DOCSLIB.ORG

Read the Full Survey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Read the Full Survey Jones Day Table of Contents GLOSSARY ....................................................................................................................................................................... iii Africa ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Kenya ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 Mozambique ........................................................................................................................................... 9 South Africa .......................................................................................................................................... 12 Asia Pacific .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 Australia ................................................................................................................................................ 17 China ..................................................................................................................................................... 21 Hong Kong ............................................................................................................................................ 26 India ...................................................................................................................................................... 30 Indonesia ............................................................................................................................................... 33 Japan ..................................................................................................................................................... 37 Laos ....................................................................................................................................................... 42 Malaysia ................................................................................................................................................ 45 Myanmar ............................................................................................................................................... 49 Philippines ............................................................................................................................................. 53 Singapore .............................................................................................................................................. 57 South Korea .......................................................................................................................................... 61 Taiwan ................................................................................................................................................... 65 Thailand ................................................................................................................................................ 67 Timor-Leste .......................................................................................................................................... 74 Vietnam ................................................................................................................................................. 77 Europe ................................................................................................................................................................. 80 Austria ................................................................................................................................................... 80 Belgium ................................................................................................................................................. 84 France .................................................................................................................................................... 86 Germany ............................................................................................................................................... 94 Italy ........................................................................................................................................................ 97 The Netherlands ................................................................................................................................. 102 Poland .................................................................................................................................................. 105 Russia .................................................................................................................................................. 108 Spain .................................................................................................................................................... 110 United Kingdom ................................................................................................................................. 113 Middle East ....................................................................................................................................................... 117 Qatar ................................................................................................................................................... 117 Saudi Arabia ....................................................................................................................................... 120 United Arab Emirates ........................................................................................................................ 123 North America .................................................................................................................................................. 127 Canada ................................................................................................................................................ 127 Mexico ................................................................................................................................................. 131 United States of America ................................................................................................................... 136 South America .................................................................................................................................................. 142 Argentina ............................................................................................................................................ 142 Brazil ................................................................................................................................................... 148 Chile .................................................................................................................................................... 154 Colombia ............................................................................................................................................. 157 Ecuador ............................................................................................................................................... 162 Uruguay............................................................................................................................................... 165 Venezuela ............................................................................................................................................ 169 JONES DAY CONTACTS BY COUNTRY ................................................................................................................. 172 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ .... 172 Jones Day Introduction to the 2019 Anti-Corruption Regulation Survey Welcome to the 2019 edition of the Jones Day Anti-Corruption Regulation Survey of Select Countries. Since the 2017–2018 edition of this Survey, there has continued to be an increasing awareness among multinational companies of the significance of anti-corruption regulations in foreign countries and the potential risks of violating these regulations or of being associated with companies or individuals that have violated such regulations. A number of countries made significant changes to their anti-corruption regulations in 2018 and 2019 to date, including, among others, Chile, India, Indonesia, Italy, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam. Furthermore, since 2018, there have been significant developments in several countries related to anti-corruption, especially with respect to enforcement practice and policy, such as in Brazil, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States. Other countries included in this Survey have indicated proposed amendments to anti-corruption regulations, the restructuring of anti-corruption enforcement bodies and enhanced coordination with the anti-corruption authorities of other jurisdictions. The 2019 edition of this Survey includes Qatar, a jurisdiction that had not been covered in previous years. This Survey is intended to provide an overview of the complex and evolving anti-corruption regulations in the 42 countries covered herein. Ways in which this Survey may be useful will vary depending on a company’s situation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Political Corruption in Poland Surdej, Aleksander; Gadowska, Kaja
    www.ssoar.info Political corruption in Poland Surdej, Aleksander; Gadowska, Kaja Arbeitspapier / working paper Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Surdej, A., & Gadowska, K. (2005). Political corruption in Poland. (Arbeitspapiere und Materialien / Forschungsstelle Osteuropa an der Universität Bremen, 65). Bremen: Forschungsstelle Osteuropa an der Universität Bremen. https:// nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-436042 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Deposit-Lizenz (Keine This document is made available under Deposit Licence (No Weiterverbreitung - keine Bearbeitung) zur Verfügung gestellt. Redistribution - no modifications). We grant a non-exclusive, non- Gewährt wird ein nicht exklusives, nicht übertragbares, transferable, individual and limited right to using this document. persönliches und beschränktes Recht auf Nutzung dieses This document is solely intended for your personal, non- Dokuments. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für commercial use. All of the copies of this documents must retain den persönlichen, nicht-kommerziellen Gebrauch bestimmt. all copyright information and other information regarding legal Auf sämtlichen Kopien dieses Dokuments müssen alle protection. You are not allowed to alter this document in any Urheberrechtshinweise und sonstigen Hinweise auf gesetzlichen way, to copy it for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the Schutz beibehalten werden. Sie dürfen dieses Dokument document in public, to perform, distribute or otherwise use the nicht in irgendeiner Weise abändern, noch dürfen Sie document in public. dieses Dokument für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, aufführen, vertreiben oder conditions of use. anderweitig nutzen. Mit der Verwendung dieses Dokuments erkennen Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen an. Forschungsstelle Osteuropa Bremen Arbeitspapiere und Materialien No.
