We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
("OECD") Working Group on Bribery recently published its
Phase 3 report "Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention
in the United Kingdom".
The report provides a comprehensive review of the current UK
response to its obligations regarding implement of the Anti-Bribery
Convention. It evaluates the effectiveness of the Bribery Act 2010
and the Government's published Guidance.
While the OECD does commend the UK on many points, including its
significant increase in foreign bribery actions, it sets out the
areas in which it finds the UK lacking. In summary the OECD main
concerns include:
There has been an increased use of civil recovery orders -
meaning that there is less judicial oversight and the civil
recovery process is much less transparent than criminal plea
agreements;
The OECD found that, due to the low levels of information
regarding settlements being made publicly available by UK
authorities, there cannot be a proper assessment of whether the
sanctions imposed are "effective, proportionate and
dissuasive";
The OECD found that UK Overseas Territories have been slow to
implement the convention and, as some are offshore financial
centres, this raises the risk that they are used to facilitate
corrupt transactions;
The OECD noted that while the Bribery Act 2010 Guidance to
Commercial Organisations has increased awareness of foreign bribery
issues it requires further clarification around
"reasonable and proportionate hospitality" and
"promotional expenditures" especially in regard to
industry norms; and
The OECD is concerned that the Serious Fraud Office has entered
into confidentiality agreements with defendants that prevent the
disclosure of key information after bribery and corruption cases
are settled which reduces public awareness of these matters and
transparency overall.
What is clear from the report is that the UK still has much work
to do to comply with the Convention, and that the Bribery Act is
not sufficient to comply. Businesses should note that the Guidance
may be reviewed in light of the report's recommendations and
compliance with the Bribery Act is an ongoing process.
The material contained in this article is of the nature of
general comment only and does not give advice on any particular
matter. Recipients should not act on the basis of the information
in this e-update without taking appropriate professional advice
upon their own particular circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The right of a person to discuss certain matters with their lawyer, no matter how nefarious, without fear of their confidence being broken is one that has been recognised since the 16th Century.
The ramifications for those found to be in civil contempt (as presided over by the High Court), and, in particular, the court’s power to enforce such a finding against a contemnor who resides overseas, are more far reaching than many (civil) lawyers realise.
The Bribery Act has made the news again following the conviction of a would be taxi driver. Earlier this week, at Minshull Street Crown Court in Manchester, Mr Mawia Mushtaq became the second person convicted of an offence under the Bribery Act by attempting to bribe a Licensing Officer.
In the previous edition of Corporate Focus we reported that the Bribery Act 2010 (the Bribery Act) came into force on 1 July 2011 and we considered procedures that commercial organisations could put into place in order to prevent bribery.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
