Is Bribery Always Wrong_Oommen.pdf

8/11/2019 Is Bribery Always Wrong_Oommen.pdf

1/83


2/83


3/83

Published byHaggai Institute for Advanced Leadership Training

Tanglin P.O. Box 422SINGAPORE 912415

175 East Lipoa StreetKihei, HI 96753-8137USA

Post Ofce Box 13Atlanta, Georgia 30370-2801USA

Phone: +1-770-449-8869Website: www.haggai-institute.com

Copyright 2006 Haggai Institute

All rights reserved; no part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmittedin any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical,photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the priorwritten permission of the Publisher. This book may not belent, resold, hired out, or otherwise disposed of by way oftrade in any form of binding or cover other than that inwhich it is published without the prior written consent ofthe Publisher.

Printed and bound byViaTech Publishing Solutions, Inc.


4/83

The author would like to acknowledge the kind assistance ofthe following in writing this book: Mr. Courtney Richards,

Jamaica; Mr. Reil John Raos, Philippines; Mr. John Onditi,Kenya; Rev. David Wong, Maui.


5/83

Dr. Tom Oommen of India is theyoungest of nine siblings born to Christianand God-fearing parents in South India. He

accepted the Lord as his Savior following a crisisexperience in 1972. After his medical studies,he specialized in clinical pharmacology,preventive cardiology, chelation therapy andhuman resource management.

He also served as the Deputy Executive Editor of the BritishMedical Journal (South Asia Edition). His professional expertise took himto assignments sponsored by the WHO with his name being listed in theMarquis Whos Who in the World for ten consecutive years. A memberof various professional national and international bodies, he is also amember of the Board of H.I. India. He was nominated InternationalHealth Professional of the Year for the Year 2004 and as Deputy DirectorGeneral for Asia of the International Biographical Center by theInternational Biographical Society of Cambridge, UK. He was recentlyincluded in Great Minds of the 21st Century and the 8th edition ofWhos Who in Science and Engineering, as well as being awarded theInternational Peace Prize by the United Cultural Convention, USA.

Additionally, he was nominated to the Board of Advisors to the AmericanBiographical Center, North Carolina, in 2005.

He attended Haggai Institute training at Singapore in 1992and has been teaching at H.I. seminars since then. His call into privatemedical practice in 1999 provided more time to devote to HaggaiInstitute. His book Passionate and Compassionate Communication waspublished in October 2003. He is also the author of Corruption as an

Accepted Way of Life and Goal-Setting Dare: To Win .

Tom and his wife Anitha, a Professor of Anatomy at the RajivGandhi University, also run a professional reference library with over20,000 volumes covering 37 specialities, a service provided free of cost toall users and the largest of its kind in India. They are stationed with theirthree children, Anisha, Anup and Ajit, at Mangalore, South India, whereTom also serves as an Elder of the Brethren Church, which they attend.


6/83

Chapter 1: Everybody loves values

Chapter 2: The law is good: An internationalperspective

Chapter 3: Whats in a bribe?

Chapter 4: How corrupt are we?

Chapter 5: If money decides, then why pray?

Chapter 6: Global moves against bribery

Chapter 7: Hope for a hurting world

APPENDIX: The global threat

Contents


7/83

Chapter 1 :Everybody loves values He has shown you, O man, what is good and what TheLord requires of you, but to do justly and to love mercy and towalk humbly with your God. (Micah 6:8)

The Government of India had distributed land topeople who were homeless. However, quiet cooperationbetween landowners, revenues authorities and the rulingclass in India ensured that the government-distributedland did not reach the beneciaries. They created falsedocuments. In village after village the land is beingoccupied by someone else while the legal owner does noteven know that he owns the land. When the issue came upfor discussion in November 2004, a minister,Mr. Satyanarayana, said, The land belongs to God. It is asin to demand its distribution.

Every human being needs a skeleton that giveshim a frame, rigidity and structure. The skeleton givesattachment to the muscles and facilitates movement. Italso protects his internal organs from injury. Values arelike the skeleton. Our values give us the framework forour beliefs. Our beliefs in turn determine our conduct and

our ethics. In the absence of a strong value system we lackthe strength to stand on convictions or even to have anidentity in society. For people recognise us more for who

1


8/83

we are than for what we achieve. Nobody cares how muchwe know unless they know how much we care. The heartof the matter is a really matter of the heart. Our innerstrength and the protection of our lives depend on thestrength of our values. This is why it is essential for us tohave values that can stand the test of time or the crucibleof opposition.

If we have supple or exible values that are relativeto people or situations we have no hope in a changing

world. We can only grow socially, economically, physicallyand morally in an environment of change. The jellysh isa marvel of creation, transparent in appearance and softand delicate to touch. But it lacks a skeleton and lives ameaningless marine existence. I would not want to shakehands with a skeleton. But I would not want to shakehands with a jellysh either. If man were all muscle and nobone he would be no better than jellysh. If our values arenot constant we have an unsure foundation.

Values do not change with time, place or culture.Everybody loves values. The former President of theUnited States, Mr. Ronald Reagan, went on record tosay that there was an inherent goodness in every man.But not every man or woman feels bound by auniversal moral code. In a world that increasinglyemphasises freedom, people begin to establish theirown values and do what is right in their own eyes. In

reality, values give way to situation ethics unreliable,untrustworthy and unpredictable.

2

Dr. Tom Oommen: Is Bribery Always Wrong?


9/83

Against this background, how do we ethically assesswhether a bribe is good thing or not? Stanley Grenz in his1997 book The Moral Quest (Inter Varsity Press) has putforward some critical principles towards a Christian ethic.The ethical decision making of Christians must be based on:

the scriptures (the heteronomous view);

our own experience of Gods Spirit and His revelationand workings in our lives (the autonomous view);

our relationship with God and each other in a livingvital relationship (the theonomous view).

We should add that Christian ethics must also haveagape love (unconditional love) as its content. It mustbe theocentric focusing on the need to glorify God inall our actions, and seeking to embody the very teachingsand pattern of Christ and His life. It must be communityoriented it must be rigorously developed in the contextof Christian community with a consideration for others asparamount. Finally, it must be eschatologically directed,that is, directed towards our nal destination in heaven,which means that it must anticipate the kind of life we willlive in heaven.

3



10/83

Every country is governed by a constitution andlaws that are framed on the basis of that constitution. Laws

are drafted to ensure that people can live in peace andharmony with a uniform code of conduct that is acceptableto all its citizens. The Apostle Paul reminds us that allhuman authority is ordained by God (Rom. 13: 1-4).Rulers are not a terror to good works but to evil. Broadlyspeaking, each nation wishes to create an environmentwhere its people are peace loving citizens living inharmony with each other and in good relation with itsneighbouring countries. The law is good.

Why bribery is illegal According to the law, the denition of a crimehas always been regarded as a matter of great difculty,and no satisfactory denition has yet been achieved. Anyconduct that harms an individual also harms society, sincesociety is made up of individuals. Therefore it is true tosay that a crime is an offence against society. Any conductwhich a sufciently powerful section of a communityfeels to be destructive to its own interests endangeringits safety, stability or comfort is labelled as a crime.

Chapter 2 :The law is good: Aninternational perspective

4


11/83

Offences involving fraud include corrupt rewards,obtaining credit by fraud, frauds by bankrupts, fraud ingaming, impersonation, witchcraft and fortune telling,bribery and corruption. Professor Kenny, the legal expertof the mid-twentieth century, says that it is a commonlaw misdemeanour to bribe or offer to bribe a judge or fora judge to accept a bribe, or to bribe or offer to bribe anypublic ofcer to omit to do his duty or act contrary to hisduty. To sell or purchase, to receive or give any reward inrespect of the sale or purchase of a public ofce is a crimepunishable with a ne and imprisonment, forfeiture of theofce and absolute disqualication for holding it again.By the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906, it is a crimeto offer an agent, or for an agent to accept or attempt toobtain, any gift or consideration as an inducement, to do orforbear to do anything in relation to his affairs or business.

This illustrates the principle that, in legal terms,bribery is a crime.

The link between bribery and poverty Financial corruption is almost as old as history itself.At the time of Amos, the people were prosperous but hadforgotten justice in their desire for quick money (Amos5:24). The Financial Times recently reported that corruptionremains rampant in developing nations, with oil-producingcountries in particular still plagued by bribery.

The problem is not with the law as much as withthe way the law is enforced. Governments do not alwaysactively pursue the givers and takers of bribes. Sometimes

5



12/83

they have limited means to do so. And throughout muchof the developing world, at least part of the problem stemsfrom underlying poverty, which increases the pressure onofcials to supplement their income by extra-legal means.

