Resources from the Anti-Corruption Helpdesk

Foreign exchange controls and assets declarations for politicians and public officials. Chêne, M, 2011.  

This query addresses how monitoring and tracking of suspicious activity and money laundering across international borders can be improved. To do so, it examines a number of countries which, as a means to prevent corruption, restrict their citizens and politicians from holding overseas bank accounts or property. The paper finds that such restrictions are typically not specific to politicians, but imposed on citizens as part of a country’s foreign exchange control regime. Restrictions can include disclosure requirements, strict prohibition or the written authorisation of the central bank or the taxing authority to open and maintain overseas accounts. As the number of countries where strict exchange controls are in force is constantly changing, however, there is no up-to-date, publicly available and exhaustive list of countries enforcing strict exchange control regimes.  

Asset declarations in selected Asian countries. Martini, M, 2013.  

This query analyses to what extent Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyz Republic, India, Bangladesh and Nepal comply with generally accepted good practice in the realm of disclosure systems. To do so, it analyses each country against the following criteria: (1) coverage of assets declaration, (2) types of information to be declared, (3) frequency of filling, (4) monitoring and enforcement, (5) sanctions, (6) availability of information to the wider public. Although the regulations may have changed since 2013, the paper is still useful as the author goes beyond the legislation to also examine how each of these issues is dealt with in practice. Despite a lack of literature on the topic, she describes a number of obstacles which are hampering implementation and enforcement of asset declaration rules in the selected countries.  

Declaration of interest, assets and liabilities: Oversight mechanisms, disclosure policy and sanctions. Martini, M, 2013.  

This query surveys good theory and practice of systematic verification of asset and interest declarations, and considers the literature on making officials' declarations public. It also considers the kind of sanctioning mechanisms appropriate in cases of non-compliance. The paper finds a broad consensus that declarations should be verified by an independent and well-resourced public body, and that disclosures should be made public once information that would violate privacy rights has been redacted. Finally, that author argues that in cases of wilful non-compliance, officials' employment may be terminated and affected decisions should be retroactively cancelled.  

Close search

Responsive versions of the site in progress.