and can thus not serve as an instrument to detect corruption.
Here it seems as if aid agencies and their partners should have the courage to
spend more for a credible, independent and serious audit.
The co-responsibility that donor organizations
of the North share does not usually consist in being directly involved in
bribes, but that they continue to support organizations of which they well know
that corrupt practices may occur. Therefore, local partner organizations in
Cameroon clearly expressed their expectations to the partner organizations of
the North at the Anti-Corruption Seminar in March of 1999 (see chapter 8); in
particular they called up to adopt more rigorous policies and to suspend or
stop the financial support of corrupt partners in the South, because continuing
the cooperation would be considered a legitimization of corruption and donor
organizations would be considered part of the problem of corruption.
In disaster and emergency relief the situation
is much more complex. Here, it is necessary to obtain flight and transport
permits as fast as possible, to procure relief material and to guarantee safety
measures without delay; the rescue teams therefore face a greater risk of being
subjected to corruption and blackmail. In particular, big state or multilateral
actions and institutions are highly threatened by corruption, as has been shown
by recent cases of ECHO, the emergency relief organization of the European
Union, or of the German GTZ, the state-owned organization for technical
cooperation: More than 380 perpetrators of corruption have been sentenced to
years of prison for dishonest procurement of relief material (Pieth/Eigen, 1999,
133f).
The biggest part of development projects that
are supported by the protestant aid agencies and missionary societies are
certainly free of corruption (apart from small-scale corruption – for example
to obtain specific permits – that many projects cannot or do not want to
avoid). The minority of projects that allows corrupt practices severely hampers
the image of development cooperation altogether. The promising approaches that
are described in this paper should therefore serve the players of development
cooperation and missionary work in their fight against corruption.
The following examples are effects of corruption (in particular of the heavy but also of the
small-scale corruption):
·
Misdirection of development (wrong allocation
of resources) in
vital sectors of the society (eg. telecommunication, health, energy,
traffic/transport systems, armed defense), by not investing in areas of urgent
economic, social and political need, but by investing for example in public
servants who may expect the highest bribes.
·
Increased indebtment if investments in development projects do not yield the required
economic benefit and thus aggravate the interest payments or the repayment of
the debts.
·
Shortage of taxes and other national revenues for public tasks, as tax officials
are corrupt; hence, paying habits are rather weak.
·
Tax evasion, as no taxes are paid on corrupt money
·
Deterioration in quality (eg. by falling short of standards)
and thus by
·
increased risks to safety,health and
environment (eg.
construction of bridges with cheaper material to compensate the additional
expenses due to corruption; negligence when dealing with environmental restrictions
evading sustainability provisions, for example in forestry).
·
Distortions of competition and of the market.
·
Economic inefficiency, by destroying investment values,
for example, and by increasing the price of products without improving on their
performance.
·
Repulsive effect on potential investors and paralyzing the spirit of
development of a particular country.
·
Widening the gap of affluence (strengthening of small elites,
difficult development of the middle class).
·
Increasing intransparency, attempting blackmailing and mafioso
dealings.
·
Loss of confidence in state and economy.
·
Weakening of moral integrity and credibility of persons and institutions.
·
Loss of democracy; as transparent decision-making processes are
a precondition to democracy. Corruption misrepresents election results.
·
The dimension of gender: Those that are already in power
are favoured (usually men), for example when it comes to access to land,
property, offices and power positions.
·
Weakening of the of rule of law functions and constitutional control
mechanisms until governments are almost unable to function.
·
Support of dictatorships (that may finance their private
security forces by bribes und thus become more independent in view of
Parliamentarian controls) and of armed
movements of rebels.
·
Undermining
the acceptance of public and private development
cooperation.
The list shows that it is actually surprising
to see that development organizations do not undertake as many efforts to fight
corruption as they do for example for releasing the debt burden of development
countries! Looking at the mere quantities it becomes clear that corruption is
as serious a problem to development as indebtedness!
In addition, there are reasons to see a connection between the degree of
indebtedness of a country and the extent of corruption (while corruption is of
course only one factor among many accounting for the degree of indebtedness!),
equally between the degree of the indebtedness and the amount of flight capital
in foreign countries (for example Nigeria has 28 billion dollar external debts
and 50 billion dollar private assets on foreign accounts!). Thus, IMF and World
Bank credits often aggravate the indebtedness, if they are not tight to
transparency criteria. „As long as the whole industry of development
cooperation (led by IMF, World Bank and the African Bank of Develoment) is not
subjected to the same rules of transparency and accountability that they are
requiring from their debtors the vicious circle of aid and indebtedness will
certainly continue“, was recently said by a researcher in Tansania (Cooksey,
1999).
The effects of corruption are as dramatic for
the national revenues of development
countries. Here, we talk not only about far-reaching corruption but also about
small-scale corruption on local and regional level. In this connection, a
Norwegian sociologist told me about his latest investigation (1999) on the tax
system in three regions of Tanzania. He discovered that in certain areas 95 per
cent of the taxes end up not in the tax department of the state but in the
pockets of tax collectors leading to daily demonstrations against them and to
the refusal to pay taxes at all. Tax evasion is also an effect of corruption,
because bribes are never taxed. In Argentina, tax evasion apparently makes up
for 40-50 per cent of outstanding taxes! In Cambodia, the state lost due to corruption
100 million dollar from the sale of tropical forest products in one year only
(1996). This accounted for one third of the overall national revenue of that particular
year!
Many concepts of development assume that
democratization and liberalization of the markets would automatically reduce
corruption and thus represent the best recipes of how to fight corruption. Yet,
what seems to be obvious in theory, is unfortunately often not the case in
practice. In many countries corruption even aggravated after introducing
democratization and liberalization measures. But it would be wrong to conclude
that democracy and market economy were particularly sensitive to corruption,
which historically cannot be substantiated, let alone the contrary. Dieter
Frisch, the former general director of the development cooperation of the EU
and founding member of Transparency International, formulates a possible
explanation: "The explanation for the seeming contradiction between theory
and practice may consist in the fact that the societies concerned are
undergoing a process of transition, that one system has come to an end, and a
new system has not yet been really established" (Frisch, 1999, 97).
Transition phases and transformation processes are often connected with
weaknesses and insecurities of the legal system that is favouring corruption.
Corruption is a manifold threat of democracy
ranging from outstanding tax revenues and tax evasion to the bribery of state
officials as well as to the misrepresentation of election results. An
increasing reason for corrupt procedures are rising election campaign costs
that those that are elected settle by accepting bribes once they have taken
office.
Corruption knows winners and losers. Usually it
is the poor that are the losers, even if they need petty, small-scale
corruption to be able to survive; and the community is also losing out on
corruption: The poor mostly suffer from the extremely high econommic costs of
corruption, from the show of force of small elites that sustain themselves with
the corrupt funds they receive, they suffer from safety and health hazards of
ecological or construction risks, from corrupt judges that are manipulating the
laws, from outstanding state tax revenues that cannot be used for badly needed
state education and health services, etc. In addition, corruption also has a
gender dimension (TI Zimbabwe focuses on this aspect. See also Frey Nakonz,
1999): It is assumed that women are more affected by the effects of corruption
than men, because corruption also serves to keep the existing power structures
in place (access to land, property and offices). One may assume that men are
more involved in corrupt practices than women. Therefore, women are very
important in the fight against corruption.
The winners of corruption are as a rule
individuals and not the society: Namely those that are already rich, power brokers,
officials on all levels who extend their power with corruption but at the same
time live in a system of mutual dependence and fear connected with the lack of
transparency that comes hand in hand with corrupt practices. Who actually
benefits from corruption and who suffers from its effects needs further
studies.
Corruption is almost as old as humanity, at
least known since jurisdiction has existed. When looking for ethical criteria to
judge corruption biblical insights may be illuminating. Two recent
comprehensive theological-ethical studies are dealing with this research
(Rennstich, 1990, 137-197; Kleiner, 1992, 83-183).
The oldest reference to corruption in the Old Testament seems to be found in the
book of Exodus, only three chapters after the Ten Commandments (Kleiner, 1992,
101ff): "Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe makes people blind to what is
right and ruins the cause of those who are innocent." (2. Ex. 23,8) This
prohibition of corruption dates back to the times before the kings and is not
accidentally addressed to judges not to accept bribes. An unbiased jurisdiction
is vital for every legal system. Also, in the environment of the Old Testament,
in Egypt and Mesopotamia, the phenomenon of corruption was known, but here in
the book of Exodus a law against corruption has already been drawn up! It is
also important to see what the ethical justification is to prohibit corruption:
It is truth and justice, in particular the legal protection of the poor, as is
shown in other verses.