    [Show full text]
  • In Search of Corruption Funds
    In Search of Corruption Funds A comparative study of country practices prepared in fulfillment of the Advanced Research Project The Graduate Institute, Geneva, Fall 2016 Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ iii Acronyms and abbreviations ............................................................................ iv Executive Summary ........................................................................................... v Strategic recommendations ............................................................................ viii Technical recommendations ............................................................................. ix Part I: Introduction ............................................................................................ 1 Ia. Overview of the problem ............................................................................. 1 Part II: Research Overview ............................................................................... 3 IIa. Research questions and key assumptions .................................................... 4 IIb. Methodology .............................................................................................. 5 Part III. Common law practice ......................................................................... 7 IIIa. The United States .................................................................................... 7 Overview .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • No Room for Debate the National Constituent Assembly and the Crumbling of the Rule of Law in Venezuela
    No Room for Debate The National Constituent Assembly and the Crumbling of the Rule of Law in Venezuela July 2019 Composed of 60 eminent judges and lawyers from all regions of the world, the International Commission of Jurists promotes and protects human rights through the Rule of Law, by using its unique legal expertise to develop and strengthen national and international justice systems. Established in 1952 and active on the five continents, the ICJ aims to ensure the progressive development and effective implementation of international human rights and international humanitarian law; secure the realization of civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights; safeguard the separation of powers; and guarantee the independence of the judiciary and legal profession. ® No Room for Debate - The National Constituent Assembly and the Crumbling of the Rule of Law in Venezuela © Copyright International Commission of Jurists Published in July 2019 The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) permits free reproduction of extracts from any of its publications provided that due acknowledgment is given and a copy of the publication carrying the extract is sent to its headquarters at the following address: International Commission of Jurists P.O. Box 91 Rue des Bains 33 Geneva Switzerland No Room for Debate The National Constituent Assembly and the Crumbling of the Rule of Law in Venezuela This report was written by Santiago Martínez Neira, consultant to the International Commission of Jurists. Carlos Ayala, Sam Zarifi and Ian Seiderman provided legal and policy review. This report was written in Spanish and translated to English by Leslie Carmichael. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 FCPA/Anti-Corruption Year in Review
    FCPA/Anti-Corruption Developments: 2019 Year in Review January 21, 2020 FCPA/Anti-Corruption Developments: 2019 Year in Review Lucinda A. Low and Brittany Prelogar (eds.)1 Introduction US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement authorities announced a steady stream of individual and corporate enforcement matters throughout 2019, some with eye-popping fines. Overall, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reported 50 FCPA-related actions (including 31 by the DOJ and 19 by the SEC) over the course of the year. The $2.9 billion in total fines, penalties, and disgorgement imposed in corporate FCPA settlements in 2019 nearly matched the record-breaking $2.91 billion imposed in 2018 in such matters. The DOJ also announced a slew of new charges against individuals and racked up a number of trial victories in existing cases. Mega settlements reached by two companies made up nearly two-thirds of the $2.9 billion total corporate penalties imposed in 2019. In the first quarter of the year, Mobile TeleSystems PJSC (MTS) agreed to pay $850 million in penalties and disgorgement to resolve charges against it, joining the ranks of fellow companies Telia and VimpelCom among the top FCPA fines to date for conduct relating to the Uzbek telecommunications sector. In a strong book-end to the year, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Ericsson) and its subsidiary, Ericsson Egypt Ltd. (Ericsson Egypt), agreed to pay more than $1 billion in penalties and disgorgement to resolve DOJ and SEC investigations for conduct in multiple countries. Enforcement against individuals, especially by the DOJ, was also particularly robust in 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Bribery and Corruption Review June 2018
    ANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION REVIEW JUNE 2018 CONTENTS Global contacts 3 World Map 4 Foreword 6 Europe, the Middle East and Africa 7 Belgium 8 Czech Republic 11 France 13 Germany 15 Italy 20 Luxembourg 22 Poland 23 Romania 25 Russia 28 Slovak Republic 31 Spain 32 The Netherlands 34 Turkey 36 Ukraine 38 United Arab Emirates 40 United Kingdom 41 The Americas 44 Brazil 45 United States of America 47 Asia Pacific 50 Australia 51 Hong Kong 53 Japan 56 People’s Republic of China 57 Singapore 58 Thailand 62 ANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION REVIEW GLOBAL CONTACTS EUROPE, THE MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA Ukraine3 Belgium Sergiy Gryshko +380 44 390 22 19 Sébastien Ryelandt +32 2533 5988 United Arab Emirates Dorothée Vermeiren +32 2533 5063 James Abbott +971 4503 2608 Yana Paulovich +32 2533 5038 Jack Hardman +971 4503 2712 Czech Republic Connor Partos +971 4503 2664 Jan Dobrý +420 22255 5252 United Kingdom France Roger Best +44 20 7006 1640 Thomas Baudesson +33 14405 5443 Luke Tolaini +44 20 7006 4666 Charles-Henri Boeringer +33 14405 2464 Patricia Barratt +44 20 7006 8853 Marc Bailly +33 14405 5312 Zoe Osborne +44 20 7006 8293 Germany Heiner Hugger +49 697199 1283 THE AMERICAS David Pasewaldt +49 697199 1453 Brazil Gerson Raiser +49 697199 1450 Patrick Jackson +55 11 3019 6017 Italy Fernando Zanzarini +55 11 3019 6098 Antonio Golino +39 028063 4509 United States of America Jean-Paule Castagno +39 028063 4317 David DiBari +1 202912 5098 Pasquale Grella +39 028063 4289 Megan Gordon +1 202912 5021 Luxembourg Catherine Ennis +1 202912 5009 Albert Moro +352 485050
    [Show full text]
  • By Carlos Subero* Edgar G., a Doctor Who Practices In
    By Carlos Subero* Edgar G., a doctor who practices in Caracas, decides to pay 2,000 bolívares fuertes (US$930) to a “private agent” (a middleman used in some Latin American countries to handle bureaucracy) because it is the only way he knows to keep his medical practice going. “I am required to process a great quantity of documents and other requirements. I have only two weeks to accomplish all this work, which is not enough time, so I need to hire a middleman to meet these requirements,” he says. “The system is designed in a way that allows corruption to flourish,” he adds. Another example of corruption in Venezuela can be seen in the predicament of a Venezuelan businessman who is under investigation by the National District Attorney’s Office. Police officers from the Corp. of Scientific, Penal and Criminal Investigations (Cuerpo de Investigaciones Científicas, Penales y Criminalísticas — CICPC) come to the businessman’s house, claiming they are there to search for evidence. Instead, they take the man into a back room, explain to him that he is “in trouble,” and blackmail him into paying them 6,000 bolívares fuertes (US$2,970). The businessman consults with his attorney who recommends that he pay off the officers. Otherwise, the police will plant false evidence that could further damage his case. These two cases serve as examples of the corruption that many Venezuelans face every day. Venezuelan people think that there is much corruption, but that’s not one of their main concerns. A 2006 survey of the Venezuelan Institute of Data Analysis (Instituto Venezolano de Datos— IVAD) says that 72 percent of the population believes there is much corruption in Venezuela.
    [Show full text]
  • Here a Causal Relationship? Contemporary Economics, 9(1), 45–60
    Bibliography on Corruption and Anticorruption Professor Matthew C. Stephenson Harvard Law School http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/mstephenson/ March 2021 Aaken, A., & Voigt, S. (2011). Do individual disclosure rules for parliamentarians improve government effectiveness? Economics of Governance, 12(4), 301–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10101-011-0100-8 Aaronson, S. A. (2011a). Does the WTO Help Member States Clean Up? Available at SSRN 1922190. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1922190 Aaronson, S. A. (2011b). Limited partnership: Business, government, civil society, and the public in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). Public Administration and Development, 31(1), 50–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.588 Aaronson, S. A., & Abouharb, M. R. (2014). Corruption, Conflicts of Interest and the WTO. In J.-B. Auby, E. Breen, & T. Perroud (Eds.), Corruption and conflicts of interest: A comparative law approach (pp. 183–197). Edward Elgar PubLtd. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hul.ebookbatch.GEN_batch:ELGAR01620140507 Abbas Drebee, H., & Azam Abdul-Razak, N. (2020). The Impact of Corruption on Agriculture Sector in Iraq: Econometrics Approach. IOP Conference Series. Earth and Environmental Science, 553(1), 12019-. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/553/1/012019 Abbink, K., Dasgupta, U., Gangadharan, L., & Jain, T. (2014). Letting the briber go free: An experiment on mitigating harassment bribes. JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 111(Journal Article), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2013.12.012 Abbink, Klaus. (2004). Staff rotation as an anti-corruption policy: An experimental study. European Journal of Political Economy, 20(4), 887–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2003.10.008 Abbink, Klaus.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Corruption Strategies for Authoritarian States 2
    U4 Helpdesk Answer 2018:7 Anti -corruption strategies for authoritarian states Author(s): Roberto Martinez B. Kukutschka Reviewer(s): Nieves Zuniga Date: 20 May 2018 Although democracies – particularly weak ones – are not necessarily better than authoritarian states at controlling corruption, most success stories happen in democratic environments. Autocracies that manage to control petty and bureaucratic corruption, often leave in place the corruption that benefits the rulers. We look closer at some successful transformations in authoritarian environments: Qatar, Rwanda and Singapore. U4 Anti-Corruption Helpdesk A free service for staff from U4 partner agencies Query What evidence is there for effective anti-corruption interventions in authoritarian contexts? Contents 1. Background 1. Background In its broadest sense, authoritarian regimes 2. The link between regime type and the levels of encompass all forms of undemocratic rule. corruption Compared to democracies, these regimes do not 3. Why do autocrats engage in anti-corruption? maintain the institutions and procedures of 4. Anti-corruption reforms in Qatar participation and political competition, 5. Anti-corruption reforms in Rwanda fundamental rights and control of power 6. Anti-corruption reforms in Singapore (separation of powers, parliaments, elections, 7. Lessons learned plurality of parties, etc.) characteristic of a 8. References democracy. Juan Linz's (1975) widely cited definition identifies three characteristics through Summary which authoritarian regimes can be differentiated This U4 Helpdesk Answer explores the strategies from democratic and totalitarian ones: and policies used by authoritarian states to counter 1. limited pluralism contrasted with the corruption. It provides an overview of the theory principally unlimited pluralism of democracies and evidence linking the type of government and monism of totalitarianism (democratic vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Corruption in the Caribbean Basin : a Comparative Analysis of Jamaica and Costa Rica Michael W
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations University Graduate School 6-28-2000 Political corruption in the Caribbean basin : a comparative analysis of Jamaica and Costa Rica Michael W. Collier Florida International University DOI: 10.25148/etd.FI14060878 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd Part of the Comparative Politics Commons, Latin American History Commons, Political History Commons, and the Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons Recommended Citation Collier, Michael W., "Political corruption in the Caribbean basin : a comparative analysis of Jamaica and Costa Rica" (2000). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2408. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/2408 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the University Graduate School at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Miami, Florida POLITICAL CORRUPTION IN THE CARIBBEAN BASIN: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JAMAICA AND COSTA RICA A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS by Michael Wayne Collier To: Dean Arthur W. Herriott College of Arts and Sciences This dissertation, written by Michael Wayne Collier, and entitled Political Corruption in the Caribbean Basin: A Comparative Analysis of Jamaica and Costa Rica, having been approved in respect to style and intellectual content, is referred to you for judgment. We have read this dissertation and recommend that it be approved. Anthony P.
