Press Statements

LAUNCH OF TI'S 2005 GLOBAL CORRUPTION REPORT (GCR 2005) SPECIAL FOCUS : CORRUPTION IN THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR
WEDNESDAY, 16 TH MARCH 2005, 10.30AM, GII CONFERENCE HALL, OSU
By Daniel Batidam (Executive Secretary, Ghana Integrity Initiative)

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Press!
We have invited you this morning to share with you the contents of a new publication from our mother organization, Transparency International – The 2005 Global Corruption Report (GCR 2005). The Global Corruption Report, first published in 2001, is an annual overview of the state of corruption worldwide. In the past the Report has focused on various sectors of societal life and governance. For instance, the report of 2003 had a special focus on Freedom of Information , while that of 2004 focused on Political Corruption .

This year's report has a special focus on Corruption in Construction and Post-Conflict Reconstruction . To mark the publication of the report, TI is today also launching its ‘Minimum Standards for Public Contracting,' which sets out a blueprint for transparent public procurement.

The TI Standards call on public contracting authorities to ensure that contracts are subject to open, competitive bidding. Other measures include maintaining a blacklist of companies caught bribing; providing public disclosure of the entire process; and ensuring monitoring by independent oversight agencies and civil society. The TI Standards also advocate the use of a TI Integrity Pact, which commits the authority and bidding companies to refrain from bribery. The Integrity Pact is a tool that has already been successful in reducing corruption and cutting the costs of dozens of procurement procedures around the world.

THE COSTS OF CORRUPTION
The scale of corruption is magnified by the size and scope of the construction sector, estimated globally at some 3,200 billion US Dollars per year. TI estimates that the amount lost due to bribery in contracting is at least 10 per cent of contract value, putting the figure of lost funds at more than 300 billion US Dollars per year worldwide.

The costs of corruption in the construction and engineering sector are not limited to money. The damage caused by natural disasters such as earthquakes is magnified in places where corrupt building practices flourish, such as where inspectors are bribed to ignore building and planning regulations. When poorly built homes collapse, the result is that lives are lost and thousands are injured.

Corruption in the construction sector also ravages the environment. Many projects have progressed only because bribes were paid to ignore environmental and social hazards, often with the collusion of consultants who risk forfeiting future projects if they fail to endorse their client's interest in promoting these investments.

TI ON THE NEW REPORT
The Global Corruption Report 2005 finds that a lack of transparency in large-scale projects can have a devastating impact on economic development. As TI Chairman, Peter Eigen, puts it, “Corrupt contracting processes leave developing countries saddled with sub-standard infrastructure and excessive debt.”

Corruption in large-scale projects is a daunting obstacle to sustainable development, Eigen said, at the launch of the report today. “When the size of the bribe takes precedence over value for money,” he said, “the results are shoddy construction and poor infrastructure management.”

MONUMENTS OF CORRUPTION
The report has a list of what it terms “Monuments of Corruption” around the globe. These include: •  The Lesotho Highlands Water Project, in which $2 million was allegedly paid in bribe by Acres International and 11 other international dam-building companies.

•  The Cologne incinerator project in Germany , where $13 million was allegedly paid in bribes during the construction of a $500 million waste incineration plant.

•  The Bujagali dam in Uganda , which is currently being investigated for corruption by the World Bank and four different governments, after a British subsidiary of the Norwegian construction company, Veidekke , admitted paying a bribe to a senior Ugandan civil servant. The cumulative environmental impacts of Bujagali and other dams on the Nile have never been assessed.

LESSONS FOR GHANA 'S CONSTRUCTION SECTOR
The GCR 2005 does not include a country report on Ghana nor does it cite some of the “monuments of corruption” dotted around the country; this does not mean that Ghana is immune to the problem. Shoddy construction works and poor infrastructure management is a visible phenomenon - from schools and classroom blocks through roads and dam constructions, to private residences and KVIPs.

Scandals in the construction industry and the poor execution of public contracts at both national and district levels have been the subject of countless media reports. Allegations relating to conflict of interests and malfeasance in the award of contracts surfaced during the recent vetting of certain ministers of state. Mainly because of Parliament's limited resources and technical base, they were unable to properly cross-check these allegations and verify counter claims by those nominees who had been accused of wrongdoing. The vetting process has underscored the absence of a credible code of conduct for ministers and high public officials, especially regarding conflict of interests, and the flawed nature of assets declaration. These are issues that must be addressed.

The unhealthy link between political patronage and lucrative industries encourages unacceptable levels of corruption. In the construction industry, a good percentage of contracts often go to political party loyalists and insiders without due regard for competence and meritocracy, and at the expense of possible loss of human lives.

Sadly, political patronage and weak accountability have also encouraged high levels of corruption in the award of construction contracts at the district assembly level.

Ghana 's construction industry is especially prone to corruption at various stages of the construction process, as manifested in:

• The lack of transparency in the award of contracts
• The fierce competition for ‘make or break' contracts
• The numerous levels of official approvals and permits
• The uniqueness of many projects, which make it difficult to compare pricing
• The opportunities for delays and overruns
• The fact that poor quality of work is often concealed by concrete, plaster and cladding.
• The indication of high quality and expensive materials and labour in contract bidding while low quality and cheap materials and labour are used in the actual execution of the contract.
• Collusion between supervising engineers, architects, surveyors and the contractors they are supposed to watch over.

In addition, projects are executed by dozens, sometimes hundreds, of small-scale subcontractors, creating several stages of transactions that are difficult to monitor and that lead, in many instances, to end results that are sub-standard and unable to stand the test of time.

GII/TI RECOMMENDATIONS
The Ghana Integrity Initiative once again commends government for passing the Public Procurement Act (663) over a year ago. As we stated last October during the launch of the 2004 Corruption Perception Index, we shall continue to monitor whether the Act is being implemented in a credible and transparent manner so as to help check public corruption, of which over 70 per cent derives from public procurement. Already, knowledgeable people have raised doubts as to whether the Act in its present form can achieve the desired objectives

We remain concerned about the continued delay in the implementation of the Act and the issues of accountability this raises in the procurement sector. We urge government to speed up the process of implementation in order to prevent corrupt procurement practices and to safeguard the taxpayer's money.