From the time of the kings the sons of King
Samuel are mentioned, that they accepted bribes for their own benefit (1Sam
8,3). In the Book of Kings it becomes clear that corruption was also used in
external affairs and in military matters: Allies of the adversary were offered
bribes to use military actions against him (1 Kgs 15,19; 2 Kgs 16,8).
The theological justification of refusing
corruption becomes clear in particular with the prophets. God Jahwe is
incorruptible, as he is the right and justice himself. This is why he is not
trying to bribe King Kyros when he repatriates his people from exile to their
land (as some individuals among the people may have proposed)?. Corruption
destroys communities. Whoever uses the evil of bribery is called pagan and is
thus called as being excluded from the community with God (Prov 17,23). Devout
is who does not take bribes (Ps 26,10).
Cases of bribery are also mentioned in the New Testament. And again, bribery is always
condemned. In connection with the events around Passion and Easter, it is
reported that Judas was bribed by high priests (Mk 14,10f par). High priests
and elders had apparently paid bribes to the soldiers so that they spread the
lie, the body of Christ was not resurrected but stolen (whether these passages
are historical is controversial). The Acts of the Apostles report on how judges
are bribed, the governor Felix wanted some money from Paulus, to sentence him
less severely (Acts 24,26f). It is also documented that customs – controlled by
the Romans – was corrupt at the time of Jesus; this fact is also shown by the
story of chief tax collector Zacchaeus and his illegally acquired goods and how
he later gives half of his belongings to the poor (Lk 19,1-10). The
corruptibility of the spirit is probably the most dangerous form of corruption:
Simon offers money to the apostles Peter and John, thus trying to buy the power
so that anyone he places his hands on would receive the Holy Spirit (Acts
8,8-24). To draw a moral from this story, then it shows that what is an
inalienable power of God cannot be acquired with underhand dealings.
The relevance of these biblical insights –
mostly conveyed in narrative stories – for the ethics of fighting corruption
lies in the fact that the stories reflect "images of successful life and
of a society that knows no corruption" (Bondolfi, 1996, 7). Basic values
are thus mirrored that are then taken up by the ethic of transparency and
turned into concepts. This is what the following chapter tries to do.
There is more or less a general agreement
beyond cultural boundaries that corruption is ethically reprehensible
(otherwise corrupt practices would not happen in secret and secluded). The fact
that corruption actually belongs to the culture of many countries in the South
and is supposedly part of their "culture of gifts", is a fatalistic
justification of corruption which cannot stand an analysis according historic
and defining criteria: Corruption has for example enormously grown in African
societies with their colonial and post-colonial power structures and with
today’s international trade as compared with pre-colonial times. Moreover, in
formulating definitions we have clearly distinguished between bribery and
gifts.
The following ethical criteria could serve to judge corruption:
·
Justice: Justice means to diminish the gap between
poor and rich. Whatever benefits most the weakest of our societies is just (J.
Rawls). “Heavy“ corruption favours the lead of the power brokers and widens the
gap between poor and rich.
·
Equality, equal rights for all, also for the poor: Bribes often
pervert the rights of the weaker who do not have the means to bribe or cannot
get justice in front of corrupt courts. The Old Testament puts it already in
words: "Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe makes people blind to what is
right and ruins the cause of those who are innocent." (Ex 23,8)
·
Truth: One of the motivators that lead to corruption is
time and again the fear of truth – which very often leads to perverting the
laws of the constitutional state and to violent actions. This form of
corruption is equally found in the bible, as seen above.
·
Freedom: Corruption creates an obscure tangle of interdependences
and blackmailing opportunities and thus compromises political freedom in the
sense of perceiving civil rights and duties and forestalls the respect of human
rights.
·
Productivity and Work: "Corruption replaces economic
performances and achievements by theft " (as stated by the Peruvian
Bishop’s Conference in 1989). It distorts the market because it does not reward
achievements, but existing power structures.
·
Rationality/Efficiency: Corruption increases the
"efficiency" for individuals at the expense of the overall system –
which is inefficient in economic terms.
·
Participation: Corruption is based upon intransparency
contradicting democratic control and participation of the public. To be able to
participate in decision making processes presupposes transparent information.
·
Human Rights: Corruption prevents the individual of getting
his or her lawfully entitled rights, as they have to be bought separately. The
propertied get one’s dues more than the unpropertied. The General Assembly of
the WCC in 1998 defined the protection of the individual from corruption as
elementary human rights.
·
Self-interest against Common Good: Corruption as abuse of public or
private power for private use (as to definition in chapter 2) puts the
self-interests in front of the common good. Corruption is "the undermining of the common
wellbeing through particular interests of individuals", as is rightly stated by economic
ethic-philosophers Peter Ulrich and Thomas Maak from St.Gall (Maak/Ulrich,
1999, 103).
·
Responsible use of power: A reason for corruption is often the
short-term economic survival (the necessity to obtain orders), but in the case
of those that bribe the reason is often greed and hunger for power; this makes
it impossible to carry out power in a responsible way.
These criteria are related in particular to
large-scale corruption. The petty, small-scale everyday corruption is more
likely to be justified from the moral point of view: Why is it objectionable
when a small official raises his pittance of salary to sustain his family? Or
when a customs officer is paid bribes of acceleration in order to have him
finally deliver the medical supplies for the poor rural hospital and thus to
save lives? This "small-scale" corruption of poverty is understandable,
but nevertheless ethically to be rejected, because in the same way as
large-scale corruption it undermines and destroys trust, sense of community and
democracy (even if it has much less serious effects in the individual case). It
does not mean that large-scale corruption is not practiced in the sense of a
survival strategy and has to been understood as an effect of the entanglement
into structures of injustice which is simply a question of personal survival,
as there is often almost no escape. Yet, it does not mean that it can thus be
legitimized ethically, on the contrary, it means that it is not admissible to
individualise the "guilt". Much rather has this entanglement into
structures of injustice in all spheres of life to be understood as part of the
ethic dilemma that we face as human beings and which brings about the fact that
we cannot live without guilt. This is the essence of Christian forgiveness.
This remission of guilt liberates us to be able to call injustice after what it
really is – even if it is not always possible to escape from it – instead of
legitimizing it ethically. Forgiveness liberates from the moral obligation to
be innocent.
The continuing increase of corruption and its
ever-lasting acceptance as a fact (although it has been publicly criticized)
undermines the fundamentals for a global
ethics of economy necessary for the modern, interdependent global economy,
should it be sustainable. The consciousness
must be strenghtened that corruption is unethical due to its above-mentioned
damaging effects on development, politics, economy, culture and religion.
Corruption however will not be reduced primarily
through the individuals that call up to renounce from corrupt practices out of
ethical reasons, but by implementing joint structural
measures enabling the (economic) players to maintain their competitiveness even
if they forego paying out bribes (social ethics as ethically responsible way of
shaping structures). A multitude of instruments are required that can be
employed at the same time. What could
entrepreneurs and companies, governments, administrations, trade associations,
churches and aid agencies together or separately contribute to the combat
against corruption?
In the following, a few basic approaches are
enumerated to possible solutions that are being discussed or implemented:
Stricter enforcement of criminal law
(Pieth/Eigen, 1999, 339-372), of tax laws (Pieth/Eigen, 1999, 373-390),
auditing practices (Pieth/Eigen, 1999, 391-448) and of awarding of contracts
(Pieth/Eigen, 1999, 492-518) are vital instruments. Included are also
universally valid "islands of integrity" related to specific lines of
industry (and promoted by Transparency International), legal reforms like in
Switzerland in relation to money laundering of bribes and tax deductibility of
bribes; reforms of administration in countries of the South or East; public sensitization
campaigns; support of the OECD-guidelines to combat corruption and no state
guarantee for export risks, if the payment of bribes can be proved. Voluntary
codes of conduct (see chapter 8 and Pieth/Eigen, 1999, 258-266) are an
important supporting instrument that can be immediately implemented by the
respective institutions without having to wait for the government to change the
laws.
A few instruments of the fight against
corruption are mentioned in the follwowing:
6.1.1 Laws
Important legal ways of fighting corruption are
given by criminal law and tax law, but also for example by laws and regulations
as to state guarantees for export risks, bookkeeping, banking, money laundering
and as to international legal aid, etc.
6.1.2 Anti-corruption clauses in
development contracts
The Development Assistance Committee DAC of the
OECD asked the member states in a recommendation (in May 1996) to include
anti-corruption clauses in their development contracts. Switzerland has
implemented this recommendation since 1998 in the Swiss Agency for Development
and Cooperation (SDC) and in the State Secretariate for Economy (SECO). All
private aid agencies (including Bread for All and Swiss Interchurch Aid – HEKS)
that receive government funds for development, have adopted this clause in
their SDC-contracts since 1999.