    [Show full text]
  • FCPA & Anti-Bribery
    alertFall 2019 FCPA & Anti-Bribery Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP A New York Limited Liability Partnership • One Battery Park Plaza New York, New York 10004-1482 • +1 (212) 837-6000 Attorney advertising. Readers are advised that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey. © 2019 Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP CORRUPTION PERCEPTION SCORE No Data 100 Very Clean 50 0 Very Corrupt Data from Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index 2018. SCORE COUNTRY/TERRITORY RANK 67 Chile 27 52 Grenada 53 41 India 78 35 Armenia 105 29 Honduras 132 23 Uzbekistan 158 88 Denmark 1 66 Seychelles 28 52 Italy 53 41 Kuwait 78 35 Brazil 105 29 Kyrgyzstan 132 22 Zimbabwe 160 87 New Zealand 2 65 Bahamas 29 52 Oman 53 41 Lesotho 78 35 Côte d’Ivoire 105 29 Laos 132 20 Cambodia 161 85 Finland 3 64 Portugal 30 51 Mauritius 56 41 Trinidad 78 35 Egypt 105 29 Myanmar 132 20 Democratic 161 85 Singapore 3 63 Brunei 31 50 Slovakia 57 and Tobago 35 El Salvador 105 29 Paraguay 132 Republic of the Congo 85 Sweden 3 Darussalam 49 Jordan 58 41 Turkey 78 35 Peru 105 28 Guinea 138 20 Haiti 161 85 Switzerland 3 63 Taiwan 31 49 Saudi Arabia 58 40 Argentina 85 35 Timor-Leste 105 28 Iran 138 20 Turkmenistan 161 84 Norway 7 62 Qatar 33 48 Croatia 60 40 Benin 85 35 Zambia 105 28 Lebanon 138 19 Angola 165 82 Netherlands 8 61 Botswana 34 47 Cuba 61 39 China 87 34 Ecuador 114 28 Mexico 138 19 Chad 165 81 Canada 9 61 Israel 34 47 Malaysia 61 39 Serbia 87 34 Ethiopia 114 28 Papua 138 19 Congo 165
    [Show full text]
  • Corruption and Good Governance in Asia
    046.qxd 9/25/2006 12:01 PM Page 1 Batch number: 1 CHECKLIST (must be completed before press) (Please cross through any items that are not applicable) Front board: Spine: Back board: ❑ Title ❑ Title ❑ ISBN ❑ Subtitle ❑ Subtitle ❑ Barcode ❑ Author/edited by ❑ Author/edited by Edited by IN ASIA AND GOOD GOVERNANCE CORRUPTION ❑ Series title ❑ Extra logo if required ❑ Extra logo if required Corruption and Good General: ❑ Book size Governance in Asia ❑ Type fit on spine Nicholas Tarling Nicholas CIRCULATED Date: SEEN BY DESK EDITOR: REVISE NEEDED Initial: Date: APPROVED FOR PRESS BY DESK EDITOR Initial: Date: Edited by Nicholas Tarling ,!7IA4BISBN 978-0-415-36904-6 Routledge studies in the modern history of Asia www.routledge.com ï an informa business PC4 Royal Demy B-format Spine back edge Corruption and Good Governance in Asia In recent years much has been said about governance and corruption in Asia, both before and after the 1997 crisis. This edited volume analyses the causes of corruption in East and Southeast Asia and considers the means of limiting and, wherever possible, eliminating the problem through better governance. Taking a country-by-country approach, the book explores the diversity in the quality of governance and patterns of corruption among countries and regions. Insightful analysis of these differences and similarities is used to argue that political will, appropriate structures and legislation, and political transparency are required if corruption is to be stopped. All these are needed along with a strategy relevant to the circumstances of the particular country concerned. This volume outlines the key principles of good governance and the policies and practices essential for their application.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Corruption Agencies in Asia Pacific Countries: an Evaluation of Their Performance and Challenges
    Anti-Corruption Agencies in Asia Pacific Countries: An Evaluation of their Performance and Challenges Jon S.T. Quah, Phd, Anti-Corruption Consultant, Singapore Author: Jon S.T. Quah, Phd, Anti-Corruption Consultant, Singapore Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information contained in this report. All information was believed to be correct as November 2017. Sponsored by: Transparency International cannot accept any responsibility of the content of this report nor for the consequences of the use of this report for other purposes or in other contexts. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 1. INTRODUCTION 5 2. DEFINITION AND TYPES OF ACA s 6 3. POLICY CONTEXTS IN ASIA PACIFIC COUNTRIES 7 4. LEARNING FROM SUCCESS: RECIPE FOR EFFECTIVE ACAs 10 A. STRONG DOSE OF POLITICAL WILL 10 B. ESTABLISH A TYPE A ACA WITH ADEQUATE BUDGET AND PERSONNEL 10 C. TYPE A ACA MUST BE AN INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG WITH OPERATIONAL AUTONOMY 12 D. PUBLIC SUPPORT IS NEEDED TO PROTECT THE ACA FROM ITS ENEMIES 13 5. PREVENTING FAILURE BY AVOIDING TWO MISTAKES 15 A. AVOID MISUSING THE ACA AS AN ATTACK DOG 15 B. AVOID CREATING THE ACA AS A PAPER TIGER 16 6. CHALLENGES FACING ACAs IN ASIA PACIFIC COUNTRIES 18 A. GROWING THREAT OF PRIVATE SECTOR CORRUPTION 18 B. BATTLING POLICE CORRUPTION 19 C. ATTRACTING AND RETAINING TALENTED PERSONNEL 20 7. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENHANCING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ACAs 23 8. CONCLUSION 24 REFERENCES 25 APPENDIX A: ANTI-CORRUPTION AGENCIES IN ASIA PACIFIC COUNTRIES 30 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The effectiveness of Singapore’s Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in combatting corruption has resulted in the establishment of many anti-corruption agencies (ACAs) in other Asia Pacific countries over the past 65 years.
    [Show full text]