This Anti-Corruption Helpdesk brief was produced in response to a query from a U4 Partner Agency. The U4 Helpdesk is operated by Transparency International in collaboration with the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre based at the Chr. Michelsen Institute.
We would like to get more information on how the other bilateral and multilateral donors are publicly disclosing corruption investigations and cases involving development assistance. Please provide current and good practice examples of other donors’ public disclosure policies and systems.
Disclosing information on corruption cases can play an important role in donors’ integrity management systems to prevent, deter and sanction fraud and corruption in the use of development assistance funds. However, the extent to which donors disclose such information greatly varies across agencies, from the publication of generic information and aggregated statistics in annual reports to the full publication of case information, including names of individuals and entities sanctioned. Multilateral donors typically have higher standards of transparency in the disclosure of corruption cases.
- National laws and policies on access to information, data protection, whistleblowing, etc. provide a legal framework that may limit the full disclosure of corruption cases by bilateral donors.
- Few bilateral donors, such as Sida and DANIDA, have made progress in recent years regarding the disclosure of corruption cases.
- Multilateral donors generally have higher standards of transparency and disclosure of corruption cases than bilateral ones.
- Examples of bilateral donors’ disclosure policies
- Examples of multilateral donors’ disclosure policies
Marie Chêne, Transparency International
Roberto Martinez B. Kukutschka, Transparency International and Arne Strand, U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre