Protect your business, comply with laws and effectively address bribery and corruption.
This collection of resources proposes steps to take when instances of bribery or corruption occur, or when there are near misses. Develop your business’ understanding of what has occurred and promote a culture of action, self-reporting, remedy and organisational learning.
In 2019 the Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom (UK) entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with a small UK resources sector company concerning bribery in South Korea. The company was required to disgorge its profits from the bribery but did not receive a penalty because of its small size and the fact that it had thoroughly investigated and self-reported the issues.
The United States (US) Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) is the regulator for companies that are listed in, or raise capital in, the US. It frequently brings enforcement action against companies for 'books and records' offences related to foreign bribery under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. This resource includes an annotated list of enforcement actions under this Act.
This news story reports on the 2017 case where three individuals pleaded guilty and were convicted of conspiring to bribe an Iraqi foreign public official to secure infrastructure contracts for their construction company. One, a middleman who facilitated the bribe, was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment. The other two, directors of the company, were sentenced to imprisonment for three years and four months and fined A$250,000 each.
Liability for bribery and corruption can arise under multiple jurisdictions both inside and outside Australia. In Australia, individuals and corporations can be liable for a range of state and territory offences including offences that apply to conduct in the private sector. For example, section 236 of the Northern Territory Criminal Code contains offences for secret commissions.
Australia’s powerful confiscation laws ensure there can be no profit in bribery. Under the Proceeds of Crime Act, law enforcement agencies are equipped with a range of powers to trace, restrain and confiscate proceeds of crime against Commonwealth laws such as foreign bribery. Any asset can potentially be subject to confiscation if it is the ‘proceeds' or an 'instrument' of a Commonwealth offence.
Liability for bribery and corruption can arise under multiple jurisdictions both inside and outside Australia. In Australia, individuals and corporations can be liable for a range of state and territory offences including offences that apply to conduct in the private sector. For example, section 249B of the NSW Crimes Act contains offences for corrupt commissions or rewards.
Liability for bribery and corruption can arise under multiple jurisdictions both inside and outside Australia. In Australia, individuals and corporations can be liable for a range of state and territory offences including offences that apply to conduct in the private sector. For example, sections 356 and 357 of the ACT Criminal Code contain offences for bribery and corrupting benefits.
Liability for bribery and corruption can arise under multiple jurisdictions both inside and outside Australia. In Australia, individuals and corporations can be liable for a range of state and territory offences including offences that apply to conduct in the private sector. For example, section 176 of the Victorian Crimes Act contains offences for secret commissions.
Liability for bribery and corruption can arise under multiple jurisdictions both inside and outside Australia. In Australia, individuals and corporations can be liable for a range of state and territory offences including offences that apply to conduct in the private sector. For example, sections 442B and 442BA of the Queensland Criminal Code contain offences for secret commissions.
Liability for bribery and corruption can arise under multiple jurisdictions both inside and outside Australia. In Australia, individuals and corporations can be liable for a range of state and territory offences including offences that apply to conduct in the private sector. For example, section 150 of the South Australian Criminal Law Consolidation Act contains an offence for bribery of a fiduciary.
Liability for bribery and corruption can arise under multiple jurisdictions both inside and outside Australia. In Australia, individuals and corporations can be liable for a range of state and territory offences including offences that apply to conduct in the private sector. For example, sections 529 and 530 of the Western Australian Criminal Code contain offences for corrupt rewards.
This toolkit offers a step by step guide on how to design and implement a grievance mechanism. It explains the purpose of having a grievance mechanism, including why this is a good business investment, issues to consider when establishing a grievance mechanism, how to build and operate an effective mechanism, and how to use feedback to improve a mechanism. This resource includes links to other useful tools.
Geared towards the banking sector, this briefing paper offers guidance from global experts on how to develop effective grievance mechanisms. It proposes 10 straightforward recommendations, which can be applied to other sectors. This resource explains the United Nations Guiding Principles effectiveness criteria for grievance mechanisms and applies these to case studies. It offers justification for why SMEs in high risk jurisdictions and sectors would benefit from implementing an operational-level grievance mechanism.
In 2016, Rolls Royce agreed to pay a fine of over £500 million in a deferred prosecution agreement relating to bribery in China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Russia and Thailand. Rolls Royce received significant discounts in penalties for cooperating with the Serious Fraud Office in the investigation and implementing strong anti-bribery policies and procedures after the misconduct was uncovered.
In January 2020, Airbus entered into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) which included a fine of €991m in the United Kingdom (UK), as part of a total €3.6bn settlement across France, the UK and the United States for five counts of failure to prevent bribery. The conduct took place across Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan and Ghana between 2011 and 2015.