6.1.3 Islands of Integrity
Transparency International has developed the
instrument of so-called integrity pacts or islands of integrity. Such pacts
guarantee equal rights for the different players of an economic tender for a
contract. When calling for tenders for infrastructure programs for example, a
government establishes that only those companies can apply for job contracts
that have signed the island of integrity at chief executive level. This is the
case for an airport, power plant, a dam or a telecommunication net, all
prohibiting the payment or receipt of any kind of bribes. As in all
anti-corruption measures, checking of such pacts is of course of essential
importance.
6.2.1 Codes of conduct and standards
More and more entreprises sign in-house codes of conduct – relating to
the line of industry or of general nature – that also include anti-corruption
clauses. These codes of conduct are voluntary codes and are thus viable
instruments to start fighting corruption. When containing sanctioning
mechanisms, they may internally serve as very useful tools. Whenever
self-control takes place without the external verification of the code, it is a
relatively weak instrument. Codes of conduct are supplementing, but not
substituting necessary state and legal measures. Codes of conduct against
corruption increasingly exist also for public officials, for specific
professionals, etc. (please order a compilation of 36 of such codes with
Transparency International. See also bibliography).
Non-governmental organizations should and could apply more codes of
conduct. The one developed in Cameroon is a very good model. At the moment, an
international integrity-standard for NGO’s and the private economy is being
worked out (among others by Transparency International). As much as social and
ecological standards (for example SA 8000 or ISO 14000), this new standard
could play a vital role in the future.
6.2.2. Historic-cultural-ethical research
Research on the
deeper reasons for corrupt behaviour is important. Apart from obvious
superficial economic aspects, the patterns of colonial and missionary history
as well as ethnic and religious patterns play an important role. In this
connection, a Nigerian professor of sociology pointed out that there is a link
between corruption and offerings for ancestors in her country. Monies paid to
political leaders or even to Christian priests or pastors were considered as a
means of indulgence to ancestors. All in all, a possible connection between
corruption and “indulgence mechanisms“ seems worth of an investigation.
6.2.3 Moral education
The religious and ethical education of families,
churches, schools and media is an important instrument in the long-term fight
against corruption. As long as bribery is seen as part of everyday life and is
accepted as a fact of economic activities, corruption will not be overcome. And
in Cameroon I have even found a chapter against corruption in a secondary
level-textbook of ethical education!
6.2.4 Media
The work of investigating journalists in
disclosing cases of corruption is essential. But as the example of many
countries shows this is only possible when the respective journalists and media
are protected in their personal security and when freedom of press is
guaranteed. Today, due to the present international wave of governments that
are all showing an interest in fighting corruption – at least verbally –,
journalists face better working conditions than just a few years earlier.
The most
important players of today’s fight against corruption are the following
organizations:
7.1.1 OECD
The OECD-Convention on combating bribery in
international transactions was signed in December 1997 and came into force in
February 1999. It has a rather limited but economically and politically highly
relevant goal, as the convention’s approach is very practical and oriented to
the enforcement of its contents. Economic interests or bilateral individual
interests are clearly submitted to the legal and political goals of fighting
corruption. This is not a matter of course, if one considers that governments
for example in arms trade would probably also resort to corrupt means due to
economic reasons.
7.1.2 European Union
The EU has recently developed an entire program
against corruption for its member-states. Starting from the Convention on the
protection of its economic interests of 1995 it has developed into a protocol
to this Convention focused on bribery of community officials and of member
states threatening the communities’ economic interests. The EU at the same time
has serious corruption problems within its own structures which led to the
resignation of the whole EU-Commission on the 15th of March 1998.
Also, emergency and humanitarian aid of the EU have been affected.
7.1.3 Council of Europe
The Council
of Europe has prepared a draft for legal procedures in cases of corruption. It
has not yet been adopted, but work is well advanced. Different from the
OECD-initiatives it assumes a broad understanding of corruption, including
active and passive domestic bribery of officials, the bribery of private
persons in a commercial context as well as „trafficking in influence“.
7.1.4 Organization of American States
The Inter-American Convention against
corruption of 1996 also applies a broad concept of bribery, it goes beyond
traditional approaches by including illicit enrichment.
7.1.5 United Nations
The UN has resumed work on corruption with two
General Assembly Resolutions in 1996 and recently increased its efforts.
7.1.6 World Bank
For approximately two years the World Bank has
intensively worked against corruption, together with its new president James
Wolfensohn. Since then it has published numerous interesting documents and
investigations (see bibliography). It has – finally – started to establish its
own control mechanisms. Not least because the World Bank has been accused of
being involved in cases of corruption time and again. A recent study showed
that one third of a World Bank grant to the government of Indonesia was abused as
bribes and disappeared in corrupt channels. On the occasion of talks with
different World Bank officials responsible for the fight against corruption in
New York in July 1999 and at the 9th International Anti-Corruption
Conference in Durban/South Africa in October 1999 I have been convinced by the
seriousness of efforts undertaken by the World Bank.
7.1.7 International Monetary Fund
The IMF also recently started a process to
fight corruption. Like the World Bank, also because it has become obvious that
the IMF itself used tremendous funds to bribe, as is shown by the newest
example of IMF-credits to Russia.
7.1.8. World Trade Organization WTO
Up to now, the WTO has considered corruption as
a non-trade-related issue and therefore viewed the WTO as not being in charge
of it, although Transparency International tried to convince the WTO to take
action on this issue. However, in connection of the efforts of maybe including
a so-called „Procurement Convention“ into the WTO-rules, it has lately seemed
possible to touch upon the issue in WTO-circles.
7.1.9 Switzerland
The
Swiss legislation as to money laundering was considerably strenghtened in 1998.
This also helps the fight against corruption. As the first chamber, the
National Council (the lower House of Parliament) ratified the OECD-Convention
against Corruption on October 9, 1999 and at the same time passed a law to
abolish the deductibility of bribes. Thus, important steps on the level of
Swiss legislation have been concluded, even if they took place relatively late.
In addition, Switzerland and in particular the Swiss Agency for Development und
Cooperation SDC actively supports several efforts of fighting corruption, among
others those of Transparency International. On the legislative level, we would
require an anti-corruption clause in the law of the state guarantee for export
risks and probably a revision of the bank secrecy law under the perspective of
anti-corruption measures – for example related to tax evasion.
7.2.1 Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGO‘s)
At the moment, most anti-corruption activities
are undertaken by governments and multilateral institutions and much less by
private companies or non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The expectations
are rather high that the so-called civil society and thus the NGOs contribute
to the fight against corruption; and right now these expectations are far from
being met.
Among all NGO’s, Transparency International
(TI) ranks top on the list of specialized organizations in the fight against
corruption. TI was founded in 1993 by the former World Bank director Peter
Eigen and the former general secretary of the department of development of the
European Union Dieter Frisch. Today, this NGO is already represented with
national chapters or contact organizations in over 70 countries, the majority
of which are development or transition countries. And since 1999, the majority
of the international board comes from development countries, as well! The Swiss
section of TI, Transparency Switzerland, was founded upon the initiative of the
general secretary of „Bread for All“ in 1995.
7.2.2 Private Sector
Private economy is a major part of the problem
of corruption, in particular in international business. However, it is also
part of the solution. In the centre of the discussions are in-house codes of
conduct, but also the increased readiness of private economy to contribute to
the strenghtening of legal measures in criminal law and tax legislation. In the
future I see a particular role to be played by the five large global auditors
like PriceWaterhouseCoopers or KPMG, that exert a great influence on companies
and governments and their rendering of accounts; thus they could have a major
influence on the implementation of anti-corruption measures. This is also true
for customs inspection companies like SGS, that have already realized the
potential of that market. However, due to their power concentration they need
to be subjected to democratic control, as past cases of corruption show in
which SGS itself was involved.
7.2.3 Churches
The churches and their representatives are part
of the problem of corruption and thus part of the solution. Individual church leaders
and councils start working against corruption in a growing number of countries.
The 8th Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Harare/Zimbabwe
in December 1998 made some clear statements on the issue, among others in the
final statement on debts. The international community of over 350 churches from
all countries called on its member churches to „advocate ethical governments in
all countries and to urge governments to take legislative action against all
forms of corruption and misuse of loans.“ The general assembly expressed in the
statement on human rights that “corrupt practices are a major evil in our
societies. We uphold the right of every person to be protected under the law
against corrupt practices. This is an elementary human right.“
7.2.4 Other Religious Denominations
Statements of other religious denominations or
communities are available but analysed only to a limited extent. For example,
Nigerian Moslem communities have expressed their views on corruption. Certainly
the Holy Scriptures of all religious communities speak against corruption. Here
we find a potential of joint action that has not yet been fully utilized.