At the time of this writing, Zambia is consideredto have the highest debt-burden per inhabitant of anycountry in Africa. Its main industry, copper mining, isrunning at a loss. Agriculture, which is the main hope forthe future, has had the worst year on record with most

of the commercial farmers now technically bankrupt.Ination is running at an annual rate of 120% and interestrates at commercial banks are running at 134% for 28-dayloans. The structural adjustment program has widenedthe gap between rich and poor and now 70% of the ruralcommunity are said to be below the poverty line.

Uganda is a small country in the heart of Africa,with an area of 236,000 square kilometres, 85% of which isuseful agriculturally. A good rainfall of between 75-125 cmper annum adds to the rich tropical fertility of the soil. Witha population of about 15 million, of which over 90% live inrural areas, more than 50% are below the age of fteen. Suchdistribution has its far-reaching effects in the provision ofhealth services, let alone effects in other social services.

Progress on resolving poverty at the internationallevel has been slow.

In October 1995, world leaders gathered in NewYork to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the United

Nations. Each of them echoed the same concerns about

6



13/83

their nations and regions. Capt. Valentine EM Strasser,former Head of State and Chairman of the NationalProvisional Ruling Council and Secretary of State forDefence, The Republic of Sierra Leone, said: Whilethe wealthier North enjoys stability, democracy andeconomic prosperity, increased productivity, expandedmarkets and job opportunities, the underdeveloped wallowin debt, famine, instability, disease and death. Unfairlydepressed commodities and a huge debt overhanging thenation threaten the recovery for third world recoveringeconomies. Africas debt alone has moved from a staggering$200 billion in 1993 to $211 billion in 1994.

Mr. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, President of theRepublic of Uganda, commented that the main reasonfor the backwardness of the economies and population ofUganda is the structure of its society. In Uganda, he said,ninety-two percent of the people are peasants and basethemselves on a subsistence economy. It does not matter ifwe are forgotten or marginalized. It is crucial that we inAfrica solve the bottlenecks and the endogenous factors thefactors within Africa that have stopped us from developing.Even if we do not get any help, provided we solve theendogenous bottlenecks, I am sure we shall develop.

According to Mr. Bahige Tabbarah, Ministerof Justice, the Lebanese Republic, World peace andunderstanding and respect for human rights cannot be

permanent unless the economic gap between the richand poor countries of the world is bridged. And Mr. JosEduardo dos Santos, President of the Republic of Angola

7



14/83


15/83

Earth and other celestial bodies, the gap between therich and the poor has widened alarmingly. And Mr.Shamshad Ahmad, Secretary-General of the EconomicCooperation Organization, said, Today the iron curtainis no longer there but a poverty curtain still divides theinternational community into two unequal worlds, oneembarrassingly rich and the other desperately poor. Wecertainly need a just, fair and equitable economic order freeof discriminatory and protectionist walls.

The heart of the issue Even where poverty persists, however, there islittle doubt that, if justice were meted out with speed andimpartiality, bribery could be curbed. Everybody was doingit will not stand good on judgement day. In the words ofMr. Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, Former President of theRepublic of South Africa: The time to act is now.

The Rt. Hon. Sher Bahadur Deuba, formerly PrimeMinister of the Kingdom of Nepal, saw the same problemin his nation when he commented, Today nations seeksocial and economic development within a frameworkof political freedom and justice in which the rights ofindividuals to live in dignity are respected. It is thereforenot enough for Governments to pay lip service to theseprinciples: they have to deliver the goods to the people bylifting them from dire economic conditions and providingthem with political stability to enjoy the fruits of freedomand prosperity.

9



16/83

Increasing wealth is not sufcient in itself to stampout bribery. The United States, with all its afuence, isno exception. The former President, Mr. Richard Nixon,had taken money from the Greek dictatorship through hisfriend Thomas Pappas. The reclusive billionaire, HowardHughes, had aspired to control politicians, and loaned$205,000 to Nixons brother, Donald. He was trying tobuy inuence with Nixon. Nixon was a close friend ofTeamsters Union leader Frank Fitzsimmons, who gota conditional pardon for his jailed predecessor, JimmyHoffa, while Teamsters money owed to the Nixon WhiteHouse. Mobster Mickey Cohen met with Nixon and, heclaimed, raised money from criminal fraternity in twoelection campaigns.

At the 35th Plenary meeting of the United Nations, October 22-24, 1995: Mr. Bill Clinton, formerPresident of the United States, said: Our time is not freeof peril. As the cold war gives rise to a global village, toomany people remain vulnerable to poverty, disease andunder-development. Criminal enterprises are moving vastsums of ill-gotten gains through the international nancialsystem with absolute impunity.

10



17/83

Bribery and nancial corruption seem to havebecome a way of life in most parts of the world. Somecountries are considered to be more corrupt thanothers. Our governance structure and business practicesunderscore our desire to act responsibly and with integrityin all aspects of our work, wherever we operate. Endemiccorruption, within government or business, underminesustainable economic and social development.

A bribe is anything given or promised to a personto induce him to do something wrong, illegal or against hiswishes. In an increasingly secularised world it should notsurprise us that bribery is not only prevalent but on theincrease. When God is removed from the halls of justiceand the way we order our lives as civil society, where thenis the moral centre that we can appeal to? What exactlymust hold a society together? Secularism and relativismare twin concepts without any foothold on which tostand. They are the breeders of a world of self-interest,corruption and chicanery. We should not be surprisedfor, since German philosopher Nietzsche declared over ahundred years ago that God is dead, we have thus removedthe moral lawgiver. Without a moral lawgiver, there is nomoral law.

Chapter 3 :Whats in a bribe?

11


18/83

Properly understood, a bribe is a corruptive andsubversive inuence since it is intended to circumnavigatethe normal legal systems and processes to benet theparties involved. Usually, bribery favours the rich who havethe means to do it! The poor who have few possessionsare thus disfranchised so that justice is not only deniedthem, but unfair favours are given to the rich. At theheart of bribes is not merely the circumnavigation of theproperly constituted authorities, but the innate selshnessof the persons involved. The person who is at the point ofvantage or power is the one who asks for the bribe. He usesa manipulative form of management to have his interestsmet at the expense of others who are at a nancial or socialdisadvantage.

Can a bribe ever be justifed? Some argue (and they do so in Jamaica andmany other developing countries) that bribes lessen the

economic costs to individuals as government nes areridiculously high, for example those for trafc violations.What is missed is that whilst the individual may seemto benet now (and many do) the entire society pays afar more weighty cost eventually because of the erosionof justice, the corruption of systems and persons andthe decline of morality. Thus the very foundation onwhich a healthy, just and wholesome society must restis undermined. Indeed, the economic loss that accrues

from bribes worldwide runs into billions, if not trillions ofdollars. So we are all losers in the long run.

12



19/83

Others assert that giving a bribe is not as wrongas the receiving it. They religiously hold that theScripture does not say anything about giving a bribe.True, but neither does the Bible use the word Trinity, ormissionary. The absence of the word in Scripture doesnot mean that the concept is not taught, explicitly orimplicitly. The very assertion that giving a bribe is not aswrong as the receiving it is based on a faulty understandingof human values. A distorted corollary of this assertionwould be, it is more blessed to give than to receive, or aplay on Pauls exhortation to the Church at Rome, whenhe said, Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tributeis due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, (bribeto whom bribe). In accordance with the Prevention ofCorruption Act, 1906, it is a crime to offer an agent, orfor an agent to accept or attempt to obtain, any gift orconsideration as an inducement to do or forbear to doanything in relation to his affairs or business.

It is certainly true that those who agree to pay abribe, rather than deliberately offering it, often do so outof fear that their needs will not be met. Even if they do notwant to give a bribe, they may lack the moral courage tostand against a corrupt system. Nevertheless, to give a bribeis to encourage corruption and succumb to fear. It alsobecomes an easy way out of as tight spot. And the world isfull of willing people those who are willing to give andothers who are willing to receive.