GII also urges government and the private sector/business community to adopt TI's “Minimum Standards for Public Contracting” already referred to earlier. Specifically, public procurement authorities should:

• Implement a code of conduct that commits the contracting authority and its employees to a strict anti-corruption policy. The policy should take into account possible conflicts of interest, provide mechanisms for reporting corruption and protect whistleblowers
• Allow a company to tender only if it has implemented a code of conduct that commits the company and its employees to a strict anti-corruption policy
• Maintain a blacklist of companies for which there is sufficient evidence of their involvement in corrupt activities. Debar blacklisted companies from tendering for the authority's projects for a specified period of time
• Ensure that public contracts above a low threshold are subject to open competitive bidding
• Provide all bidders, and preferably also the general public, with easy access to information about all phases of the contracting process, including the selection and evaluation processes and the terms and conditions of the contract and any amendments
• Ensure that no bidder is given access to privileged information at any stage of the contracting process, especially information relating to the selection process.
• Ensure that internal and external control and auditing bodies are independent and functioning effectively, and that their reports are accessible to the public. Any unreasonable delays in project execution should trigger additional control activities
• Promote the participation of civil society organisations as independent monitors of both the tender and execution of projects
• Encourage professional bodies such as the Ghana Institution of Engineers and the Institute of Architects to enforce their codes of ethics on their members.
• Strengthen the Architectural and Engineering Services Company (AESC) and improve its management to enable it play its proper role as a competent state organ capable of competing effectively with private firms and providing competent services to the state.
• Enact a credible code of conduct for ministers and high public officials
• Make official asset declarations more accessible to dissuade high public officials from amassing ill-gotten gains while in public office.

CONCLUSION
This year's budget statement identified construction as one of two areas (agriculture was the other) that achieved growth. The construction sector is therefore of great importance to the country. However, corruption continues to exact a heavy toll on the sector and consequently on the development and the moral of citizens. Sub-standard construction projects in Ghana , which are tainted by bribery and corruption, not only result in the loss of money, but injure and kill people, especially when buildings are built in disaster-prone areas (flood and earthquake zones). In calling attention to corruption in the construction sector, the Ghana Integrity Initiative urges government to make good on its pledge of zero tolerance for corruption by implementing the Procurement Act, subjecting ministers and public officials to greater degrees of scrutiny, and promoting more accountability and transparency in the award of construction contracts.

For further information and references on the GCR 2005, contact Daniel Batidam, Executive Secretary of GII, on the following numbers: 0244 848132, 0277 453202, (021) 782364/5 (Off.). You may also visit GCR website www.globalcorruptionreport.org or the GII website www.tighana.org .

FOCUSSING ON POLITICAL CORRUPTION
Press statement to launch Transparency International's 2004 Global Corruption Report (GCR 2004)
Thursday, 25th March 2004, Ghana International Press Centre, Accra
By Daniel Batidam (Executive Secretary, Ghana Integrity Initiative)

INTRODUCTION
The Global Corruption Report (GCR), first published in 2001, is an annual overview of the state of corruption worldwide. This year's report covers the period from July 2002 to June 2003, and focuses on corruption in the political process and on the insidious impact of corrupt politics on public life in societies across the globe. It covers national and international developments, institutional and legal change and activities within both the private sector and civil society over the period.

Political corruption is defined as the abuse of entrusted power by political leaders for private gain, with the objective of increasing power or wealth. In established democracies, the loss of faith in politics and lack of trust in politicians and parties challenge democratic values, while in transition and developing states like ours, political corruption threatens the very viability of democracy, as it makes the newer institutions of democracy vulnerable.

THE IMPACT OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION
It is now clear that the general public around the world has taken note of political corruption. TI's Global Corruption Barometer* which is a new instrument that assesses the general public's experiences of and attitudes towards corruption, finds that if citizens could have a magic wand to eliminate corruption from just one institution, more would choose to clean up political parties, than any other institution. For parties, which play a crucial role in public life in any democracy – including ours, the message is clear: there must be absolute probity of party members and officials, and parties themselves must clean up their internal practices. In other words, internal party democracy is as important as the democratic principles that must be exercised in the wider political terrain.

Political corruption points to a lack of transparency, but also to related concerns about equity and justice: corruption feeds the wrongs that deny human rights and prevent human needs from being met. Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, argues that corruption hinders participation in political life and proper access to justice. These, and many other issues, have been addressed in this year's GCR.

The report also evaluates various mechanisms that can curb corruption in politics, from citizen action to the creation of new international norms and standards, such as TI's ‘Standards on Political Finance and Favours'.

Political Corruption can elicit a number of responses. One is voter apathy – where voters see no point in participating in a process they perceive as meaningless because there will be no difference who comes into political/public office; this (apathy) is usually accompanied by public disillusionment with democracy itself and its capacity to curb political corruption. Another response, one that Transparency International aims to capture in this report, is the ignition of citizen action – and, in some cases, positive government and private sector measures. In this regard, two important developments in the fight against corruption at the international level, are worthy of note:

1. The most significant development to affect the African region was the adoption in July 2003 of the African Union Convention against Corruption . The Convention, which awaits 15 ratifications before entering into force, promises to strengthen laws on corruption by listing offences that should be punishable by domestic legislation, and outlines measures to enable the detection and investigation of corruption offences. One weakness of the Convention is that, its procedure permits any signatory to opt out of some or all provisions.

2. The UN Convention against Corruption , adopted in Mexico in December 2003, is another important development in the global anti-corruption crusade. It is the first global instrument embracing a comprehensive range of anti-corruption measures to be taken at the national level. It will also enhance international cooperation on corruption prevention and enforcement. The Convention breaks new ground, particularly in relation to the provisions on cross-border recovery of assets, but more is needed if it is to have a significant impact on reducing corruption.

The potential contribution the (UN) Convention could make in the fight against corruption was weakened by the United States' refusal to countenance any mandatory provision on transparency in political funding. This has led to a lukewarm and optional provision tucked away in an article entitled “Public Sector”. Conversely, the Convention represents a welcome breakthrough regarding international cooperation on the return of (stolen) assets.