Governments, business and
multilateral institutions are intensifying their efforts to fight corruption at
the international level. NGOs and churches are also becoming increasingly
active in anti-corruption campaigns, such as the one launched in Cameroon.
Bread for All helped to devise a model code of conduct for NGOs in Cameroon:
"Code against Corruption and for Transparency for NGOs and Church
Projects.". This is a world première for aid agencies and churches! Find the full text of the Code against Corruption
in the appendix – printed here for the first time outside of Cameroon!
In 1998, Cameroon was the last country on the
international list of the Corruption Perception Index (also refer to chapter
2.3). It is thus being considered as one of the presently most corrupt
countries, at the same time Cameroon is one of “Bread for All”’s target
countries for development cooperation. Included are the long-time experiences
of the “Basel Mission” and the “Département missionnaire”.
Alarmed by this information, NGOs and church
representatives in Cameroon – among others also partners of the Basel Mission
and of the Département missionnaire in Lausanne – expressed their willingness
to become more active in the fight against corruption. Consequently, the Center
for Environment and Development in Yaoundé, Cameroon’s capital city, conducted
a study in collaboration with Bread for All, financed by the Swiss Agency for
Development and Cooperation and Transparency International, to determine how
NGOs in Cameroon are affected by the problem of corruption and what they could
do about it. The study was conducted by four specialists from Cameroon at 15
selected organizations from various sectors in 1998.
During a second phase of the study, a seminar
was held in the city of Mbalmayo in March 1999, in which 40 representatives
from development organisations, farmers’ cooperatives, churches and
environmental organizations participated. It was rather symbolic when during
the seminar the volcano of Mount Cameroun erupted for the first time since 17
years; and almost as eruptive the willingness of the NGO and church
representatives was expressed to finally take joint action against corrupt
practices. They discussed, complemented and modified the analysis. During this
phase they worked out during long nights (also for the author of this paper) a code of conduct to combat corruption and
promote transparency in NGOs and churches was formulated (see text in the
appendix). This code, the first of its kind to apply to development organisations
and churches, focuses in particular on the publication of financial statements,
democratic decision-making structures, the separation of powers, and on the
protection for persons engaged in the fight against corruption.
The code against corruption and for
transparency contains eight principles:
The second part of the code contains nine steps for implementing the code,
which all organisations that sign the code pledge to support, just as they pledge
to support its principles. These steps are specifically concerned with
organizational structure (e.g. separation of powers, employment practices,
limits on terms of office, etc.), internal training, sanctions against
corruption, legal measures, and better exchanges of information among
organizations with respect to combating corruption. The code’s signatories
intend to meet within a year to assess progress. The general secretary of Bread
for All was the only representative from the North to attend the seminar.
Representatives of Cameroon have also called upon development agencies in the
North to intensify their efforts to combat corruption. In response, Bread for
All invited religious development organisations and religious missions to a
one-day seminar last autumn during which project leaders discussed the issue of
corruption. The question is whether it was not useful to have development and
missionary agencies – i.e. “donor organizations” – sign the code as well!
The main challenge now is to encourage as many
organizations as possible in Cameroon to sign and implement the code of
conduct. This is not an easy task; in some cases, the presidents and directors
of individual organizations are themselves part of the problem. However,
willingness to confront this development-inhibiting problem is growing
considerably, thanks to the rapid increase in discussions about combating
corruption at the global level as well as concrete requirements at the
governmental level (see chapter 6.1). FEMEC, the Association of Evangelical
Churches in Cameroon, organized a follow-up seminar on corruption for church
leaders in June 1999 and decided to publish a collection of theological papers
responding to the issue of corruption.
Voluntary codes of conduct against corruption for
individual companies, lines of industry or specific sectors of the civil
society like development organization or churches are "necessary, but not
sufficient ", as resulted from an analysis of the code of ethics of the
International Federation of Engineering Associations with its head office in
Lausanne (Hofmann, 1999, 258ff).
Apart from voluntary codes of conduct – as the
one above-mentioned – there is also the possibility to include anti-corruption
clauses into the contracts for development projects or church partnerships. The
Swiss government applies this principle since 1998 in the case of development
contract with governments and private organizations (via the Swiss Agency for
Development and Cooperation SDC) and increasingly in the case of trade
contracts (concluded by seco, the new State Secretariate for Economy).
The "Anti-Corruption Clause for Contracts" by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation says: "The contractual parties shall neither offer a third person nor seek, accept or get promised directly or indirectly for themselves or for another party any gift or benefit which would or could be construed as an illegal or corrupt practice." (DEZA, Leitlinien Korruptionsbekämpfung, S. 24).
Since 1999, this clause is included in all
program contracts of SDC, i.e. also in the one of Bread for All and HEKS
(Interchurch Aid). In addition, Bread for All included the same code into the
new contracts with the ten partner organizations of the contact group BFA
(earlier SEMR-Gruppe 3) of June 1999. It has also been included word-for-word
into article 1.5 of the code of conduct adopted in Cameroon in March 1999! The
Basler Mission clearly included the following project criteria into the draft
of their new mission statement of August 1999: „Projects and programs of the
Basler Mission ... never resort to the means of corruption“.
The biggest part of development projects that
are supported by the reformed aid agencies and missionary societies are
certainly free of corruption (apart from small-scale corruption – for example
to obtain specific permits – that many projects cannot or do not want to
avoid). However, the minority of projects that allows corrupt practices
severely hampers the image of development cooperation altogether. The promising
approaches that are described in this paper should therefore serve the players
of development cooperation and missionary work in their fight against
corruption.
Churches, church-funded aid agencies,
associations and missionary societies could and should act against corruption
with common strategies and mutual support; in so doing, they could obtain
international profile and credibility. Therefore, I propose an „Ecumenical Program
to Combat Corruption“ (EPCC). This program could be promoted under the
responsibility of WCC, the World Council of Churches, and possibly in
cooperation with the Catholic International Commission Justitia et Pax.
Representatives of the World Council of
Churches (WCC) have also shown interest in making the code of conduct of
Cameroon applicable to other churches and other continents. At the last general
assembly of the World Council of Churches in Harare, Zimbabwe, in December
1998, member churches gave the Council a clear mandate to combat corruption.
With these efforts, churches and aid agencies
raise their credibility and are more justified to demand from multinational
corporations, governments and multilateral institutions to cooperate in fighting
corruption. In church and church-related project partnerships sometimes
combating corruption is complicated by misconceptions of partnership that is
turned into an ideology to cover up intransparencies by pleading the existing
partnership. Transparency, frankness and mutual accountability are
preconditions for a trustful partnership.
There are many opportunities for churches,
church agencies and their development and partnership programs to combat
corruption:
·
Drawing
up an analysis, in as much one’s own organization faces corruption and how it
deals with it.
·
Working
out biblical-theological instruments on corruption.
·
Signing
the code of conduct against corruption (see chapter 8).
·
Participation
in national legal revisions to fight corruptions.
·
Public
statements of churches against corruption in one’s own country.
·
Implementation
or support of an anti-corruption campaign
(„zero-tolerance campaign“ like eg.
the one of the government of Botswana).
·
Cooperation
with the national chapters of Transparency International.
·
Dialogue
between churches and companies as to the issue.
The following questions should serve as a
checklist in the fight against corruption helping to find orientation for
programme coordinators, management and other decision makers in aid agencies,
missions, churches, development programmes and church partnerships (in the
following called „organization“).
1.
Is
there an analysis, in as far as the organization is confronted with corruption
and how it deals with it? If not, who could work out such an analysis?
2.
Are
biblical-theological instruments on fighting corruption being developed and
disseminated for bible work, class-room education, sermons and (also
interreligious) pastoral care?
3.
Has
the signing of the „Code against Corruption and for Transparency“ (see chapter
8) been discussed and planned with the organization and its partners and – in
case the code has already been signed – is there a control mechanism in place
to regularly check on its observance?
4.
Is the
auditing company that audits the finances of the organization credible and free
of corruption? Is it necessary to invest more means into auditing in order to
guarantee this?
5.
Is
there a participation of the organization in the revision of national laws to
combat corruption, perhaps in connection with NGO-umbrella organizations?
6.
Has
the organization made or planned public statements against corruption on local,
regional, national or international level?