13



20/83

Bribery without money A bribe need not be just nancial or material. Inseveral ofces or universities people are willing to offertheir physical bodies for sexual appeasement in order togain academic, political or ofcial favors, for promotions,transfers, incentives or rewards. The problem is as relevanttoday as it was in the days of the Prophet Micah. SouthKorea is no exception. Corruption in legal circles is foundto be widespread in South Korea. Mr. Na Jeong-ju, staffreporter with the Korean Times, wrote that corruptioninvolving prosecutors, judges and lawyers has drawn keenmedia attention nationally, but little effort has been made toestablish legal measures to curtail the problem, according tolegal experts. The most recent case came from Chunchon,located some 150 kilometres east of Seoul, with a sexscandal involving a judge of the district court and otherpowerful men of the city. According to initial investigations,more than a dozen senior prosecutors, lawyers and judges

may have had sex with female employees of an up-marketbar in downtown Chunchon, with a lawyer nancing thesecret meetings in return for favours.

At the heart of the bribe is a system that promotesa get-rich-quick attitude. Money is not sinful, but the loveof money surely is. It is a good slave but a bad master. Witha mind-set that works for the here and now, the innereye does not see the future. This sets off a vicious cycleof wanting more and never being satised, much like theparched earth crying for rain. This desire to have morepossessions or social benets begets an evil eye

14



21/83

(Prov. 28: 22, KJV), depriving man of his ability to seeright from wrong. He develops distorted values, seeing onlyshades of grey and lacking the ability to discern betweenblack and white. He hastens to be rich and runs the riskof being guilty of several nancial irregularities that couldinclude evasion of taxes, falsifying of accounts, moneylaundering, indulging in crime and even living a lifestylethat is socially unacceptable.

Bribes and gifts It is arguable that a bribe is a gift. A gift is givenwithout expecting anything in return, usually as a token oflove, friendship or good will. The giver of the gift need notbe at a point of disadvantage. In contrast, a bribe is usuallyoffered by someone who expects a favour in return and isaccepted by the person who is in a position to bestow sucha favour. The person who expects or demands a bribe isusually at a point of vantage and intends to use his vantage

position for illicit gains. Bribery has resulted in socialinjustice, distortion of human rights, exploitation and mal-distribution of resources. Asking for or demanding a bribeimplies greed and giving a bribe involves moral depravityand spiritual laxity.

Even if a bribe is interpreted as a gift, such agift is forbidden in scripture because it blinds the wiseand perverts the words of the righteous. (Ex. 23:8, Deut.16:19), forcing them to resort to a way of life that is contraryto their inherent values. It is also considered to be a charm(Prov. 17:8) that entices people and lulls their conscience.

15



22/83

It subdues righteous indignation and causes aperversion of justice (Prov. 21: 14). The law of the landthen gets undermined, injustice prevails and people losecondence in the judiciary. Justice then is either delayedor denied, punishment is not meted out when necessary,criminals are not taken to custody and cheating, stealing,violence and crime go unchecked and unabated. Theproblem is not with the law, which is good, but with thelaw enforcement. Crime goes unchecked and wickednessincreases and the wicked man gives such a gift just topervert the ways of judgement (Prov. 17: 23).

God, being just, holy and impartial, cannotbe bribed (Deut. 10: 17). Any system that encouragesbribery does so in violation of such a righteous God.And what God is there that permits unrighteousness? Itis undoubtedly the cursed that take bribes (Deut. 27:25)because in doing so he is depriving his own neighbourof what could have been rightfully his. In short, a bribecorrupts (Eccl. 7:7), perverts the words of the righteous(Deut. 16:19), thwarts justice (Prov. 17:23, Amos 5:12),distresses the righteous (Amos 5:12), subverts the cause ofthe just (Ex. 23:8), predisposes to partiality (Deut. 10:17),justies the wicked and deprives people of their rights(Isa. 5:23). As a result, the rich to get richer and fewerwhile the poor get poorer and increase in numbers, theso-called principle of immiseration. Almost every countryin the world has experienced this phenomenon, whichis directly or indirectly related to bribery, corruption andcorrupt practices.

16



23/83

In several countries bribery has been a part of thelifestyle. This is happening in almost all sectors of societyand even the church is not an exemption. For example,if you want to process some documents in certain ofces,whether private or government, and if you want it to befast you have to pay under the table.

Some institutions, organisations and establishmentsare trying to avoid this practice. But it is really hard tochange the paradigm if it is already in the system and partof the sub-culture. Corruption trials are now becomingcommon events:

In April 2003, a grand jury in New York returned anindictment charging James Giffen, a U.S. citizen whoacts as a counsellor to the Government of Kazakhstanon oil transactions, with violations of the FCPA, moneylaundering and fraud associated with the diversion of feespaid by oil companies and the deposit of funds into Swissbank accounts held for the benet of Kazak ofcials. Trialin this matter is scheduled for October 2004.

In 2003, a grand jury in New York returned anindictment charging Hans Bodmer, a Swiss lawyer, withconspiring to violate the FCPA in connection withalleged bribery of senior ofcials of the Government

Chapter 4 :How corrupt are we?

17


24/83

of Azerbaijan. At the United States request, Koreaextradited Mr. Bodmer to the United States in 2004.

In April 1998, a grand jury sitting in Trenton, New Jersey, returned an indictment charging Frerik Pluimers,a Dutch national, and David Mead, a U.K. national,both of whom were ofcers of an American company,Saybolt Inc., with conspiracy and violations of the FCPAand the Travel Act in connection with a bribe allegedlypaid to Panamanian ofcials. Mr. Mead was convicted at

trial in October 1998. The United States requested the Netherlands to extradite Mr. Pluimers in March 2000.Despite extended litigation, including a decision of theDutch Supreme Court authorising the extradition, theDutch authorities have not yet (as of November 2004)ordered Mr. Pluimers extradition.

In December 2001, a grand jury sitting in Houston,Texas, returned an indictment charging David Kay,an ofcer of American Rice, Inc., with violating theFCPA by allegedly authorising bribes of Haitian customsofcials. In March 2002, the grand jury returned asuperseding indictment, adding a second defendant,Douglas Murphy, a former ofcer of American Rice,Inc. In April 2002, the district court dismissed theindictment, nding that the conduct alleged did notfall within the FCPAs requirement that the bribes bepaid to assist in obtaining or retaining business. The

United States appealed this decision and, in February2004, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuitreinstated the indictment.

18



25/83

The United States has been a leader in themultinational effort to end bribery and corruption ininternational business practices, a campaign that hasbeen supported by the United Nations, the Organisationof American States, the Organisation for EconomicCo-operation and Development (OECD), and othermultilateral organisations and institutions.

Rooting out corruption In saluting the delegates at the Second GlobalForum on Fighting Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity,President Bush stated that increasing accountabilityand transparency in governance around the world is animportant foreign policy objective for his administrationand that the United States is committed to support globalanti-corruption initiatives

Corruption cannot be an election issue in mostcountries. With all the politicians indulging in corruptionit is only a matter of choosing between the bad and theugly. And Mr. Ablass Oudraogo, Minister of ForeignAffairs, Burkina Faso, similarly observed, Injustice hasbecome built into the structure of todays world.

Even centuries ago the whole nation of Israel wasinvolved in bribery and corruption: their leaders, priestsand prophets (Micah 4: 9-12). It was part of the nationalsubculture (Jer. 6:13). But national corruption results

in national disaster (Micah 4: 9-12). As stated above,everybody was doing it will not stand good onjudgement day, just as it did not help the nation of Israel

19



26/83

in their hour of reckoning. During the time of the ProphetAmos (Amos 5:11), it was the poor who were lookingfor jobs. Because of the surfeit of poverty the rich tookadvantage of them.

Lee Mi-gyeong, an ofcial of the anti-corruptionbureau of the Peoples Solidarity for ParticipatoryDemocracy of South Korea, observed that every year,corruption scandals involving those practising andenforcing the law occur to the disappointment of the

public, which expects them to be the last ones to commitcrimes. Most cases are revealed by witnesses, he added.Until now, judges have regularly met privately withlawyers and plaintiffs, but no rule has been prepared totackle this practice. This leads to wrongdoings every year.

Civic groups have increased their efforts to monitorsuspicious activities in legal circles, while also demandingthat the government and the National Assembly gettougher with such cases. According to the JudiciaryReform Committee under the Supreme Court in Seoul,lawyers who were previously judges or prosecutors tendto use personal links with judges and prosecutors in trials.Rulings have often been marred by judges relationshipswith lawyers. People doubt the fairness of rulings if thelawyers involved were previously judges. This damagesthe reputation of those involved in law among the public,said Cho Jun-hee, a committee member. Preventing these

practices has been a top priority of judicial reform, Chosaid, adding that many other measures will be taken toprevent corruption in legal circles.

