Topic Guide: Codes of Conduct

Codes of conduct should be tailored to suit the nature of the ethics challenge for the particular group of public officials they cover, and the exact provisions will differ according to whether the code is intended to be applied to legislators, the judiciary, the executive or civil servants. Nonetheless, effective codes generally include the following:[1]

Codes of conduct should clearly state their key objectives as experience shows that ambiguity can hinder effective implementation and enforcement.[2] Clearly, the central focus of codes will vary according to context, but common objectives include:  

• providing a set of ethical standards and guidelines for public officials faced with difficult decisions
• increasing citizens' trust in the probity of public officials and raising accountability
• establishing expected values, principles and responsibilities for public officials
• promoting ethical behaviour and discouraging unethical acts

When formulating a code of conduct for public officials, it is strongly advisable to begin with a discussion of core values before moving on to detail the exact nature of rules and regulations.[3] In general, codes of conduct should build upon a country's public consensus on core values while remaining committed to the minimum standards provided by UNCAC.[4]  

The large majority of codes reflect values such as rule of law, political neutrality, loyalty, honesty, impartiality, competence, justice, public interests, accountability, efficiency and effectiveness, openness and transparency, reliability and predictability, and citizen participation.[5]

Bribery

All codes of conduct for public officials should explicitly define and ban bribery. Transparency International defines bribery as "the offering, promising, giving, accepting or soliciting of an advantage as an inducement for an action which is illegal, unethical or a breach of trust. Inducements can take the form of gifts, loans, fees, rewards or other advantages (taxes, services, donations, etc.)"[6]  

Conflicts of interest

Conflicts of interest are at the root of most unethical behaviour in public office and should be comprehensively covered by codes of conduct. Codes should outline what constitutes a conflict of interest, and detail procedures for detecting and resolving conflicts of interest as they arise. Transparency International advocates the inclusion of interest and asset disclosure mechanisms for senior public officials in order to identify potential conflicts of interest.[7] Conflicts of interest and disclosure systems are considered extensively in the following sections of this topic guide.  

Gifts and favours

Gifts and favours should be regulated by codes of conduct. Both UNCAC (article 8) and the OECD state that the acceptance of gifts is a leading cause of conflicts of interest.[8] Nonetheless, a 2011 OECD study found that less than a quarter of its member countries restricted the acceptance of gifts.[9] In many countries, therefore, gift taking needs to be controlled more strictly. In particular, codes of conduct should clearly define what constitutes a "gift" to include both physical gifts and promised services or hospitality. Codes should, moreover, establish clear thresholds and outline in which situations acceptance of a gift is permissible. Note, however, that care should be taken to align permitted thresholds to country norms, otherwise reformers risk introducing unenforceable regulation. Generally speaking, public officials should not accept a gift if it could be construed as an inducement or reward placing the public official under an obligation to a third party.[10] Codes should also specify a competent and independent ethics body to supervise gift taking. The Open Government Guide suggests that an internal audit body or ombudsman could develop a system of pre-approval of gifts and services.[11]  

Use of state property

Codes of conduct for public officials should outline unacceptable uses of state property and provide example scenarios to show what qualifies as illicit activity. The US Standards of Ethical Conduct, for instance, declares that, "An employee has a duty to protect and conserve government property and shall not use such property, or allow its use, for other than authorised purposes”. The dishonest use of government property or assets for personal gain is fraudulent activity and should be dealt with appropriately.

Other areas in need of regulation by a code of conduct include external activities, outside income and restrictions on public servants' pre and post-public employment. These remain less frequently covered in codes but are being slowly added to the legal framework in several countries.[12] More detail is provided on these issues in the subsequent section on conflict of interest. Suffice to note here that additional measures to tackle lobbying and improper relations with other public officials should be included in codes of conduct for government ministers and legislators.

Public servants are usually the first to notice misconduct, illicit or unethical activity and risks to the public interest. Fear of reprisals or a sense of inefficacy can discourage officials from reporting their concerns and it is important for organisations to overcome these disincentives by providing protection to whistleblowers. Whistleblower protection is a fairly recent addition to the open government movement and where protection exists it is generally provided by separate legislation.[13] However, innovative codes of conduct seek to integrate whistleblower mechanisms into the broader anti-corruption framework. The Australian public service code of conduct is notable for requiring public bodies to set out appropriate measures to react to whistleblower reports of misconduct.[14]

Model codes of conduct provide not only sanctions for non-compliance but also stipulate the bodies responsible for monitoring and enforcement of penalties. Sanctions range from suspension from office, fines, official warnings and occasionally criminal prosecution. It is, nonetheless, important to distinguish between the ethical issues which codes of conduct seek to address on one hand and what is covered by criminal law on the other.[15]  

Providing guidance to public officials on avoiding conflicts of interest is very different from prosecuting officials for corruption. As expanded upon in the section on asset declaration, these two tasks should ideally be undertaken by different bodies. Codes of conduct should therefore make explicit reference to relevant citations in the criminal law code and clearly specify jurisdictions for various kinds of infringements. Crucially, sanctions should be proportionate to the offence.[16]