7.
Are
there anti-corruption clauses included in the development and cooperation
contracts of the organization and in its mission statements and project
criteria?
8.
Does
the organization – according its possibilities – dialogue with entreprises (in
particular with international corporations) about anti-corruption measures?
9.
Participates
the organization in investigations on the harmful effects of corruption, in
particular those that obstruct development and destroy the environment?
10.
Has
the issue of gender in corruption become a subject matter?
11.
Is
there a cooperation with the national chapter of Transparency International
(TI) to support and assist each other in the fight against corruption?
12.
Does the
organization promote „Island of Integrity“ in one’s own or in government
projects (maybe in cooperation with TI)?
13.
In
case the organization advocates disendebtment measures (Jubilee 2000), has it
pointed out the connection of disendebtment and combating corruption?
14.
Does a
„hotline“ inside or outside of the organization exist for anonymously reporting
on cases of corruption, like the UN-hotlines for their various organizations?
15.
Does
the organization participate in an anti-corruption campaign or can it propose
one?
16.
Does
the organization use its media-opportunities to fight against corruption, eg.
to „give corruption a face“ and to protect critical journalists?
- Bernasconi, Paolo: Internationale Anti-Korruptionskonvention. Entwurf und Kommentar, in: Aspekte des Wirtschaftsrechts, Schulthess, Zurich 1994, p. 423-440.
- Bondolfi, Alberto: Sozialethische Beurteilung des Phänomens Korruption und Kriterien für ihre Bewältigung, manuscript for a presentation in Budapest, 1996, 8 p.
- Cooksey Brian: Do Aid Agencies have a
Comparative Advantage in Fighting Corruption in Africa? Paper presented at the
9th International Anti-Corruption Conference, Durban 12th
October 1999.
- Cooksey, Brian: Corruption in Aid: How Much
Is Acceptable?, Governance Vol 1, No 1 (World Bank), January 1998, 13-18.
- Elliott Kimberly, Ann (Ed.): Corruption and
the Global Economy, Institute for International Economics, Washington 1997, 244
S.
- Frey Nakonz, Regula: Recherchen zur Genderdimension von Korruption, Arbeitspapier für Brot für alle, Bern 1999, 6 p.
- Frisch, Dieter: Entwicklungspolitische Gesichtspunkte der Korruption, in: Pieth, Mark/ Eigen, Peter (Hrsg.): Korruption im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr. Bestandsaufnahme, Bekämpfung, Prävention, Luchterhand, Neuwied 1999, p. 89-100.
- Galtung, Frederic: Zum Beispiel Korruption, Lamuv, Göttingen 1994, 112 p.
- Hofmann, Ernst: Codes of Conduct auf Branchenebene sind notwendig, aber nicht ausreichend - Beispiel FIDIC, in: Pieth, Mark/ Eigen, Peter (Hrsg.): Korruption im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr. Bestandsaufnahme, Bekämpfung, Prävention, Luchterhand, Neuwied 1999, p. 258-266.
- Holtz, Uwe/ Kulessa, Manfred (Hrsg.): Korruption als Entwicklungshindernis. Teil 1: Lässt sich Korruption durch rechtliche Massnahmen in Deutschland unterbinden? Materialien zum Dialogprogramm der Gemeinsamen Konferenz Kirche und Entwicklung Heft D11, Bonn 1995, 61 p. Teil 2: Dokumentation des Hearings, Heft D12, Bonn 1995, 131 p.
- International Monetary Fund: Mauro, Paolo:
Why Worry About Corruption?, Washington 1997, 16 p.
- Kleiner, Paul: Bestechung. Eine theologisch-ethische Untersuchung, Peter Lang, Bern 1992, 272 p.
-
Korruptionsgefährdungen und Sicherheitsvorkehrungen in der Bundesverwaltung. Report to the Swiss government on
26th of March 1998.
- Lange, Heiko/ Löhr, Albert/ Steinmann, Horst
(Ed.): Working Across Cultures. Ethical Perspectives for Intercultural
Management, Kluwer, Dordrecht 1998, 349 p. (55-145, diverse Autoren)
- Leisinger, Klaus, M.: Unternehmensethik. Globale Verantwortung und modernes Management, C.H.Beck, München 1997, 249 p., (62-83).
- Maak, Thomas,/ Ulrich, Peter: Korruption - die Unterwanderung des Gemeinwohls durch Partikularinteressen. Eine republikanisch-ethische Perspektive, in: Pieth, Mark/ Eigen, Peter (Hrsg.): Korruption im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr. Bestandsaufnahme, Bekämpfung, Prävention, Luchterhand, Neuwied 1999, p.103-119.
- Moody-Stuart, George: Grand Corruption in
Third World Development, York 1993, 61 p.
- Peter, Hans-Balz: Korruption. Einige sozialethische Überlegungen. ise-texte 7/95, Berne, 12 p.
- Pieth, Mark/ Eigen, Peter (Hrsg.): Korruption im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr. Bestandsaufnahme, Bekämpfung, Prävention, Luchterhand, Neuwied 1999, 735 p.
- Principles to Combat Corruption in Africa/ Principes pour Combattre la Corruption en Afrique (Erklärung von Regierungsvertretretern afrikanischer Staaten, Feb. 1999), hg. von Global Coalition for Africa, Washington 1999, 8 p.
- Rapport du séminaire sur la transparence dans
les ONGs et projets d'Eglises du 29 au 31 mars 1999 à Mbalmayo, Cameroun.
Yaoundé 1999, ca. 60 p.
- Recommendations of the working group „Sicherheitsprüfungen und
Korruption“ of the Swiss Confederation, Berne October 1996
- Rennstich, Karl: Korruption. Eine Herausforderung für Gesellschaft und Kirche, Quell, Stuttgart 1990, 279 p.
- Revision des Schweizerischen Korruptionsstrafrechts. Bericht und Vorentwurf, Berne June 1998, 60 p.
- Rijckehem, C. van/ Weder, B.: Corruption and
the Rate of Temptation: Do low Wages in the Civil Service Cause Corruption? in:
International Monetary Fund Working Paper 97/73, May 1997.
- Robinson, Mark (Ed.): Corruption and
Development, Cass, London 1998, 166 p.
- Rügemer, Werner: Wirtschaften ohne Korruption? Fischer TB, Frankfurt a.M. 1996, 265 p.
- SECO: Korruption in internationalen Geschäftstransaktionen. Übersicht über Instrumente und Initiativen zur Korruptionsbekämpfung. Inventar möglicher Aktivitäten für das BAWI, Berne August 1998, 12 p.
- Stückelberger, Christoph: Corruption - a
Challenge for NGO's and Churches, Paper presented at the Seminar in Cameroon,
March 1999, 8 p.
- Stückelberger, Christoph: Korruption in internationalen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen aus ethischer Sicht. Vortragsmanuskript für die Ausbildung von Exportfachleuten, Zürich 1996, 10 p.
- Stückelberger, Christoph: La corruption - un
défi pour les Eglises et les ONGs, Séminaire au Cameroun, March 1999, 8 p.
- Stückelberger, Christoph: Program to Combat
Corruption PCC. A Proposal for Churches and Development Agencies, Paper
presented at the Heads of Agencies meeting, Zeist Febr. 1999, 5 p.
- Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SDC: Korruptionsbekämpfung. Leitlinien. Bern 1998, 24 p.
- Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SDC: Rechtsstaatlichkeits-Konzept. Bedeutung in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, Berne 1999, 22 p.
- Trang, Duc (Ed.): Corruption and Democracy.
Political Institutions, Processes and Corruption in transition States in East-Central
Europe and the former Soviet Union, Institute for Constitutional and
Legislative Policy, Budapest 1994, 241 p.
- Transparency International: Reader on Codes
of Conduct. A sample selection, Berlin July 1999 (36 codes of conduct).
- Transparency International: Report 1996ff
(Annual report), Berlin
- Transparency International: The Role of Civil
Society in Fighting Corruption, paper presented at the Annual General Meeting
of TI by H. Elshorst, Durban Oct. 1999.
- Transparency International: The TI Source
Book, Second Edition 1997, ed., by Jeremy Pope, Berlin 1997, 136 p. (3rd
edition published in 2000).
- Usunier, Jean Claude/ Verna, Gérard: La
grande triche. Ethique, corruption et affaires internationales, Editions la
découverte, Paris 1994, 218 p.
- Waller, Peter/ Kulessa, Manfred (Hrsg.): Korruption als Entwicklungshindernis. Teil 3: Die Bekämpfung der internationalen Korruption - Wo steht Deutschland? Dokumentation der Tagung 24.6.1996, Materialien zum Dialogprogramm der Gemeinsamen Konferenz Kirche und Entwicklung Heft D14, Bonn 1996, 130 p.