20



27/83


28/83

In the Chunchon case, while investigators initiallyclosed the case citing a lack of evidence, it drew theattention of the Korea Independent Commission AgainstCorruption after some individuals claimed they had soldsex to the judge and the lawyers. The case is now under thescrutiny of the Supreme Public Prosecutors Ofce in Seoul,as the commission demanded a proper investigation. Thiscase may prove to be a storm in a teacup, but the damageto the reputations of the people concerned is irreversible,according to a commission ofcial.

Law enforcement agencies are generally feared anddisliked (Amos 5:10). Ever seen a man running when noone is chasing him? He possibly has something to hide.If someone is smiling at you all the time you had betterwatch out. Or remember the clergyman who deliberatelybroke a trafc rule in order to save time? When accostedby the ofcer, he confessed, I saw the signal, sir, but I didnot see you. Nobody wants to get caught. Hence thedesire for concealment: And men love darkness ratherthan light because their deeds are evil. Light exposes whatis otherwise hidden in the dark. That is what the law wasmeant to do.

Rulers are not a terror to good works but to evil.Law-abiding citizens have no reason to fear the law orlaw enforcement (Rom. 13: 3, 4). The law enforcementagency is in place for the good of the nation, to maintain

law and order and a uniform socially acceptable pattern oflife. Imagine smoking in the toilet of a non-smoking ight

22



29/83

so as not to get caught. And tampering or disabling thesmoke detectors is a federal offence. We could argue for themarket economy that the well being of people is moreimportant than the principles of market economy. Obeyingthe rules and authorities is important.

Power or trust? The pressure group Transparency Internationalreports that most developing countries are living in aculture where bribery ourishes. In such countries thosewho are economically, physically, socially or politicallydisadvantaged consider themselves to be powerless tochange things.

But for Christians, do we attach too muchsignicance to power? As a physician in India, I may besocially and physically at an advantage, but there are timeswhen I have to work alongside government ofces. Forinstance, in the national elections that were held in 2004,I found that my name was not even on the voters list.

My fundamental right as a citizen of the countrywas being challenged. I could have paid a hefty sum tothe election ofcer and had my name included. But Icould see that this was, in the Bibles words, a way thatseems right to man but the end of it is destruction. SoI rather chose to ll in all the forms again and waitpatiently for the papers to be processed. It sure did

cause me some inconvenience, but I could sleep witha clear conscience. There is no pillow as soft or bed ascomfortable as a clear conscience!

23



30/83

There are times we tend to feel that are problemsare so great and our God so small that we must handle ourproblems in our own wisdom. But no problem is special tous. It is not comfortable to travel 72 hours by train throughthe dangerous terrain of Central India without a properrailway reservation. Nor is it convenient to live in anapartment without a telephone connection, adequate lightingor proper water supply. Nor can I travel out of the countrywithout a valid passport. All these benets and more canbe mine if I am willing to pay someone a little money. Butno amount of money can build a character. To quote fromMahatma Gandhi, recognised as the Father of India, If healthis lost, much is lost; but if character is lost, everything is lost.

Our nations become what we, honest and law-abiding citizens, make of it. It is just when we are in adifcult situation that is just the time when the power ofGod is being revealed. When God wants to do somethingwonderful, He begins with a difculty. But when Hewants to do something very wonderful, He beings with animpossibility. If then we claim that our nations are in animpossible situation we have hope that God is about to dosomething very wonderful!

Can paying a bribe be the lesser of two evils? A poor farmer carried his unconscious and bleedingtwelve-year-old daughter to the rural hospital. She hadbeen severely injured in a road accident. It was near closingtime and the doctor was keen to be back at home with hisfamily. The gentleman pleaded with the security ofcer to

24



31/83

open the gate and let them in. He explained that the girlhad been badly injured. But the ofcer saw the situationand wanted to cash in on it. He refused them entry unlessrst he had been paid some money. The farmer had justabout enough money to pay for medical care.

The girls breathing started to become shallow. Thefather panicked. He pleaded with the guard again but tono avail. In despair, he reached into his pocket and doledout a soiled currency note. It did not satisfy the ofcer. He

wanted more. The farmer wept, looked at his daughter,pleaded with the ofcer, and nally gave him some moremoney. The ofcer nally opened the door. Half an hourhad gone by, the girl had been losing blood and hercondition became more precarious. The doctor had alreadylocked his ofce and was making it to the front door.

The nurse who was witness to the ugly scene at thefront gate took it on herself to inform the doctor that thefarmer was bringing in an injured girl. But the doctor wasmore concerned about his getting back home. The farmerrushed into the casualty department, screaming as he wentin. A small crowd started to gather. The doctor couldonly pacify the crowd by seeing the patient. He asked theward assistant to shift the child to the operating room.But the assistant refused to wheel the child in until hewas paid handsomely. It was past closing time, he argued,and if the government was not willing to pay him for

working overtime, why should he oblige? The nurse triedto intervene, but trade unions being what they are, theassistants demands prevailed.

25



32/83

By the time the child was placed on the operatingtable over two hours had passed since the accident. Thedoctor attended to the child with a mixture of frustrationfor being held back on an emergency and fear of beingquestioned for negligence. After all, he was in charge ofthe centre and he knew how the staff behaved. The childneeded blood, but there were no donors. The farmer hadalmost run out of resources. He had hardly enough moneyto pay for the medicines. The hospital pharmacist refusedto give him the medicines unless he was willing to pay anextra amount for late services.

Even granted that bribery moved the doctor to act,the childs survival can only be explained by the grace ofGod. This was, after all, a mission hospital in North Indiawhere at least one staff member the nurse was God-fearing. The farmer had to bribe to get what was rightlyhis. Perhaps he was forced to do what was wrong in orderto save the life of his child. Such situations are extremelycommon in countries where the law enforcement is lax andbribery is rife.

But although the end does not justify the means,the story has an interesting conclusion. After the child wasdischarged, the farmer called upon his village associates tole a complaint against the corrupt staff of the hospital.After a detailed investigation and on the eye-witnessaccount of the nurse on duty, the offending staff members

were asked to pay back to the farmer what they had takenfrom him, and were summarily dismissed from service.

26



33/83

The Supreme Court in India holds credibleeyewitness accounts of a crime (and by the law of tortsa bribe is interpreted as a crime) more trustworthy thanmedical experts opinions, especially when the two are atvariance. Justice Arijit Payasat and Justice CK Thakker ofThe Apex court in India ruled that it would be erroneousto accord undue primacy to the hypothetical answers ofmedical experts to exclude the eyewitnesss account, whichhad to be tested independently and not treated as variable,keeping the medical evidence as constant.

27



34/83

Human beings have always been engaged in astruggle to secure food and resources. Behind this struggle,

as the early economist Thomas Malthus noted, is thefact that there arent always enough food and resourcesto go around. Populations grow much faster than thefood supplies on which they depend. Periodically, andoften with assistance of a sudden drought or harsh winter,a population may nd itself with nothing left to eat.Competition for remaining resources becomes intense.The strong survive and the weak go under.

Events of this kind can be seen happening today,both at the national and international levels. Worldpopulation is rising fast. Meanwhile global warming, over-cropping and the uncontrolled and inappropriate use offertilisers (let alone wars and natural disasters) all threatento produce a major food crisis. In the times and placeswhere scarcity is most intense, the people who dont haveresources nd themselves going, cap in hand, to the peoplewho do. And the people with the resources see a chanceto prot. Hence bribery and nancial corruption seem tohave become a way of life in most parts of the world.

Chapter 5 :If money decides, thenwhy pray?

28


35/83

Systems to solve the resources riddle Over the last hundred years, two economicphilosophies have governed mankinds outlook to resources.

Marxism, from which sprung socialism, held thatthe produce of the world belonged equally to all people.The attempt to make this idea a reality, however, ledto dictatorship, economic stagnation and the eventualcollapse of many communist nations.

Conversely, capitalism stressed the generation ofwealth that would gradually trickle down from the richto the poor. But this did not happen very fast, and evenin countries that redistribute wealth through tax, thegap between the rich and the poor remains substantial.At the national and international levels, money is stillconcentrated in the hands of the few.

Contrasting with both of these is anothereconomic philosophy that has stood the test of time for

two millennia. This is the philosophy of The Lord Jesus,who said that if we sought rst the Kingdom of God andHis righteousness, all else would be added to us. He is nottelling us to neglect our physical needs, but to get ourpriorities straight.

Greed and wealth are not the same thing The philosophy of Jesus is truly revolutionary. Itreleases us both from greed to gather material goods andfrom the fear of losing them.