ADDRESSING THE ISSUE
The Ghana Integrity Initiative finds the timing of the release of this report most appropriate in the light of the preparations our country is making towards elections in December. How can society address the issue of political corruption? The report presents a number of key recommendations which the Ghana Integrity Initiative considers very relevant in the context of our own country experience:

• Government must enhance legislation on political funding and disclosure. This means that, public oversight bodies such as CHRAJ, SFO, the Auditor General's department, etc. and independent courts must be endowed with adequate resources and skills and the power to review, investigate and hold offenders accountable
• Government must implement adequate conflict of interest legislation, including laws that regulate the circumstances under which an elected official may hold a position in the private sector or a state-owned company
• Candidates and (political) parties should have fair access to the media, especially the state-owned media, and standards for achieving balanced media coverage of elections must be established, applied and maintained.
• A guaranteed right to information is an essential, practical anti-corruption measure and a mark of transparency and accountability in government. Research has shown that countries with access to information laws are also perceived to be the least corrupt. In 2002, of the ten countries scoring best in TI's annual corruption perception index (CPI), no fewer than eight had effective legislation enabling the public to see government files. Of the 10 countries perceived to be the worst when it comes to corruption, not even one has a functioning access to information regime. Open government is therefore the antidote to corruption. We hope to see the FOI bill which has been on the drawing board for so long, become a reality sooner than later.
• In the same spirit of openness, political parties, candidates and politicians should be willing to disclose assets, income and expenditure to an independent agency. Such information should be presented in a timely fashion, on an annual basis, as well as before and after elections.
• International financial institutions like the World Bank and IMF, as well as donor governments, must take political corruption into account when deciding to lend or grant money to governments. They should establish sensitive criteria to evaluate corruption levels. To ensure that funds are used for their rightful purposes, donor governments need to insist on adequate civil society monitoring of good governance in recipient countries, rather than depend solely on statistics and data rolled out by government officials.
• There has to be a commitment on the part of government to implement the UN Convention against Corruption and the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption and Other Offences. But this can be done only after government has taken the first steps of signing and ratifying these Conventions.
• Similarly, the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention must be strengthened and properly monitored and enforced. Signatory governments (to these Conventions) should additionally launch an education campaign to ensure that businesses know these laws and the penalties for breaching them.

We of the Ghana Integrity Initiative – like many other Ghanaians – are fully aware that many of the issues of political corruption raised in this report are far from being overcome, even after over 10 years of nurturing our parliamentary democratic system of governance.

We believe that as a people, we have come a long way to achieve some relative peace and stability, and that this is a time for consolidation and for more refined partisan politics and practices that will enhance - rather than derail - the country's progress and development. A critical ingredient of this democratic evolution is the building of strong institutions for the fight against corruption and the promotion of good governance.

We hope that this volume enlivens the policy debate about political corruption, inspires action and results in a positive way, so as to achieve the much-needed positive change in the lives of our people.

Thank you.

How To Establish And Sustain National Anti-Corruption Chapters: The Civil Society And Media Outreach Link
By Daniel Batidam (Executive Secretary, Ghana Integrity Initiative)

At the West Africa Regional Conference For African Parliamentarians Network Against Corruption (Apnac) on the theme: “New Parliamentary Challenges In The Fight Against Corruption”
Abuja, Nigeria, 11th & 12th March 2004

Preliminary Remarks
On behalf of the Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) and Transparency International's Secretariat (TI-S) in Berlin, I wish to thank the organizers and the planning committee of this august meeting for inviting us to participate in your deliberations, and also providing us with the opportunity to share some reflections with you based on our own experience in the fight against corruption. The Ghana Integrity Initiative is the National Chapter (NC) of Transparency International (TI) in Ghana. The chapter came into being in 1999 – some six years or so after TI was established. As the TI movement chalked 10 last year, it had recorded an achievement of having about 90 chapters across the globe, with about a third of these NCs spread across Africa. Some of the NCs are already well-established and experienced in the delivery of various services and expertise to many categories of beneficiary groups, while others are still struggling to find their feet. In those of our (African) countries which have been lucky to experience relative peace and stability over a prolonged period of time, civil society groups and organizations like TI have also benefited from the bigger political space and played their proper role in the transformation of society. Before looking at this ‘proper role', however, I would like to give a brief background to how TI chapters are established and the changes that the movement has undergone in its 11 years of existence.

Establishing National Chapters of TI
As a global anti-corruption coalition in the truest sense of the word, TI introduced a rather innovative organizational structure, in order to ensure

• the movement's integrity, cohesion and reputation; and
• the diversity and richness of opinion and actions within its network

For these reasons, TI never opens a “local branch” in any country; rather the initiative to create a TI chapter always comes from the country itself. The procedure for establishing a partnership between TI and a local voluntary civil society group is called the accreditation process. At the end of the process, the local group becomes a “National Chapter” of TI. The most relevant steps of the process are:

• The TI Secretariat (TI-S) establishes a formal relationship with a person or group of persons seeking to establish a National Chapter by entering into an Agreement with such person or group of persons (referred to as “Promoters”). The purpose of this Agreement is
  • to require the Promoters to comply with the basic TI ground rules relating to the formation of National Chapters, and to work diligently to establish the National Chapter; and
  • to require TI-S to allow the Promoters the exclusive use of the TI logo, and to provide them such assistance and guidance as may be necessary.
• When the NC is about to be legally established, a number of steps are taken:
  • the Promoters apply to the Board for formal provisional accreditation as a National Chapter;
  • the Board grants provisional accreditation for a period of two years;
  • the NC confirms its acceptance of the agreement;
  • the NC nominates an office-holder to be an Active Member of TI; and
  • if at the end of two years the accreditation is not withdrawn, the National Chapter formally confirms its acceptance of the terms of agreement relating to a chapter in existence
• Until recently, when confirmed after the two years, accreditation was permanent, except where the NC is formally dis-accredited by the Board because it has acted in a way that is “detrimental to the TI movement”. This accreditation rule has however changed in recent times (no more permanency of accreditation), for reasons I shall explain shortly. When the rules I have just stated were introduced, TI was a much smaller movement. Over time the movement became a big coalition with global prominence. TI's increased influence and responsibility, together with its increased membership worldwide required a renewed sense of ‘strong and mutual accountability' within the movement. This necessitated an on-going reconfirmation of the movement's common vision about shared values, reinforcement of internal democracy and external transparency, as well as the maintenance of standards based on mutual assessments. A new, 3-yearly Re-accreditation procedure has therefore been introduced, the purpose of which is to safeguard TI's reputation in general and the standing of each NC in particular – through a continuous process of evaluation. The change of the accreditation procedure also aims at making the process and the criteria for accreditation more transparent. The intention is of course to encourage good performance, rather than to dis-accredit a chapter, as it is believed that a permanent accreditation fails to take account of the often rapidly evolving internal and external circumstances of national chapters (a point very relevant to the changing role of CSOs in emerging and transitional democracies).* TI's new accreditation renewal emerges as a crucial tool for:
  • enhancing mutual accountability within the movement
  • increasing synergy between NCs and TI-S
  • safeguarding the reputation of the TI movement in general and its chapters in particular, and
  • stimulating on-going self-evaluation in the whole movement which is considered so fundamental for the movement's own integrity