- Weltbank (Kaufmann, Daniel): The Next Stage
of Anti-Corruption, World Bank Institute, Washington, June 1999, 14 p.
- Weltbank (Ofosu-Amaah, W.Paatii et al):
Combating Corruption. A Comparative Review of Selected Legal Aspects of State
Practice and Major International Initiatives, World Bank, Washington 1999, 114
p.
- Weltbank/ Asian Development Bank:
Anticorruption Policy, Prem Seminar Series, July 13, 1998, 30 p.
- Weltbank: Corruption: An Annotated Bibliography,
Public Sector Group, Washington, May 1998, 18 p.
- Weltbank: Helping Countries Combat
Corruption. The Role of the World Bank, Washington 1997, 69 p.
For NGO’s
and Church Projects in Cameroon
PREAMBLE
Corruption is a universal phenomenon that knows no
boundary, no race and no religion. Corruption, which developed in Cameroon over
the past two decades, has become the cancer of the Cameroonian society, and is
eating into the fabric of every society stratum.
Conscious of the hope the population has placed in them,
and of their roles and responsibilities in society, NGOs and the Churches of
Cameroon intend to fight against corruption and to promote transparency. NGOs,
Churches, and Church projects sincerely hope that other sectors of society
(State and private sector) would join in their efforts and take concrete
measures with regard to this fight.
The
objective of this code is to contribute to set up a framework that is
propitious for the fight against injustice and for the promotion of
development.
This code of conduct is an agreement
which organizations shall willingly adhere to and by so doing, accept to be
bound by the voluntary control mechanisms set up within the framework of this
code. The signatory organization (herein after referred to as
"organization") shall undertake to respect the present code of
conduct.
1 THE PRINCIPLES
The organization shall undertake to
respect the following principles:
1.1 Respect of human
dignity : The right
of every man, every woman and every child, to be protected against corrupt
practices, should be reaffirmed and respected.
1.2 Respect of moral
integrity : Moral
integrity, the basis of confidence, truth and openness, is a prerequisite for
developing sound human relationships.
1.3 Promotion of
justice: Justice
encourages equity and equal chances for every-one, and helps in reducing the
disparities between the different social strata. Corruption perpetuates and
increases inequality and injustice.
1.4 Promotion of
transparency: It is
the duty of each social actor to inform the society on its aims, activities,
results, its means either willingly or upon request. This principle shall be
restricted only if there is a valid reason.
1.5 Rejecting
corruption: Every
corrupt act has to be condemned. The organization shall undertake to abstain
from offering to third parties, gifts or others advantages and /or desist from
solliciting, or accepting promises made to them or to other, directly or
indirectly, considered to be illegal or corrupt acts.
1.6 Abide by laws: Abiding by the laws of the State
and internal regulations of the NGOs
and Churches shall be obligatory, in so-far-as they are compatible with the
spirit of this code of conduct.
1.7 The right to report
and resist corruption: Everyone has the right to resist
involvement against his wish in corrupt practices, and the right to report any
corrupt act he has witnessed or is a victim of. He has to be backed by NGOs and
Churches that are signatories to this code if he is being threatened because of
his resistance to corruption.
1.8 The precedence of
public interest over self-interest: Common interest should prevail over
self-interest.
2 IMPLEMENTATION
The signatory organization shall undertake to
take the following measures for the implemention of the code:
2.1 Structure: The organization shall adapt its
structures and procedural rules to the present code, especially in the
following areas:
- Separation of different organs which have to
be independent from each other (management, execution and control),
- transparency in financial management (for
example: double signature, publication of accounts, adoption of procedural
codes…),
- external independent auditing of accounts,
- recruiting members and personnel on the sole
basis of professional competence,
- limiting terms of office to enable
alternation within NGOs and organs of Church projects.
2.2 Information on the
code: The
organization shall undertake to diffuse and explain the code to all its organs,
as well as its personnel, consultants and partners.
2.3 Sensitization,
motivation and internal training: The organization shall undertake to sensitize, motivate and train its personnel
and its organs at all levels, upon implementation of the code.
2.4 Transparent
information: The
organization shall undertake to publish its progress and financial reports as
well as the balance sheet every year.
2.5 Internal
sanctions: Any
member(s) who violates the code, especially the principle of rejecting
corruption, is liable to sanctions from the organization.. These violations and sanctions shall be
published as much as possible
2.6 Regular
evaluation: The
organization shall be subject to regular follow-up and evaluation of its
activities.
2.7 Accountability: With all transparency, each
employee shall be obliged to give an account to the organ that is a signatory
to the code, of violations of this code that can be proven and verified, and especially,
the principle of rejecting corruption. If no action is taken, the employee may
bring the information to the attention of an independent organ or the media.
Any employee that accounts for such violations has to be entirely protected
against any reprisals by the organ that is a signatory to the code.
2.8 Legal measures: The organization shall take matters
to court if internal sanctions are ineffective, or the laws are violated.
According to its means, the organization shall undertake to promote the
independence of the judicial system if it has doubts on its independence.
2.9 Setting up
networks: The
organization shall undertake to set up anti-corruption and protransparency networks.
3 FOLLOW-UP AND EVALUATION OF THE CODE
3.1 Regular
evaluation: The
organization shall undertake to regularly follow-up the implementation of this
code and include the results in its annual report.
3.2 Revision of the
code: The code may
be revised by all the signatory organizations based on the experience acquired
during its implementation. The first meeting shall take place at most one year
after the code has come into force.
4 FINAL
PROVISIONS
This code was designed and adopted during the
workshop on transparency that held in Mbalmayo from 29 to 31 March 1999 and brought
together representa
tives of NGOs, Churches and Church Projects.
This code shall be ratified by the organ that
plays the role of board of directors, represented by its president.
Done in
...................................................... on
...............................................
Organization Represented by Date and Signature
Appendix
A Definitions
Corruption: Corruption
is the abuse of public or private authority because of self-interest.
Active corruption: Unlawfully propose bids, promises,
gifts, presents or advantages of any kind, directly or indirectly, in order to
influence someone who has authority to carry out or refrain from carrying out
an act, which falls within his remit, or an act facilitated by his mission or
mandate.
Passive corruption: When someone who has authority
unlawfully sollicits or accepts bids, promises, gifts or advantages of any kind
in order to carry out or refrain from carry out an act which falls within his
remit.
NGO: In this context NGO refers to all
types of organizations existing in Cameroon and governed by the laws on
associations CIG, EIG or Cooperatives.
Church: Church refers to any institution
whose objective is to propagate and reinforce the Christian faith.
B. List of signatory
organizations
C. Laws and
regulations on corruption in Cameroon.
(Original version of the code is in french)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For further
information on the code
- Centre pour l’environnement et le
développement, PBox 8451, Yaounde, Cameroon Tel ++237 223859, Fax ++ 237
223859, e-mail: nguiffo@camnet.cm
Dr. Samuel Nguiffo.
- Bread for All/ TI Switzerland,
Monbijoustrasse 29, CH-3001 Bern, Switzerland,
Tel ++41 31 380 65 66, Fax 380 65 64, e-mail stueckelberger@bfa-ppp.ch,
Dr. Christoph Stückelberger.
Verhaltenskodex gegen Korruption und für Transparenz
für Nichtregierungsorganisationen und
Entwicklungsprojekte der Kirchen in Kamerun
Präambel
Die Korruption ist das Krebsgeschwür der kamerunischen Gesellschaft geworden. Sie hat sich in den letzten beiden Jahrzehnten entwickelt und nunmehr alle sozialen Schichten erfasst. Im Bewusstsein der Hoffnung, welche die Bevölkerung in sie setzt, und im Wissen um ihre Rolle und Verantwortung innerhalb der Gesellschaft beabsichtigen die Nichtregierungsorganisationen (NROs) und Kirchen von Kamerun, gegen die Korruption zu kämpfen und die Transparenz zu fördern. Die NROs, Kirchen und kirchlichen Projekte hoffen inständig, dass auch Staat und Privatwirtschaft sich ihnen mit konkreten Massnahmen anschliessen.
Das Ziel dieses Verhaltenskodex ist es, einen günstigen Rahmen zu schaffen, um gegen die Ungerechtigkeit zu kämpfen und sich für die Entwicklungsförderung einzusetzen.
Dieser Verhaltenskodex (im folgenden Kodex genannt) ist ein freiwilliges Übereinkommen, das über Kontrollmechanismen verfügt. Die unterzeichnenden Organisationen, fortan „die Organisation“ genannt, setzen sich dafür ein, den vorliegenden Kodex zu respektieren.