29



36/83

In Scripture, greed is directly associated with andalmost inseparable from immorality, adultery, impurity,idolatry, swindling, drunkenness, slandering, homosexualoffences, robbery or drunkenness. If money is the factorthat guides ones decisions, then one does not feel the needto pray since God is not in the decision-making process.Our selsh search for ever-rising standards of living forourselves and our compatriots can only be pursued at thecost of the economic impoverishment of others. Greed caneven cause us to lose our place in heaven. (Eph. 5: 3-7).

It is in times of afuence and promise that greedis subtly conceived. Greed is at the root of all temptation.People lust for possessions, professional status, socialsecurity, physical comforts and acceptance. Their greedburns within them. In Scripture, greed (pleonexia tohave more, used always in a bad sense, of covetousness)is directly associated with and almost inseparable fromimmorality, adultery, impurity, idolatry, swindling,drunkenness, slandering, homosexual offences, robbery ordrunkenness (Eph. 5: 5,6; I Cor. 5: 10,11; 6: 9,10).

What bribery cant buy What we gain from the philosophy of Jesus issomething we could never get by giving or receiving bribes.

Money is used to purchase jobs and property, buyfreedom, get education, gain friends, purchase loyalties and

establish power. In the early 1990s, following the collapseof Communism in the former Soviet Union, corruptionand lawlessness was rampant. If anyone wanted to start a

30



37/83

business his security depended entirely on his being willingto pay protection money to the local Maa. Within tenyears the practice became so much a part of the systemthat entrepreneurs were asked to pay the protection moneydirectly to the city council under a miscellaneous accounthead for which no receipts or details were given. The citycouncil then paid the money to the Maa.

Money can purchase education. Anisha was notdisappointed when she realised that she had not made it to

medical school while some colleagues, whose grades werelower than hers, had secured places. Their parents hadthe right connections. They had the money to pay. Apartfrom what was being demanded up-front, a lot of nancialtransactions were going on unnoticed. But Anisha wascondent that she had been praying for Gods will to berevealed to her. And His will could not be purchased withmoney. If money could buy her the professional career andfuture that she was desired, why did she need to pray?

Money can buy freedoms, but only at the cost of aclear conscience. The Apostle Paul was falsely accused byhis own countrymen and imprisoned for no fault of his. Hedefended his stand before the clergy, laity and governmentofcials, but he remained imprisoned. Powerful oratorslike Tertullus were paid to accuse him before Felix, theGovernor of Caesarea. Later, Felix came in with his wifeDrusilla, a Jewess, and he reasoned with Paul regarding

his faith. He even trembled at what Paul had to say. Felixtried to coerce Paul into paying a bribe for his freedom bycalling him more frequently for discussions. But Paul still

31



38/83

remained imprisoned. And after two years, Porcius Festusreplaced Felix as governor, and Felix, in order to please the

Jews, left Paul bound (Acts 24). Paul had values that evenchains and pain of death could not make him change.

In November 2004, the High Court of Orissa, India,ordered the release of Mr. Duga Munda, a poor tribesmanfrom the Patadiha village of Sundergarh District, whohad been forced to spend eleven years in prison for failingto furnish a bond of ve thousand rupees (approximately

US$140). Arrested in 1991 on murder charges, he wasacquitted in 1992 for want of evidence but re-arrested in1993. While ordering his re-arrest, the high court haddirected that the accused could be released on bail after hefurnished the bond and two sureties. Since he could notafford the bond, he spent the next eleven years behind bars.

Money can procure jobs but again at the cost ofa clear conscience. John Onditi, a police ofcer in Kenya,was well respected for his faith and integrity. Four times hewas recommended for promotion. He passed the qualifyingexaminations with ying colours. But the appointingauthorities demanded a hefty bribe if he wanted his papersto be regularised. I knew it was against Gods Word, hesaid. He was willing to concede his promotion so as to befree of guile. Very soon the corrupt ofcials were pulled upfor other offences and, within a matter of months, Johnwas awarded all the four promotions that were rightly his.

Money can gain friends, purchase loyalties andsecure power. With the criminalisation of politics in manyparts of the world, political power ows from the barrel of

32



39/83

a gun. Coups and counter-coups have become the normin several countries. Political horse-trading and wooingof voters are commonplace. In all these scenarios, briberyplays as dominant a role as money laundering. Even KingBalak tried to bribe the prophet Balaam to curse thechildren of Israel. And Simon the sorcerer tried to bribePeter into imparting spiritual gifts to him.

There are many things that money cannot buy.And what money cannot buy is termed priceless. For

instance, money can buy a bed but not sleep, food butnot appetite, medicines but not health, a house but nota home, knowledge but not wisdom, amusement but nothappiness, companionship but not relationship, good lifebut not eternal life.

There is no pillow as soft as a clear conscience.

33



40/83

According to the Global Corruption Report, 2004,corruption is undermining the global anti-poverty ght.Rampant corruption continues to blunt anti-povertyefforts worldwide and deprives oil-rich countries of crucialdevelopment resources. In an October 20 news release,Transparency International (TI) said that its CorruptionPerceptions Index for 2004 found that corruption in publicprojects remains unacceptably high. Corruption in large-scale public projects is a daunting obstacle to sustainabledevelopment, and results in a major loss of public fundsneeded for education, health care and poverty alleviation,both in developed and developing countries, TI ChairmanPeter Eigen said.

The Berlin-based organisation, which is fundedby grants from development agencies and foundationsaround the world, estimates that the amount lost due tobribery in government procurement is at least $400 billiona year worldwide. The 2004 TI index, published annually,gives oil-rich countries Angola, Azerbaijan, Chad,Ecuador, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Libya, Nigeria,

Russia, Sudan, Venezuela and Yemen very low scores inclean government practices. In these countries, publiccontracting in the oil sector is plagued by revenues

Chapter 6 :Global moves againstbribery

34


41/83

vanishing into the pockets of western oil executives,middlemen and local ofcials, Eigen said in the news release. Transparency International is urging westerngovernments to oblige their oil companies to publishdetails of the fees, royalties and other payments made togovernments and state oil companies. The organisationmade special note of Iraq, warning that the countrys futuredepends on transparency in the oil sector. Without strictanti-bribery measures, the reconstruction of Iraq will be

wrecked by a wasteful diversion of resources to corruptelites, Eigen said.

Attempts to improve the transparency of oilproduction has struggled to gain traction, increasing theprobability that corruption would siphon off the benetsof extractive industries in poor countries. High-proleprojects such as the Chad-Cameroon oil pipeline andthe Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) project to take oil fromAzerbaijan to the Mediterranean have increased thepressure on international oil companies - and agencies suchas the World Bank that fund the schemes - to ensure theyare free from corruption.

The Corruption Perceptions Index The Corruption Perceptions Index is a poll ofpolls, reecting the perceptions of business people andcountry analysts, both resident and non-resident. This

years Corruption Perceptions Index draws on 18 surveysprovided to Transparency International between 2002and 2004, conducted by 12 independent institutions. The

35



42/83

statistical work on the index was coordinated by Professor Johann Graf Lambsdorff at Passau University in Germany,advised by a group of international specialists.

Of the 146 countries surveyed for the report, 106scored lower than a ve against a clean score of 10, TI said.Sixty countries scored less than three out of 10. Corruptionis perceived to be worst in Bangladesh, Haiti, Nigeria, Chad,Myanmar, Azerbaijan and Paraguay, all of which have ascore of less than two, TI said. The United States ranks 17th

on the list with a score of 7.5, tied with Belgium and Ireland.TIs index is compiled from a series of polls on perceptions ofcorruption made by independent organisations.

The 2004 report is based on 18 surveys conductedsince 2002 by 12 organisations. The index rates onlythose countries that appear in three or more surveys.Finland, New Zealand, Denmark, Iceland, Singapore,Sweden and Switzerland were rated the least corrupt,all scoring higher than nine out of 10 on the index.Compared to last years TI report, corruption wasperceived to be worse in Bahrain, Belize, Cyprus,Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Kuwait, Luxembourg,Mauritius, Oman, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, andTrinidad and Tobago. Improved scores were recordedfor Austria, Botswana, Czech Republic, El Salvador,France, Gambia, Germany, Jordan, Switzerland, Tanzania,Thailand, Uganda, United Arab Emirates and Uruguay.

On the basis of data from sources that were usedfor both the 2003 and 2004 index, since last year anincrease in perceived corruption can be observed for

36



43/83

Bahrain, Belize, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Jamaica,Kuwait, Luxembourg, Mauritius, Oman, Poland, SaudiArabia, Senegal, and Trinidad and Tobago. On thesame basis, a fall in corruption was perceived in Austria,Botswana, Czech Republic, El Salvador, France, Gambia,Germany, Jordan, Switzerland, Tanzania, Thailand,Uganda, United Arab Emirates and Uruguay.