Role of Civil Society and Media vis-à-vis APNAC
I have taken the trouble of going through the history and developments in the TI movement – at the risk of boring this Honorable House - to drive home a few points in relation to the issue of civil society and its role in the changing societies around the globe.

Honorable ladies and gentlemen, starting from the premise that civil society – in the broadest sense of the word – is at varying stages of evolution in different African countries, and even more so in West Africa, it must be conceded that there will be different needs, approaches and strategies to be looked at in discussing any form of collaboration with such an amorphous group of individuals and associations. Even in countries like Ghana and Nigeria where civil society is relatively fairly advanced, the changing role of civil society organizations (CSOs) over the years has been a source of concern, if not open worry. The issue of how civil society relates to the state and society at large is a highly contentious one which requires more than a singular meeting of this nature to fully decipher. A certain school of thought even holds the view that, political parties can be categorized as civil society organizations, especially when they are not in power – a view that appears to be logical when one looks at the nature of cooperation that often exists between ‘opposition' political parties and civil society/advocacy groups.

Whatever the case, the crucial question that has often arisen is whether the relation of civil society to the state should be confrontational, co-operative, or even both? Again, a question to which there can be no simple and straight answer.

It must be acknowledged that to enable them function effectively, the elements of civil society need to enjoy substantial autonomy from the state. However, it is necessary to stress that in this modern era, there can hardly be any such thing as civil society without the state. Whether one likes it or not, it is the state that provides – or should provide - the orderly legal and political framework within which the units of civil society emerge and operate. In addition, it is undeniable that the rights and entitlements on which their corporate existence rests, must be recognized, accepted, respected, and protected by the state without involving the erosion of their autonomy. It is in this context that an important institution of state (or government) such as parliament, must view its relationship – in terms of partnership – with civil society, and perhaps more specifically, with the Media, usually referred to as the Fourth Estate of the Realm, the “Fourth Power”, and so on.

It is worth stressing here that this partnership between parliament and civil society must be a genuine partnership; a partnership built on credibility, transparency and a sense of ‘strong mutual accountability'. The credibility of this partnership can be further enhanced if a group of parliamentarians decides to come together as a force to fight a common cause such as anti-corruption (in the case of APNAC) – especially so, if the MPs involved in such a crusade are drawn from across the political divide, eg. As in Ghana.

Parliament, with all the power it wields, needs to engage civil society in a proactive manner, by opening itself up for media scrutiny and collaborating with civil society through its various internal systems, eg. the various parliamentary committees. Notable among these Committees would be the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament which has an important watchdog role similar to the role of the media. Thus, without need to look too far from your own establishment, there is enough fertile ground for effective collaboration between Parliaments and the Fourth Realm, including CSOs.

Outside of parliament's own structures, we can talk about the role of MPs in issues like organizing free and fair elections – the process through which they themselves become the elected representatives of the people (e.g. how many MPs consider vote-buying as a legitimate way of getting elected?); the attitudes of MPs in terms of how they engage the citizenry on issues on development once they are elected; the sense of accountability of MPs in relation to their constituents (or is it rather an accountability towards sponsors?); the relationship between parliament and the executive, to mention just a few. These are issues outside of parliament's internal practices which, nevertheless, impact on both the perceptions of the august institution and the real performance of parliaments and MPs. It would go a long way to determine your engagement with civil society and other actors.

The Power of Data and Transparency
Another way in which there could be enhanced collaboration with civil society and the media is for parliament to select and contract NGOs/CSOs to undertake research in various issues of governance for which such organisations have the requisite expertise. With the statistical advances and new empirical tools, governance and corruption can now be measured, monitored and analysed at both an aggregate international comparative level - as is the case with TI's Corruption Perception Index (CPI), as well as at much more disaggregated and in-depth country diagnostic level; here, we can take a clue from TI-Kenya's Urban Bribery Index. Furthermore, through new sets of transparency tools, coupled with the trend towards greater voice and democratic accountability in most emerging democracies, these data tools and indicators do empower reformists in government and civil society, in effecting change to improve governance. In this regard, corruption needs to be viewed within a broader governance context in which there are other important dimensions - such as rule of law, protection of property rights, freedom of the press, political competition, transparent campaign finance, and many others that - in turn - affect corruption and need to be taken on the agenda. In all these parliament has a role and APNAC is expected to spearhead it.

It is imperative to understand in which particular dimensions governance challenges exist within a country; what are the key factors responsible for weak institutions fostering corruption; and, what specific political factors and vested interests are contributing to corruption in a country. As stated earlier, these conditions will differ from country to country, even in a region like West Africa. It is however clear that the role of participatory voice mechanisms afforded to the citizenry (through FOI, Whistleblower Acts, etc.) in curbing corruption, is of particular importance. Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that countries that restrict freedom of the press, citizens' rights and their voice and participation, would have greater challenges in reducing corruption. As members of the legislature, APNAC will be fulfilling a great deal of its part of the partnership with civil society by pushing for legislative reforms that would create the enabling environment for achieving these fundamental freedoms.

Challenges facing Civil Society and the Media in Africa

• The need to observe democratic practices in their internal structures and processes and to tolerate one another
• Financial and organizational viability in order to preserve their relative autonomy from state encroachment. Where necessary, to increase cooperation and collaboration, as well as pool resources
• The need for co-ordination of action among CSOs
• To cooperate with and also confront government as and when necessary.