1.
Prinzipien
Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, die folgenden Prinzipien zu respektieren.
1.1 Respektierung der menschlichen Würde: Das Recht aller Männer, Frauen und Kinder, gegen die Praktiken der Korruption geschützt zu sein, muss bekräftigt und respektiert werden.
1.2 Respektierung der moralischen Integrität: Die moralische Integrität, die aus Vertrauen, Wahrheit und Offenheit besteht, ist eine Voraussetzung für gesunde menschliche Beziehungen.
1.3 Förderung der Gerechtigkeit: Die Gerechtigkeit stärkt die Rechts- und Chancengleichheit aller und trägt dazu bei, die Unterschiede zwischen den einzelnen sozialen Schichten abzubauen. Die Korruption lässt die Ungleichheiten und die Ungerechtigkeit fortbestehen und noch anwachsen.
1.4 Förderung der Transparenz: Alle sozialen Organisationen sind verpflichtet, die Gesellschaft über ihre Ziele, Aktivitäten, Resultate und Mittel zu informieren. Nur aus triftigen Gründen darf dieses Prinzip eingeschränkt werden.
1.5 Ablehnung der Korruption: Jegliche Korruptionshandlung muss verurteilt werden. Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, weder Dritten Vorteile irgendwelcher Art direkt oder indirekt anzubieten, noch für sich oder für andere direkt oder indirekt Geschenke entgegenzunehmen oder sonstige Vorteile zu verschaffen oder versprechen zu lassen, die als widerrechtliche Praxis oder als Bestechung betrachtet werden oder betrachtet werden können.
1.6 Einhaltung der Gesetze: Die Einhaltung der staatlichen Gesetzgebungen und der internen Reglemente der NROs und der Kirchen ist Pflicht, in dem Masse wie diese mit dem vorliegenden Verhaltenskodex vereinbar sind.
1.7 Das Recht, die Korruption anzuzeigen und ihr Widerstand zu leisten: Alle Einzelpersonen haben das Recht, sich zu weigern, gegen den eigenen Willen in korruptionsverdächtige Handlungen hineingezogen zu werden. Zudem haben sie das Recht, jegliche Korruptionshandlung, bei denen sie Zeuge oder Opfer sind, zu melden. Jedes Individuum, das aufgrund seines Widerstandes oder seiner Opposition gegen die Korruption Drohungen ausgesetzt ist, muss die Unterstützung der NROs und Kirchen erhalten, welche diesen Kodex unterschrieben haben.
1.8 Der Vorrang der Interessen der Allgemeinheit vor Einzelinteressen: Das Gemeinwohl muss über den Interessen Einzelner stehen.
2.
Umsetzung
Die unterzeichnende Organisation verpflichtet sich, die folgenden Massnahmen zur Umsetzung des Verhaltenskodex zu ergreifen:
2.1 Struktur: Die Organisation passt ihre Strukturen und ihre Verfahrensregeln dem jetzigen Kodex an, namentlich in den folgenden Bereichen:
- Gewaltentrennung bei den verschiedenen Gremien, die voneinander unabhängig sein müssen (Leitungs-, Führungs- und Kontrollorgane)
- Transparenz in der Finanzverwaltung (z.B.. Doppelunterschrift, Veröffentlichung der Jahresrechnung, Verabschiedung von Verfahrensregeln,...)
- Eine externe und unabhängige Revision der Rechnung
- Die Auswahl von Gremienmitgliedern und des Personals ausschliesslich auf der Basis der beruflichen Qualifikation
- Amtszeitbeschränkung, um innerhalb der NROs und der Kirchen eine Wechselfolge zu gewährleisten.
2.2 Information über den Kodex: Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, den Kodex allen ihren Organen wie auch dem Personal und den Beratern und Partnern zuzustellen und zu erläutern.
2.3 Sensibilisierung, Motivation und interne Schulung: Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, das Personal und seine Organe auf allen Ebenen für die Umsetzung des Kodex zu sensibilisieren, zu motivieren und zu schulen.
2.4 Transparente Information: Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, alljährlich ihre Tätigkeits- und Finanzberichte sowie die Bilanz zu veröffentlichen.
2.5 Interne Sanktionen: Sollte der Kodex, insbesondere das Prinzip der Ablehnung der Korruption, von einer oder mehreren Angestellten der Organisation selbst verletzt werden, ist diese angehalten, Sanktionen gegen den/die Schuldigen zu ergreifen. Die Verletzungen und deren Bestrafungen werden so schnell wie möglich publiziert.
2.6 Regelmässige Evaluation: Die Organisation unterstellt sich einer regelmässigen Evaluation ihrer Aktivitäten und Strukturen.
2.7 Rechenschaftspflicht: Jede/r Angestellte hat die Pflicht, dem den Kodex unterzeichnenden Gremium in aller Transparenz zu melden, wenn der Kodex nachvollziehbar und überprüfbar verletzt worden ist, insbesondere wenn es um das Prinzip der Ablehnung der Korruption geht. Sollten keinerlei Massnahmen getroffen werden, so kann der/die Angestellte eine unabhängige Stelle oder die Medien informieren. Alle Angestellten, die solche Verletzungen melden, müssen vollumfänglich von der unterzeichnenden Organisation gegen alle möglichen Vergeltungsmassnahmen geschützt sein.
2.8 Gerichtliche Massnahmen: Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, an die Gerichte mit diesen Angelegenheiten zu gelangen, sollten die internen Sanktionen nichts fruchten, oder die Gesetze gebrochen werden. Zweifelt die Organisation an der Unabhängigkeit des Rechtssystems, setzt sie sich ihren Möglichkeiten entsprechend für die Förderung einer unabhängigen Justiz ein.
2.9 Schaffung von Netzwerken: Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, Netzwerke zu knüpfen oder zu stärken, die gegen die Korruption kämpfen und die Transparenz fördern. Sie setzt sich dafür ein, dass mit dem Privatsektor und den staatlichen Institutionen ein Dialog über die Grundsätze des Kodex aufgenommen wird.
3.
Weiterarbeit und Evaluation des Kodex
3.1 Regelmässige Evaluation: Die Organisation verpflichtet sich, die Umsetzung dieses Kodex in regelmässigen Abständen zu evaluieren und die Ergebnisse in ihren Jahresbericht aufzunehmen.
3.2 Revision des Kodex: Der Kodex kann durch die Gesamtheit der unterzeichnenden Organisationen auf der Basis ihrer gemachten Erfahrungen revidiert werden. Sie versammeln sich zum ersten Mal spätestens ein Jahr nach dem Inkrafttreten des Codex.
4.
Schlussbestimmungen
Diese Kodex wurde während des Seminars über die Transparenz vom 29. bis 31. März 1999 in Mbalmayo in Kamerun von den Vertretern der NGOs, Kirchen und kirchlichen Entwicklungsprojekte ausgearbeitet und verabschiedet.
Die Annahme dieses Kodex muss durch das Gremium erfolgen, das die Funktion des Vorstands/ des Verwaltungsrats hat; vertreten durch dessen Vorsitzenden/ deren Vorsitzende.
Unterzeichnet in ........................................., am ..................................................
Organisation Vertreten durch Datum und Unterschrift
Anhang
A. Definitionen
Korruption: Die Korruption ist der Missbrauch von öffentlicher oder privater Macht zu privaten Zwecken.
Aktive Korruption: Der Vorgang, ohne das Recht zu haben, direkt oder indirekt Angebote, Versprechungen, Gaben, Geschenke oder Begünstigungen irgendwelcher Art vorzuschlagen, um von einer mit Befugnissen und Kompetenzen ausgestatteten Person eine Handlung kraft seines Amtes oder eine Handlung, die durch ihre Kompetenz oder ihr Mandat ermöglicht werden könnte, zu erreichen oder zu verhindern.
Passive Korruption: Der Vorgang, als eine mit Befugnissen und Kompetenzen ausgestatteten Person, ohne das Recht zu haben, direkt oder indirekt Angebote, Versprechungen, Gaben, Geschenke oder Begünstigungen irgendwelcher Art zu erbeten oder anzunehmen, um eine Handlung kraft seines Amtes oder seines Mandats zu erfüllen oder zu verweigern.
B. Liste der unterzeichnenden Organisationen
C. Gesetze und Verordnungen zur Korruption in Kamerun
-----------------------------------
Übersetzung aus dem französischen Originaltext: Helena
Nyberg/Christoph Stückelberger
Für Informationen zum Verhaltenskodex:
- Centre pour l'environnement et le
développement, Case postale 8451, Yaounde, Cameroun. Tel: ++237 22 38 57. Fax: ++237 22 38 59, e-mail: nguiffo@camnet.cm
Dr. Samuel Nguiffo.