From measurement to action Corruption robs countries of their potential.Without strict anti-bribery measures, the reconstruction ofnations will be wrecked by a wasteful diversion of resourcesto corrupt elites. According to TI Vice Chair Ms. RosaIns Ospina Robledo, across the globe, internationaldonors and national governments must do more to ensuretransparency in public procurement by introducing no-bribery clauses into all major projects. Tough sanctionsare needed against companies caught bribing, including

forfeit of the contract and blacklisting from future bidding.Public contracting must be monitored by independentoversight agencies and civil society. Companies fromOECD [Organisation for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment] countries must full their obligations underthe OECD Anti-Bribery Convention and stop payingbribes at home and abroad.

In Johannesburg, TI recently released a BribePayers Index (BPI), a survey designed to measureperceptions of bribery by companies from the industrialisedworld. The survey was run in 15 emerging market

37



44/83

economies including South Africa, Nigeria, Argentinaand Russia, among others. The BPI was commissionedafter developing countries objected to the TI corruptionindex which measures perceptions of corruptionaround the world. Developing countries appear veryhigh on this list because they are usually perceived toaccept bribes, while the industrialised countries did notappear because the corruption index did not look at whowas paying the bribes.

Unfortunately, domestic companies in developingcountries are on top of the BPI - this means local rmsmost often offer bribes to ofcials to secure contracts.

Next come companies from Russia and then the PeoplesRepublic of China. Companies from France, the UnitedStates, Japan and Italy all part of the Group of Eightindustrial countries (G8) are in the top ten of perceivedbribe-paying nations. Companies from Australia are seen asleast likely to pay bribes.

The acting Chief Executive Ofcer ofTransparency South Africa, Larry Kaufmann, pointsout that the industrialised countries have committedthemselves to kick-starting economic growth and socialdevelopment in Africa through the New Partnershipfor African Development (NEPAD). He called on themto help Africa tackle the problem of corruption byenforcing their anti-bribery conventions. G8 countries

have closely linked improved trade and aid deals forAfrica to the countries of the continent cleaning upcorruption in their governments.

38



45/83

Githongo points out that very often moneyobtained through bribery and corruption in Africa endsup in offshore bank accounts in industrialised countries.By tightening their controls on money laundering, forexample, industrialised countries could also make it harderto get away with bribery and corruption in Africa and thedeveloping world. Bribery and corruption is globalisingfaster than TI, he says ironically. Africa is trying to tacklecorruption on the continent. The Southern AfricanDevelopment Community (SADC) and the Organisationof African Unity/African Union all have anti-corruptionconventions. But, Githongo warns that there is a seriouslack of institutional capacity in African countries toenforce these conventions.

TI is trying to raise public awareness about the anti-corruption legislation and is presently discussing ways thatthe organisation can help tackle bribery and corruptionin the developing world. Most of the business expertsinterviewed wanted to eliminate corruption from thecourts, political parties and the police, among others. Onlymarginally more respondents felt that corruption was notgetting signicantly worse in their countries.

The BPI results signal the rejection bymultinational rms of the spirit of international anti-briberyconventions, while their actions lead to a huge misallocationof very scarce resources in developing countries, says TI

Advisory Council Chairperson, Kamal Hossain. TodaysBPI underscores the fact that we have a global problemof corporate bribe-paying that demands concerted global

39



46/83

actions by ofcial international organisations, civil societyorganisations and national governments. Interestingly, Transparency International isnanced by the very multinationals and local authorities itcriticises in its annual corruption index. TI counts amongstits funders a few multinationals that resort to borderlinepractices, including Shell, Betchel and Rio Tinto. This isnot a problem for us, says Robin Hodess, director of TIsresearch department. In the long run, we would like them

to change their behaviour. We would like to work withmore multinationals and convince them of the importanceof being transparent in the contracts they sign to obtainaccess to the resources of developing countries. She alsopoints out that the funders have no authority on thepolitics of the organisation.

Turning the discovery of natural resourcesfrom a curse to a blessing requires sustained effort fromthe companies involved in their extraction and fromgovernments of both rich and poor nations. It is notenough, as the US administration has done in the oilsector ironically, in view of the USs good record overallin prosecuting American companies that pay bribesoverseas to point the nger at governments of developingcountries and urge them to improve.

Bribery requires payers as well as receivers. Andgiven the weakness of many poor countries governments,it is incumbent on rich nations to do their utmost to ensurethat companies headquartered in their countries are notcolluding in corruption in the developing world. And with

40



47/83

the spread of anti-bribery legislation, corporate governanceand anti-corruption compliance codes, managers have noexcuse for paying bribes.

The global cost of bribery Subsequent to the OECD Convention againstbribery, the United Nations has now passed a globalconvention in the eld. The UN Global Compacthas immediately followed suit and presented a tenthprinciple in addition to the principles of human rights andenvironment. The curbing of corruption will, with theserecent developments, reach an unprecedented height,and business forms a major important stakeholder in thedevelopment. Corruption and bribery are challenges thatcompanies face, not only in the economic developingworld but also when conducting business with the westernworld. Anti-corruption measures are a part of the economicbottom-line and as such an integrated part of corporate

responsible strategies and corporate governance.Corruption and bribery represent an unacceptable

cost to business. Corruption distorts competition andinvestment, and hinders free and fair trade. Throughthe information it provides, the European Commissionfor Global Development (ECGD) aims to deter illegalpayments, corrupt practices and money launderingby applicants for its support, and to ensure, as far as ispracticable, that all transactions that the ECGD supportsare in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations andinternational agreements to which the UK is a party.

41



48/83

The key aspects of the ECGDs anti-bribery andcorruption procedures are: to obtain information to ensurethat no improper payments involving agents been made;to inspect, if necessary, exporters documents relatingto winning contracts and making payments to agents;to require applicants to provide copies of their codes ofconduct and to declare that they have applied them ortheir equivalents; and to require declarations that neitherapplicants themselves (including their directors andemployees) nor any afliated or partner company havebeen convicted of, or admitted to, any form of bribery,corruption or money laundering.

International conventions have not stoppedmultinational corporations from trying to secure valuablecontracts by bribing government ofcials in the worldsemerging economies especially in the arms and defence,and public works and construction industries. TheKenya Director of Transparency International, Mr. JohnGithongo, called for anti-corruption legislation andconventions to be enforced when he said, Fine wordsare not enough. Until people are brought before thecourts, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment Convention (OECD) convention on briberywill not make a difference. Bribery and corruption inbusiness deals also hamper the development of free and fairtrade and economic development. The OECD conventionmakes it illegal for companies from member countries tobribe government ofcials. The United States has hadsimilar legislation for over 20 years.

42



49/83

The shmonger had just nished weighing outa kilo of sh when my mom and I saw panic in the shmarket that morning. The Inspector of Weights andMeasures was doing his rounds. He quickly hid the weightshe had used and put some fresh ones on the pan. In theprocess we got a few more! How was I to know that theweights he used were not genuine? And could I be surethat what he was selling was not last weeks catch freshwhen it was caught but not any longer?

If what is considered good quality by one person ispoor quality for another then quality is relative and thereare no standards by which we can compare acceptableand unacceptable codes of conduct, ethics and behaviour.

This ambiguity is overcome by accepting good tradepractices as recommended by the International StandardsOrganisation. Industries that are certied by the ISO areconsidered to be of quality.

Similarly, if what is considered to be right orwrong is relative, then justice is relative and each persondoes what is right in his own eyes, taking the law intohis own hands. The law of the land sets standards that

govern good living. And just as the ISO sets standardsfor trade and industry, the Holy Bible sets standards for acorruption-free society.

Chapter 7 :Hope for a hurting world

43


50/83

We could argue for the market economy, but hereAmos says the well being of people is more importantthan the principles of market economy. Obeying the rulesand authorities is important. The Christian has differentmoral and ethical standards than the non-Christian world.The vast majority of human beings do not like to bedifferent. We like to be much the same as everybody else.We feel safer that way and do not like non-conformists.Conformity is a human characteristic and therefore thecommands of God are difcult for us. But in Lev. 18, Matt.6:8 and Rom. 12: 1, 2, we are called to be different. To bea holy people is to be the distinct people of God. To be saltand light the Christian must penetrate the non-Christianworld and bring a change in the community. Moreover,they must retain their distinctiveness. Penetration withoutdistinctiveness is of no value.