On the flip side, the State or government must allow – or even encourage – civil society to develop without undue manipulation or, in the case of the media, polarization. In other words, there is a responsibility on the part of other (State) actors to recognize the importance of having strong CSOs and a vibrant media for achieving democratic development. To this end, the current tendency in a number of African countries where some CSOs and sections of the media are being co-opted into government is a worrisome development that needs to be checked. For, CSOs themselves can, and have been used by governments, to disrupt or inhibit the evolution of civil society and democracy. A noteworthy example can be found in my own country, Ghana, one of the relatively stable countries in the West Africa sub-region.

In the 2001 Global Corruption Report of TI, the role of the Media in Ghana's political dispensation as highlighted (page 91). It pointed out how the media had succeeded in saving the country's democracy during the 2000 elections by taking on the government of the day and ensuring free and fair elections, leading to a change of government from an incumbent party to an opposition party – a historic feat in the country's history. Unfortunately, and arguably so, not everybody in Ghana today sees the media to be upholding the high accountability standards it imposed on the previous regime. In some circles it is even believed that sections of the media have compromised their critical role of holding government/public office holders accountable to the people. From ‘watchdogs', some journalists are better described as ‘lap dogs' for what some perceive as having a ‘love affair' with government the government of the day.

We could go on and on with examples of challenges facing the development of civil society and the media in many of our (West African) countries. It is important that we do not throw our hands up, that we do not give up, in the face of all these challenges and perhaps many more in the case of countries that are still confronted with even much more fundamental issues of democracy. The road to eradicating corruption may be long but it can only re-echo the need for our collective efforts in the struggle and greater cooperation at all levels.

It is our hope that this regional conference will pave the way for you MPs of the sub-region to also review your individual (country's) and collective efforts in the area of ratifying the recent instruments for fighting corruption at both the AU level – through the “African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption and Related Offences”, and at the level of the United Nations - through the historic UN Anti-Corruption Convention recently signed in Merida, Mexico. Both Conventions require certain minimum number of ratifications to come into force so that their objectives and benefits can be realised.

Transparency International has been part of the consultative process leading to the signing of both the AU and the UN Conventions and is still committed – together with its national chapters - to supporting States in the process leading to the ratification and eventual enforcement of these important tools in the fight against corruption. It is our hope that this meeting sets the agenda for such a collaboration between law-makers in this West Africa region and civil society towards the achievement of these our common goals

CALL ON GOVERNMENT TO RATIFY AU ANTI-CORRUPTION CONVENTION
By Daniel Batidam (Executive Secretary, Ghana Integrity Initiative)
6th August 2003

The Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) and Transparency International (TI) urge the Government of Ghana to ratify the African Union (AU) Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption, which was recently adopted by African Heads of States – including the Ghanaian leader - in Maputo, Mozambique, at the July 2003 AU Summit.

GII, the local chapter of TI - the leading global non governmental organisation fighting corruption world-wide - believes that the Convention represents a significant landmark in the history of the AU, as it paves the way for an African regional anti-corruption instrument which is expected to assist African states to live up to their NEPAD promises. This presents a unique opportunity for anti-corruption activists, the media and all other interest groups in Ghana, to lobby government for the ratification of the Convention. It also provides the Government with a window of opportunity to “operationalise” its policy of ZERO TOLERANCE FOR CORRUPTION.

“By adopting the African Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption, African leaders have clearly demonstrated their commitment to the New Partnership for Africa's Development,” said Peter Eigen, Chairman of Transparency International (TI). “This Convention will assist national governments in carrying out reforms and provide citizens with the confidence to insist that such reforms are implemented,” adds Eigen.

The Convention guarantees access to information and the participation of civil society and the media in monitoring that access. Other articles outlaw the use of funds acquired through illicit and corrupt practices to finance political parties and require state parties to adopt legislative measures to facilitate the repatriation of the proceeds of corruption.

Additionally, the Convention would - when it comes into force (this requires the ratification of no fewer than 15 states) - provide TI African Chapters, including the GII, with the necessary tool to hold their governments accountable in the area of corruption. It also defines the framework and prerequisites of national anti-corruption strategies. Perhaps most significantly, this is the first concrete political step to be taken by African leaders to address the issue of corruption and its impact on socio-economic development.

Ghana's role on the African continent – be it in peace-keeping and conflict resolution or in democracy and good governance – is well known and respected. The ratification of the AU Anti-Corruption Convention will not only be a confirmation of this (continental) leadership role but will indeed be re-assuring locally and will signal a true commitment to the struggle to rid the Ghanaian society of corruption.

The GII hopes that all stakeholders – the media, civil society, NGOs and all other pressure groups, will add their voices to this call for the ratification of what will definitely be an empowering tool for the citizenry – in cooperation and collaboration with Government – to fight corruption till we achieve true freedom from the canker.

LAUNCHING TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL'S 2003 CORRUPTION PERCEPTION INDEX
Tuesday, 7th October 2003, Ghana International Press Centre, Accra.
By Daniel Batidam (Executive Secretary, Ghana Integrity Initiative)

1. INTRODUCTION
Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen of the Media, our Development Partners (DPs), and Members of the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition (GACC).

We have invited you this morning to share with you the release of this year's worldwide survey on corruption conducted annually by Transparency International - the leading international non-governmental organisation (NGO) devoted solely to the fight against corruption. We are happy to share it with you at the same time that the global launch is taking place in London, and ahead of the Africa regional launch scheduled to take place in Cameroon in the next couple of days.

The Ghana Integrity Initiative – the local Chapter of Transparency International, has since its inception in December 1999, observed with keen interest the developmental setbacks facing our dear nation, and believes that the canker of corruption is a major obstacle to the attainment of our country's developmental goals. It is in this light that we find any attempt at assessing the levels and state of corruption in our country as a matter of great interest to us as an organisation, and to our country.

2. ABOUT THE CPI
The annual Corruption Perception Index (CPI) has been organised by Transparency International since 1995, and is considered the best authority on the level of corruption in any country included in the poll. The CPI is a combination of at least three credible corruption-related surveys in any country. In some countries as many as 17 surveys are used, in others, the minimum – three surveys – are used. They reflect the perceptions of business people, academics and risk analysts, both resident and non-resident in the countries that are included in the poll. The CPI is therefore a composite index, a snapshot, if you will, of perceptions of corruption on a given country from a number of sources.