- Brot für alle, Monbijoustr. 29, CH-3001 Bern, Schweiz. Tel: ++41 31 380 65 66, Fax: 380 65 64, e-mail: stueckelberger@bfa-ppp.ch, Dr. Christoph Stückelberger.
CONTRE LA CORRUPTION ET POUR LA TRANSPARENCE
DES ONGs ET
DES PROJETS D’EGLISES AU CAMEROUN
La corruption est devenu le cancer de la
société camerounaise. Elle s’est développée au cours des deux dernières
décennies, et gangrène désormais toutes les couches de la société.
Conscientes de l’espérance que les
populations placent en elles, et de leurs rôles et responsabilité au sein de la
société, les ONG et les Eglises du Cameroun entendent œuvrer pour la lutte
contre la corruption et pour la promotion de la transparence.
Les ONG, les Eglises et projets
d’Eglise espèrent vivement que les autres secteurs de la société (Etat et secteur
privé) s’associeront par des mesures concrètes à leurs efforts.
L’objectif de ce code est de contribuer
à créer un cadre propice pour lutter contre l’injustice et à la promotion du
développement.
Ce code de conduite est un accord
volontaire, disposant d’instruments de contrôle.
Les organisations signataires,
ci-dessous désignées “l’organisation”, s’engagent à respecter le présent code
de conduite.
1. LES PRINCIPES
L’organisation s’engage à respecter les
principes suivants:
1.1. Le
respect de la dignité humaine:
Le droit de tout homme, toute femme, tout enfant, à être protégé contre les
pratiques de corruption, doit être réaffirmé et respecté.
1.2. Le
respect de l’intégrité morale:
l’intégrité morale qui consiste en la confiance, la vérité et l’ouverture, est
une condition pour les relations humaines saines.
1.3. La
promotion de la justice:
La justice encourage l’équité et l’égalité des chances entre tous, et contribue
à réduire les différences entre les différentes couches sociales. La corruption
perpétue et augmente les inégalités et l’injustice.
1.4. La
promotion de la transparence:
Tout acteur social a le devoir d’informer la société sur ses buts, ses
activités, ses résultats, ses moyens, de façon délibéré ou à la demande. Ce
principe ne doit être limité que pour des raisons valables.
1.5. Le
refus de la corruption:
Tout acte de corruption doit être condamné. Elle (l'organisation) s’engage à ne
pas offrir à des tiers, et / ou ne pas solliciter, accepter ou se faire
promettre pour nous-mêmes ou pour autrui, directement ou indirectement, des
dons ou autres avantages considérés ou pouvant être considérés comme une
pratique illégale ou de corruption.
1.6.
Le respect des lois: Le respect de l’ensemble des lois de
l’Etat et des règles internes des ONGs et Eglises est une obligation, dans la
mesure où elles sont compatibles avec l’esprit du présent code de conduite.
1.7.
Le droit de dénoncer la corruption et
d’y résister: Tout individu
a le droit de s’opposer à son implication contre son gré dans des pratiques de
corruption, et a le droit de dénoncer tout acte de corruption dont il est
témoin ou victime. Il doit recevoir le soutien des ONGs et Eglises signataires
du présent code s’il fait face à des menaces du fait de sa résistance ou de son
opposition à la corruption.
1.8. La priorité de
l’intérêt public sur l’intérêt individuel: L’intérêt commun doit prévaloir sur les intérêts
particuliers.
2. MISE
EN ŒUVRE
L’organisation signataire s’engage à
prendre les mesures suivantes pour la mise en œuvre du code:
2.1. Structure: L’organisation adapte ses structures
et ses règles de procédure au présent code, notamment dans les domaines
suivants:
- la séparation
des différents organes, qui doivent être indépendants les uns des autres
(organes de direction, d’exécution et de contrôle)
la
transparence dans la gestion financière (par exemple double signature,
publication des comptes,
adoption de codes de procédure,...)
-
un audit extérieur et indépendant des comptes
-
le recrutement des membres et du personnel sur la seule base de leurs
compétences professionnelles
-
la limitation des mandats, pour permettre l’alternance au sein des ONG et
Eglises.
2.2. Information
sur le code:
l’organisation s’engage à diffuser et expliquer le code à tous ses organes ainsi qu’à son personnel,
de même qu’à ses consultants et partenaires.
2.3. Sensibilisation,
motivation et formation internes:
L’organisation s’engage à sensibiliser, motiver et former son personnel et ses
organes, à tous les niveaux, à la mise en œuvre du code.
2.4. Information
transparente:
L’organisation s’oblige à publier chaque année ses rapports d’activités et
financier, de même que son bilan.
2.5. Sanctions
internes: Si le code,
notamment le principe de refus de la corruption, est violé par une des
personnes de l’organisation, celle-ci est tenue de prendre des sanctions contre
les coupables. Ces violations et ces sanctions seront publiées autant que
possible.
2.6. Evaluations
régulières:
l’organisation se soumet à un suivi et à une évaluation réguliers de ses activités
et structures.
2.7. Obligation
de rendre compte: Chaque
employé(e) a l’obligation de rendre compte en toute transparence, auprès de
l’organe signataire du code, des violations établies et vérifiables de ce code,
et spécialement du principe de refus de la corruption. Si aucune mesure n’est
prise, l’employé(e) peut porter l’information à la connaissance d’un organe
indépendant ou des médias. Tout employé rendant compte de telles violations
doit être entièrement protégé par l’organe signataire du code, contre toute
forme de représailles.
2.8. Mesures
juridiques:
L’organisation s’engage à saisir les tribunaux si les sanctions internes sont
inefficaces, ou si les lois sont violées. Si l’orga-nisation a des doutes sur
l’indépendance du système judiciaire, elle s’engage, selon ses possibilités,
pour la promotion de l’indépendance de la justice.
2.9. Création
des réseaux:
L’organisation s’engage à créer ou à renforcer des réseaux de lutte contre la
corruption et pour la transparence. Elle s’engage à établir le dialogue sur les
principes de ce code avec le secteur privé et les institutions étatiques.
3.
SUIVI ET EVALUATION DU CODE
3.1. Evaluation régulière: L’organisation s’engage à évaluer
régulièrement la
mise en œuvre de ce code, et
à inclure les résultats dans son rapport annuel.
3.2 . Révision du code:
Le code peut être révisé par l’ensemble des organisations
signataires sur la base de leurs
expériences prochaines. Les organisations
signataires se réunissent la
première fois au plus tard un ans après son
entrée en vigueur.
4. DISPOSITIONS
FINALES
Ce code a été élaboré et adopté au cours de l’atelier sur la
transparence tenu du 29 au 31 Mars 1999 à Mbalmayo par les représentants des
ONG, Eglises et projets d’Eglise.
L’acceptation du présent code doit être ratifiée par
l’organe jouant le rôle de conseil d’administration, représenté par son ou sa
président(e).
Fait à ................................................ , le
.............................................
Organisation Représentée
par Date
et signature
ANNEXES
A.
Définitions
Corruption: La corruption est l’abus du pouvoir
public ou privé pour les intérêts personnels.
Corruption
active: le fait de
proposer, sans droit, directement ou indirectement, des offres, des promesses,
des dons, des présents ou avantages quelconques pour obtenir d’une personne
dépositaire d’un pouvoir qu’elle accomplisse ou s’abstienne d’accomplir un acte
de sa fonction, ou un acte facilité par sa mission ou son mandat.
Corruption
passive: le fait pour
une personne dépositaire d’un pouvoir de solliciter ou d’accepter, sans droit,
directement ou indirectement, des offres, promesses, des dons ou avantages
quelconques pour accomplir ou s’abstenir d’accomplir un acte de sa fonction ou
de son mandat.
B.
Liste des organisations signataires
C.
Dispositions législatives et réglementaires concernant la corruption au
Cameroun
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pour des
renseignements sur le code:
- Centre pour l'environnement et le
développement, Case postale 8451, Yaounde, Cameroun. Tel: ++237 223857. Fax: ++237 223859, e-mail: nguiffo@camnet.cm
Dr. Samuel Nguiffo.
- Pain pour le prochain, Monbijoustr. 29,
CH-3001 Berne, Suisse. Tel: ++41 31 380 65 66, Fax: 380 65 64, e-mail:
stueckelberger@bfa-ppp.ch,
Dr. Christoph Stückelberger.