By the law of God and also by national andinternational law, bribery and corruption are destructiveto any society and are not accepted as a way of life. If suchpractices have become rampant it only goes to show thedepravity of the human mind, the collapse of the humanconscience and the failure of the Church. The world islooking for higher standards that can only be establishedon the principles of the Holy Bible. The Church needspeople who cannot be bought, who will not compromisewith what is wrong, who will be honest in the small andalso the big things of life and whose values are based oneternal life and not on good life.

44



51/83

The United Nations recognised bribery as a globalthreat and documented a Convention against Corruptionat Mrida, Mxico, on December 09, 2003. At its February2004 plenary meeting, the Working Group on Briberyagreed on a new format for the Tour de Table, which would

be the basis of the information published. Accordingly, outof the 36 participating countries, submissions were madeby Delegates from Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium,Brazil, Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia, Denmark,Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Japan, Korea, Mexico,

Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic,Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and UnitedStates. Parties to the Convention having not yet submittedtext were Bulgaria, Chile, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland,

Italy, Luxembourg, New Zealand and United Kingdom.Countries not represented during the June plenary meetingof the Working Group included Belgium, Bulgaria,Denmark, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg and New Zealand.

Argentina Argentina introduced Article 258 of law 25.188of the Criminal Code penalising transnational bribery inaccordance with the Inter-American Convention againstCorruption as resolved at Caracas, Venezuela, on March29, 1996, and also adopted the Signature of the United

Nations Convention against Corruption.

APPENDIX:The global threat

45


52/83

Australia Australia implemented the legislation of TheCommonwealth criminal code division 70 bribery offoreign public ofcials, which was enforced with effectfrom on December 18, 1999. The major recommendationfor Australia was to do more to publicise these offences.The Committee is currently promoting a public awarenesscampaign to promote awareness of and compliance withthe OECD Foreign Bribery Convention and supportingdomestic legislation to see the creation of a channel ofinformation about alleged breaches of the Convention toAustralian investigating authorities. The campaign alsoallows Australia to meet its project obligations under theADB OECD Asia Pacic Anti-Corruption Action Plan.

The Government also approved a form of wordsto be inserted into Australias passport pack and forinclusion on its travel advice website. That informationdetails Australias foreign bribery offences and sets out the

obligations that Australian citizens have as a result of thedomestic implementation of the Bribery Convention. TheGovernment also plans to hold joint information sessionswith the Australian National Contact Point for theOECD Guidelines on multinational enterprises, targetingbusiness and NGOs in particular. The Government workscooperatively with DFAT to ensure that foreign briberyoffence information is included in the anti-corruptioninitiatives in the Southwest Pacic.

46



53/83

There has been much recent press in Australiagiven to the Australian governments announcement on

June 16, 2004, that it will establish a federal anti-corruptionbody, to oversee law enforcement agencies such as theAustralian Crime Commission and the Australian FederalPolice. Some of our state police forces have recently beenexposed as having endemic corruption. Australia signedthe UN Convention against Corruption on December09, 2003, with the objective to implement the provisionsof the Convention where required and to ratify theconvention as soon as all domestic requirements are met.

Austria In Austria the First Chamber of Parliamentpassed the bill for ratication of the OECD-Convention[Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt; BGBl.) III176/1999] on March 24, 1999. The ratication processwas nalised and the instrument of ratication deposited

with the OECD Secretary-General on May 20, 1999.The legislation implementing the OECD-Convention(Strafrechtsnderungsgesetz 1998) was published inthe Federal Law Gazette on August 20, 1998 (BGBl. I1998/153). It has been in force in Austria since October01, 1998. On the EU-level, Austria has signed, ratiedand implemented the protocol to the Convention on theProtection of the Financial Interest and the Conventionon the ght against corruption involving ofcials of the

European Communities or ofcials of Member States of theEuropean Union.

47



54/83

Austria has yet to adopt legislation particularly onthe status of legal persons and the bribery of public ofcialsholding a legislative ofce in order to conform to the OECDConvention, the Second Protocol to the Convention forthe Protection of the Financial Interest of the EuropeanUnion and other EU instruments, the Council of EuropeCriminal Law Convention on Corruption as well as the UNConvention against Corruption.

Belgium Belgium signed the Convention on December17, 1997. To meet the requirements of the OECDConvention, and more generally to modernise theCriminal Codes provisions on bribery that dated from1867 and had not been substantially amended since then,the Belgian Parliament adopted two Acts. The rst is theBribery Prevention Act of February 10, 1999, adopted byParliament on February 04, 1999, and signed by the King

on February 10, 1999, which entered into force on April03, 1999, following publication in the Moniteur Belge(Ofcial Gazette) on March 23, 1999. This Act amendsin particular the provisions contained in Title IV of theCriminal Code in Articles 246-252 of Chapter IV onThe Bribery of Public Ofcials. The second Act is thatof May 04, 1999, which entered into force on August 03,1999. This Act establishes the criminal liability of legalpersons, henceforth subject to the provisions of the Bribery

Prevention Act of February 10, 1999.

48



55/83

The main objectives of the amendments to theCriminal Code, as explained by the Minister of Justicein his introductory presentations to the Senate and laterto the Chamber of Representatives, are three-fold. (a)The rst objective is to cover new offences contained inthe OECD Convention and not previously covered byBelgian legislation (bribery of foreign public ofcials andinternational civil servants), as well as other offences suchas bribery of an applicant for a public function, trading ininuence and private corruption. (b) The second objectiveis to ll some gaps in the eld of sanctions, primarilyby adapting penalties to current penal trends (higherminimum and maximum penalties for sentences involvingdeprivation of liberty and for nes), by introducing newadministrative sanctions against public works contractorswho engage in bribery and by amending the Income TaxCode to limit the tax deductibility of bribes. (c) The thirdobjective is to broaden the extraterritorial jurisdiction of

Belgian courts, in particular as regards bribery involvingforeign public ofcials.

Belgium has also ratied the Council of EuropeCriminal Law Convention on Corruption. TheRatication Bill of February 19, 2004, was publishedin the Moniteur Belge on May 10, 2004, and enteredinto force ten days later. Belgium signed the United

Nations Convention against Corruption on December10, 2003. On the EU-level Belgium has signed, ratiedand implemented the rst and second protocol to theConvention on the Protection of the Financial Interests

49



56/83

and the Convention on the ght against corruptioninvolving ofcials of the European Communities or ofcialsof the Member States of the European Union.

Brazil Brazil signed the Convention on December 17,1997. The Law (No. 10.467, June 11, 2002) rules onthe crimes of money laundering or hiding assets, rightsand securities; the prevention of the use of the FinancialSystem for the illegal acts. Law no 9.613 of March 03,1998, rules on the crimes of money laundering or hidingassets, rights and securities; the prevention of the use of theFinancial System for the illegal acts. The Working Groupon Bribery Monitoring Reports include Minister of Justice,Public Prosecutors Ofce and Ofce of the ControllerGeneral and Non-governmental Organisations thatmonitor the transparency of the implementation process.

Canada Canada ratied the Convention on CombatingBribery of Foreign Public Ofcials in InternationalBusiness Transactions (the Convention) on December 17,1998. Canadas implementing legislation, the Corruptionof Foreign Public Ofcials Act (CFPOA), received RoyalAssent on December 10, 1998, and came into force onFebruary 14, 1999. Subsequent amendments were made tothe Act in January 2002 as a consequence of amendments

to Canadas Criminal Code. The Corruption of ForeignPublic Ofcials Act implements Canadas obligations setout in the Convention.

50



57/83

The main offence of bribery of foreign publicofcials represents an effort to combine the Conventionwording and requirements with wording that was foundalready in the corruption provisions of the CriminalCode. The Act calls for an annual report by the Ministerof Foreign Affairs, the Minister of International Trade,the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General ofCanada on the implementation of the Convention andon the enforcement of the Act. The offences under theCorruption of Foreign Public Ofcials Act are includedin the list of offences under section 183 of the CriminalCode. As a result, it is possible for police, through thelawful use of a wiretap and other electronic surveillance,to gather evidence in the bribery of foreign public ofcialscases and in the possession and laundering of proceedsfrom these cases.