The 2003 index on Ghana is based on data from six surveys conducted between 2001 and 2003. The institutions that conducted the surveys include:

• World Business Environment Survey (WBES) of the World Bank - 2001
• The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) – 2003
• World Market Research Centre (WMRC) - 2002
• The State Capacity Survey by Columbia University (CU) – 2003
• Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) – 2002
• The Global Corruption Report (GCR) – 2003

The data used for this year's CPI was compiled between 2001 and 2003. It is important to emphasise that the CPI relates to perceptions rather than real phenomena. It is a matter for discussion, to what extent such perceptions improve our understanding of what the real levels of corruption may be. Since actual levels of corruption cannot be determined directly, however, perceptions may serve as a guide for now.

In all the surveys “levels of corruption” were defined in order to avoid any doubt. By and large, the definition of corruption applies to the misuse of public power for private benefit such as bribing of public officials, kickbacks in public procurement or embezzlement of public funds. All the sources of data for the CPI assessed the “extent” of corruption among public officials and politicians in the countries in question.

3. RELIABILITY AND PRECISION
Ranking of countries, which in the past has been a controversial issue, especially in countries ranked at the bottom, is perhaps not the best way to access the level of corruption in a given country. This is because from year to year new countries are included in the index, while others may drop out of it, and this may affect a country's position For example, there is a significant increase in the number of countries captured in this year's index – 133 – compared with 102 countries in the 2002 CPI.

The real indicator of performance is the score. A higher score is an indication that respondents provided a better rating, while a lower score suggests that respondents changed their perceptions downwards.

4. GHANA'S RANKING AND SCORE
How did Ghana rank and score? Of the 133 countries included in this year's index, Ghana ranked 72 nd with a score of 3.3. This score is significant for us because it represents a drop from last year's score of 3.9 and is the same as the score the country had in 1999.

The larger number of sources this year (ie. 6 surveys, as compared to four surveys used last year and three in the previous year 2001) in determining Ghana's score, lends credibility to the view that this year's results have a greater likelihood of precision and reliability. This is also evident in the fact that the standard deviation fell from 1.4 in 2002 to 0.9 in 2003. The fall in the standard deviation indicates that this year, the differences of perceptions among the different surveys used for Ghana were lower.

This year's score of 3.3 suggests that, not much has been achieved in terms of curbing corruption despite government's declared war on it. Infact, it shows that after a drop in corruption it seems to be on the rise again. Why do we say this? The year 1999 was Ghana's first time to be included in the CPI, and its score was 3.3. In 2000, we scored 3.5 and in 2001, 3.4. It is instructive to note that the year 2002 was our best year, as we scored almost 4 (to be precise, 3.9). That performance possibly reflected the gains accruing from the Kufuor government's declaration of intention to pursue a policy of zero tolerance for corruption, and some of the vigorous anti-corruption measures taken in that period. Ghana's placement on this year's index indicates that corruption may be on the rise again after the initial drop.

5. HIGHLIGHTS OF 2003 CPI
Now let's put this in a more global perspective.

• The 2003 chart shows that of the 133 countries polled, 7 out of 10 countries score less than 5 out of a clean score of 10, while 5 out of 10 developing countries score less than 3 out of 10. Nine out of 10 developing countries score less than 5 against a clean score of 10
• Corruption is perceived to be pervasive in countries like Bangladesh, Nigeria , Haiti, Paraguay, Myanmar, Tajikistan, Georgia, Cameroon , Azerbajan, Angola , Kenya , and Indonesia – countries with a score of less than 2 in the index. Countries with a score of higher than 9, with very low levels of perceived corruption, are rich countries, namely – Finland, Iceland, Denmark, New Zealand, Singapore and Sweden.
• Some changes highlighted in the 2003 CPI showing improvements since last year's index, have been observed in countries like Austria, Belgium, Colombia, France, Germany, Ireland, Malaysia, Norway, and Tunisia . Noteworthy examples of a worsening index can be found in Argentina, Belarus, Chile, Canada, Israel, Luxemburg. Poland, USA, and Zimbabwe .
• Levels of corruption are also said to be worryingly high in European countries such as Greece and Italy, as well as in potentially oil-rich countries like Nigeria , Angola , Azerbajan, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Libya , Venezuela and Iraq.
• Political Parties, the Courts and the Police which were identified as the three most in need of reform in TI's Global Corruption Barometer, launched earlier this year, were cited by the report, which added, “This indicates a serious lack of confidence in those in authority worldwide”.

COMMENTS FROM TI
It is important to take seriously the comments of TI Chairman Peter Eigen. Dr. Eigen says governments in developing countries must implement results-oriented programmes to fight corruption, but adds that they also urgently require practical help, tailored to the needs of their national anti-corruption strategies.

He notes that there are many countries, where there is now a high-level political commitment to fight corruption. “In such countries,” says Dr. Eigen, “international support – especially for transparency in public contracting – is essential to build solid foundations for removing corruption from government and public services.” He also notes in particular, that the private sector must take full responsibility for its conduct at home and abroad, and take urgent steps to stop paying bribes.

To make this a reality, TI and private sector companies have worked together to develop a set of Business Principles for Countering Bribery, advocating anti-bribery training and codes of conduct within companies. TI has also implemented no-bribes Integrity Pacts in public contracting and is advocating for a multilateral framework agreement on Transparency in Government Procurement (TGP).

In countries such as Ghana, it is in our own interest to introduce transparency measures in public procurement because the waste of scarce resources is at stake, and poverty will surely grow if corruption in procurement is not contained.

CONCLUSIONS
It is crucial that the government and indeed, the country, takes this CPI seriously because we believe it will go a long way to inspire us to undertake the necessary institutional reforms, in order to sustain public trust in the new democratic dispensation, and to achieve the goal of economic renewal.

Indeed, the government's policy of zero tolerance for corruption will remain mere political slogan without any meaning to the citizenry, if no tangible steps are taken to ensure a reversal of the current trend of events.

We, as the Ghana Integrity Initiative, together with our partners such as the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition, commit ourselves to collaborating and cooperating with government, civil society, the private sector and indeed, all individuals and groups that are prepared to join hands to rid our dear nation of this canker of corruption.