Other corruption provisions are found in theCriminal Code, including sections 119 to 121 (bribery ofCanadian ofcials and frauds on the government), 123to 125 (municipal corruption and selling or inuencingappointments to ofce) and 426 (secret commissions byan agent). A payment that constitutes an offence underthe Corruption of Foreign Public Ofcials Act is includedin the list of expenses for which a deduction is deniedunder subsection 67.5(1) of the Income Tax Act. Thepurpose of this Act is to modernise the public service whileretaining core values of merit, excellence, representation,impartiality and the ability to serve members of the publicwith integrity in the ofcial language of the publics choice.

51



58/83

The Czech Republic In the Czech Republic the Convention enteredinto force internally on March 21, 2000, and was publishedby the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as No. 25/2000 ofCollection of International Treaties. The Act No.96/1999 Coll., amendment to the Penal Code (Act No.140/1961 Coll., Penal Code,) introduced a new provisionof Section 162 (a), which includes a denition of a bribe,as developed by judiciary, and a denition of foreignpublic ofcial, which implements denitions pursuant toArticle 1, paragraph 4 of the Convention. These conceptsapply to general bribery offences that are stipulated inSections 160-162 of the Penal Code. Maximum penalty foraggravated active bribery was increased from 3 to 5 years ofimprisonment. All criminal offences, including corruptionoffences, are predicate offences for purposes of applicationof legislation against money laundering.

This amendment was published on May 25, 1999, andentered into force on June 09, 1999. The Act No. 492/2000Coll. amendment to the Income Taxes Act (Act No.586/1992 Coll., as amended) introduced explicit prohibitionof tax deductibility of bribes paid to foreign public ofcialspursuant to Article IV of the Revised Recommendation.This amendment was published on December 29, 2000, andentered into force on January 01, 2001.

As expected and noted in Phase 1

recommendations, the Czech Republic enacted lawexplicitly preventing the tax deductibility of bribes paid toforeign public ofcials. At present, the Czech authorities

52



59/83


60/83

as those applying to Danish public ofcials. Moreover,responsibility of legal persons (companies, etc.) wasintroduced as concerns active bribery in the public andprivate sectors, including liability for handling bribes inrelation to active and passive bribery in the public sector.The provision concerning responsibility of legal personswas later amended. Criminal responsibility can now beimposed on legal persons for all violations of the CriminalCode. Under Danish law, both active and passive briberyof persons exercising a public ofce or function are offencesunder sections 122 and 144, respectively.

According to Section 122, any person who undulygrants, promises or offers some other person exercising aDanish, foreign or international public ofce or functiona gift or other privilege in order to induce him to do orfail to do anything in relation to his ofcial duties shall beliable to a ne or imprisonment for any term not exceedingthree years. Section 144 states that any person who,while exercising a Danish, foreign or international publicofce or function, unduly receives, demands or acceptsthe promise of a gift or other privilege shall be liable toimprisonment for any term not exceeding six years or, inmitigating circumstances, to a ne.

The Criminal Code rule on bribery in privateaffairs is laid down in section 299, no. 2, by which activeand passive bribery is made a criminal offence collectively.

It follows that any person who, in circumstances otherthan those covered by section 280 of the Danish CriminalCode, in his capacity as trustee of any property of any other

54



61/83


62/83

ratied the Council of Europe Civil Law Convention onCorruption as well as the Criminal Law Convention onCorruption. The Convention of the European Unionon the ght against corruption involving ofcials of theEuropean Communities or ofcials of Member States of theEuropean Union is in the process of ratication.

Finland In Finland, on June 03, 2004, the Supreme Courtrefused to grant a leave of appeal in the so-called FinnishMaritime Administration criminal case. The Court ofAppeals of Helsinki had given its verdict that the Director-General of the Finnish Maritime Administration was foundguilty of the crime of corruption by accepting unlawfulnancial advantage in order to carry out an ofcial actrelating to his duties, in breach of his ofcial obligations.The Director-General had accepted a trip to the USAand a Caribbean cruise as well as other benets from a

Norwegian company, which was in contractual relationswith the Finnish Maritime Administration, and benetsfrom other parties, which had common interests with the

Norwegian company. The Director-General was sentencedto four months imprisonment (a suspended sentence)and to a discharge from his ofce. He also had to refundthe unlawful benets he had gained ( 11.906). Further,a Head of Unit of the Finnish Maritime Administrationwas sentenced to 10 months imprisonment (a suspended

sentence) for corruption and for grave corruption. TheHead of Unit had received benets such as trips to Brazil,South Africa and to the Caribbean, including trips with

56



63/83

his family members. The Head of Unit had to refund allunlawful benets ( 54.858). He retired from his ofcewhile the criminal procedure was still in progress so he wasnot discharged from his ofce.

A Deputy-Director of the Finnish MaritimeAdministration was sentenced to four months imprisonment(a suspended sentence) for corruption He had acceptedmoney from the Norwegian company. The Deputy-Directorhad already been discharged from his ofce before the verdict.

He also had to refund all unlawful benets (

7.232). Thereis currently a criminal case pending in the Supreme Court,where the Court of Appeals sentenced an army ofcer to ane. The ofcer had organised his birthday party at a vesselwhile the costs for using this vessel were paid by a company,which is taking part in a competitive bidding concerning thepurchase of army helicopters.

France

France authorised the ratication of theConvention adopted on May 25, 1999 (Law No. 99-424of May 27, 1999). The National Assembly adopted theimplementation legislation on June 30, 2000, whichamended the Criminal Code and the Code of CriminalProcedure with regard to the ght against corruption.The Convention went into effect together with theimplementation law on September 29, 2000. Article435-3 of the Criminal Code states that any person whobribes or attempts to bribe a foreign public ofcial toobtain or retain an advantage in an international business

57



64/83

transaction is liable to a penalty of up to 10 yearsimprisonment and a ne of 150,000 euros.

In addition, a company can be judged criminallyliable and punished accordingly. Moreover, the deductionfor tax purposes of exceptional commercial expenses paid toa foreign public ofcial is totally forbidden by Article 39 theGeneral Tax Code. If the senior manager is found to haveacted fraudulently in this way, he will be prosecuted for taxfraud on the basis of Article 1741 of the General Tax Code,

which punishes anyone who has fraudulently avoided orattempted to avoid payment of all or part of taxes.

The Action Statement on Bribery and OfcialSupported Export Credit requiring that when an exportermakes an application for credit insurance, he must declarethat the contract covered by the guarantee was not securedby actions outlawed by the articles of the Criminal Codewas introduced by French law after the OECD Convention.The law on nancial security (Law N 2003-706 ofAugust 2003), which contains several provisions intendedto strengthen supervision of the auditors, provided, inparticular, for a supreme council responsible for overseeingthe audition profession (Haut Conseil du commissariat auxcomptes), with three quarters of its membership consistingof outsiders (magistrates and prominent people withappropriate qualications), and a series of measures aimed atstrengthening the independence of auditors in performing

their duties within a company, particularly by guardingagainst situations of conict of interest and the danger

58



65/83

of collusion between an auditor and the company whoseaccounts he is responsible for auditing.

Germany Germany ratied the Convention on November10, 1998. The implementing legislation contained in theAct on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Ofcialsin International Business Transactions of September 10,1998 (Federal Law Gazette [Bundesgesetzblatt] Part IIp. 2327, Annex 1), entered into force together with theConvention on February 15, 1999. The general approachof this Act is to provide for the equal treatment of theoffences of bribing domestic and foreign public ofcials andparliamentarians. Prior to the new legislation, only briberyof domestic public ofcials and parliamentarians had beenpunishable. A separate offence has been created for thebribery of foreign Members of Parliament and members ofparliamentary assemblies of international organisations.

Other relevant laws, regulations or decreesthat have an impact on a countrys implementationof the OECD Convention or the recommendationsinclude legislation implementing the European anti-corruption instruments, notably the Second Protocolto the Convention for the Protection of the FinancialInterest of the European Union as well as the European

Joint Action on bribery in the private sector, which wasadopted by Parliament and went into effect on August30, 2002. The law contains amendments to the CriminalCode, extending the domestic private bribery offence to

59



66/83

international bribery, as well as to the Regulatory OffencesAct, extending the provisions on sanctioning of legalpersons and providing for higher nes.

The adoption of the Second Protocol to theConvention for the Protection of the Financial Interest ofthe European Union and of the EU Bribery Conventionwas nalised and published in the Ofcial Gazette inOctober 2002. The Second Protocol to the Conventionfor the Protection of the Financial Interest was ratied

on March 05, 2003, and the EU Bribery Convention wasratied on October 08, 2003. Germany has signed theCivil and the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption ofthe Council of Europe, the United Nat

Documents

Is Bribery Always Wrong_Oommen.pdf