Thank you.

For full details of the TI CPI 2003, visit http://www.transparency.org/cpi/index.html#cpi

UN ANTI-CORRUPTION CONVENTION: GOVERNMENT URGED TO SIGN AND RATIFY!

From 9-11 December 2003, Heads of State and Ministers will gather in Merida, Mexico, for the signing of the United Nations Convention against Corruption. This instrument, which comes into force with 30 ratifications, could have the importance and influence, over time, of the UN Declaration on Human Rights.

Corruption - the abuse of entrusted power for private gain - undermines the economic, social and political foundations of our societies. Whether it occurs in the public or private sectors, it deepens global poverty and thwarts development.

For the first time, the new Convention provides an internationally agreed set of standards for the prevention and criminalisation of corruption. It also provides a comprehensive framework for international cooperation to combat corruption, including mechanisms for the recovery of stolen assets. As such, it has the potential to facilitate international anti-corruption efforts for years to come.

Signing a Convention is, however, not enough. The Convention must be ratified and implemented by individual states. A key weakness of the Convention is that the state parties will decide what - if any - monitoring process there will be only after the Convention enters into force, so the media and civil society organisations need to be especially vigilant to ensure that an effective monitoring process emerges.

The Ghana government, which is incidentally chair of ECOWAS, has the opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to tackling the scourge of corruption by ratifying this convention as soon as possible. We urge our government to announce, at the signing ceremony, the date by which it will have ratified this historic UN Convention. Without such an announcement, the signing will remain a symbolic gesture.

THE UN ANTI-CORRUPTION CONVENTION: What's in it ?
By Daniel Batidam (Executive Secretary, Ghana Integrity Initiative)

“Corruption is a poison that no society is free from ... In the developing countries, it poses a major obstacle to advancement. It destroys efforts to establish the rule of law, discourages investments and frustrates hopes of lifting the living standards of the poor” – Hans Corell, UN Legal Counsel

The year 2003 was a momentous one for the international coalition against corruption, culminating in the signing in Merida, Mexico, last December of the UN Convention Against Corruption, and the UN's decision to make December 9 an annual anti-corruption day. Earlier in the year – July 2003 to be precise - African Heads of States who met in Maputo, Mozambique, also adopted the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption.

In various international circles, the Merida Convention - as the UN event has come to be known - has been viewed as a fitting climax to the 10 th anniversary of Transparency International (1993 - 2003), the world's leading organization devoted solely to the fight against corruption. Indeed, as an organization, TI was born out of the experience of people who witnessed at first hand the real threat to human life posed by corruption.

During the high-level political conference for the purpose of signing the Convention, TI noted that while awareness has grown worldwide as far as the fight against corruption is concerned, the Convention represents another phase of the global fight – namely, putting in place the framework of international instruments. The third - and perhaps most challenging phase - is to meet the expectations of the world's citizens by implementing and applying these instruments so that real tangible progress is seen in reducing corruption worldwide.

So, what's in the Convention that countries are required to implement?
Under the terms of the UN General Assembly-approved Convention against Corruption, ratifying countries will enter into a legally binding obligation to:

• criminalize corrupt practices
• develop national institutions to prevent corrupt practices and to prosecute offenders
• cooperate with other governments to recover stolen assets
• help each other, including with technical and financial assistance, to fight corruption, reduce its occurrence and reinforce integrity
• Prevention. This includes measures such as the establishment of anti-corruption bodies and enhanced transparency in the financing of election campaigns and political parties to address both the public and private sectors. Requirements are also established for the prevention of corruption in the judiciary and in public procurement. The Convention calls on countries to actively promote the involvement of non-governmental and community-based organizations, as well as other elements of civil society, to raise public awareness of corruption.
• Criminalization . Countries are required to establish criminal and other offences to cover a wide range of acts of corruption. This includes not only basic forms of corruption, such as bribery and the embezzlement of public funds, but also trading in influence and the concealment and “laundering” of the proceeds of corruption.
• International cooperation. Countries agree to cooperate in the fight against corruption, including prevention and investigation activities, and the prosecution of offenders. The Convention also binds countries to render specific forms of mutual legal assistance in gathering and transferring evidence for use in court and to extradite offenders. Countries must also undertake measures to support the tracing, freezing, seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of corruption.
• Asset recovery. This is an important issue for many developing countries where high-level corruption has plundered the national wealth, and where resources are badly needed for reconstruction and the rehabilitation of societies under new governments. Measures include the prevention and detection of transfers of illicitly acquired assets, the recovery of property, and the return and disposition of assets.
• Implementation mechanisms. The Convention needs 30 ratifications to come into force. A Conference of the States Parties is established to review implementation and facilitate activities required by the Convention.

CONCLUSION
Clearly, the new UN Anti-Corruption Convention is wide-ranging in its coverage, though not uniform in the treatment of various issues. At the signing ceremony, TI's Advisory Board Member, Peter Rooke, expressed regret that “transparency in funding the political process and private sector corruption are not addressed by mandatory provisions.”

On the other hand, the global anti-corruption movement (TI) applauded the “ground-breaking provisions on assets,” noting that “if effectively implemented, these will allay suspicions that financial institutions in the North facilitate the looting of resources from the South.”

“We also welcome the extensive provisions for international cooperation on law enforcement, extradition and mutual legal assistance,” the TI statement added.

While we can and should all applaud the great achievement the Convention represents, it is clear that even bigger challenges lie ahead, with the greatest being the political will to implement and enforce provisions of the Convention.

Top of page

LAUNCHING: TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL’S 2004 CORRUPTION PERCEPTION INDEX (CPI)
By Daniel Batidam (Executive Secretary, Ghana Integrity Initiative)
WEDNESDAY, 20TH OCTOBER 2004

1. INTRODUCTION
Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen of the Media, our Development Partners (DPs), Members of the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition (GACC) and members of the Diplomatic Community. On behalf of the Board of the Ghana Integrity Initiative, I welcome you all to this morning’s conference. We have invited you this morning to share with you this year’s worldwide survey on corruption conducted annually by Transparency International - the leading international non-governmental organisation (NGO) devoted solely to the fight against corruption. As many of you do know by now, GII is the National Chapter of Transparency International. The year 2004 marks the tenth publication of the CPI. It is worthy of note that the number of countries included in the CPI has been consistently increasing year after year. The number of countries included in this year’s Index is 146, an increase of 13 countries from that of last year.

2. ABOUT THE CPI
The annual Corruption Perception Index (CPI) is considered the best authority on the level of corruption in any country included in the poll. The CPI is a combination of at least three credible corruption-related surveys in any country. In some countries there could be as many as 18 surveys, while in others the minimum – three surveys – are used. They reflect the perceptions of business people, academics and risk analysts, both resident and non-resident in the countries that are included in the poll. The CPI is therefore a composite index or a snapshot of perceptions of corruption on a given country from a number of sources.

Survey Sources for Ghana
The 2004 index on Ghana is based on data from seven surveys conducted between 2002 and 2004. The institutions that conducted the surveys include: - World Economic Forum (WEF) – 2003 - World Economic Forum (WEF) - 2004 - The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) – 2004 - World Market Research Centre (WMRC) – 2004 - Merchant International Group (MIG) - 2004 - The State Capacity Survey by Columbia University (CU) – 2003 - Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) – 2002 The CPI focuses on corruption in the public sector and defines corruption as the abuse of public office for private gain. The surveys used in compiling the CPI asks questions that relate to the misuse of public power for private benefit, with a focus, for example, on bribe taking by public officials in public procurement or embezzlement of public funds.
All the sources of data for the CPI assessed the “extent” of corruption among public officials and politicians in the countries included in the index and do not distinguish between administrative and political corruption or between petty and grand corruption. For example, the World Market Research Centre (WMRC) provides an assessment of the likelihood of encountering corrupt officials in the process of doing business. Corruption can range from petty bureaucratic corruption (such as the paying of bribes to low-level officials) right through to grand political corruption (such as the paying of large kick-backs in return for the awarding of contracts).
It is important to emphasize that the real indicator of a country’s performance is the score and not the ranking. A higher score is an indication that respondents provided a better rating than previously, while a lower score suggests that respondents changed their perceptions downwards. The ranking of a country can change simply because new countries enter the index or others drop out.

3. GHANA’S RANKING AND SCORE
How did Ghana rank and score this time round?
Ghana is ranked 64th on the list of 146 countries included in this year’s index - with a score of 3.6. This score of 3.6 is a slight improvement over last year’s score of 3.3, though still lower than the 3.9 recorded in 2002.
What can we make of Ghana’s 2004 CPI score?
This year’s score should remind us that Ghana is far from winning the fight against corruption. In fact, when the score for this year is placed side-by-side with those from the last couple of years, it becomes clear that very little has changed on the anti-corruption front. It indicates that we have been stagnating at the bottom third position of the CPI (which uses a scale on which zero (0) represents the poorest rating of “highly corrupt” and ten (10) represents the best rating of “very clean.”) This less than impressive position underscores the continuing need for long-term institutional reforms and system solutions to prevent and punish corrupt officials. Ghana’s persistently poor showing also underscores the position of GII and other anti-corruption focal bodies who have consistently reminded governments in Ghana that to be successful, the fight against corruption must focus on long-term institutional measures and the strengthening of pillars of integrity in the country.

POLITICAL CORRUPTION
This being an election year, GII would like to take this opportunity to sound a note of warning on political corruption which was the theme of the Global Corruption Report (GCR 2004) launched earlier in the year. The abuse of political power for private gain has been the bane of failed political leadership in Ghana and many other developing countries over the years. Successive governments failed to demonstrate the political will to fight corruption among their own appointees and other high-ranking public servants, thereby undermining their ability to effectively address the canker of corruption.

4. HIGHLIGHTS OF 2004 CPI
Now let’s put the index in a more global perspective.
- A total of 106 out of 146 countries score less than 5 against a clean score of 10, according to the new index; 60 countries score less than 3 out of 10, indicating rampant corruption in those countries. - In the Africa Region, 36 countries participated of which Ghana ranked 7th from the top, coming after Botswana, Tunisia, South Africa, Seychelles, Mauritius and Namibia. Botswana leads the region with a score of 6.0. - Corruption is perceived to be most acute in Bangladesh, Haiti, Nigeria, Chad, Myanmar, Azerbajan and Paraguay, all of which have a score less than 2 in the index. - Oil-rich countries like Angola, Azerbajan, Chad, Ecuador, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Libya, Nigeria, Russia, Sudan, Venezuela, Yemen, all have extremely low scores. - Countries with a score of higher than 9, with very low levels of perceived corruption, are predominantly rich countries, namely Finland, New Zealand, Denmark, Iceland, Singapore, Sweden and Switzerland - On the basis of data from sources that were used for both the 2003 and 2004 index, since last year, an increase in perceived corruption can be observed for Bahrain, Belize, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Kuwait, Luxembourg, Mauritius, Oman, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Trinidad and Tobago (Thus, corruption perceived to have worsened since last year). - On the same basis, a fall in corruption was perceived in Austria, Botswana, Czech Republic, El Savador, France, Gambia, Germany, Jordan, Switzerland, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, United Arab Emirates and Uruguay (A perception of better performance in corruption since last year). - As already noted, the index includes only those countries that feature in at least three surveys. As a result, many countries – including some which could be among the most corrupt – are missing because there simply is not enough survey data available.

5. WHAT TI SAYS ABOUT THE CPI 2004
- TI Chairman, Peter Eigen, says, “Corruption in large scale public projects is a daunting obstacle to sustainable development and results in a major loss of public funds needed for education, health care and poverty alleviation, both in developing and developed countries.”
The global anti-corruption movement (TI) estimates that the amount lost due to bribery in government procurement is at least USD 400 billion per year worldwide. Peter Eigen stresses that “If we hope to reach the Millennium Development Goal of halving the number of people living in extreme poverty by 2015, governments need to seriously tackle corruption in public contracting.”
- TI urges western governments to oblige their oil companies to publish what they pay in fees, royalties and other payments to host governments and state oil companies. “Access to this vital information will minimize opportunities for hiding the payments of kick-backs to secure oil tenders, a practice that has blighted the oil industry in transition and post-war economies,” says Eigen. - TI Vice-Chair, Rosa Robledo, says “across the globe, international donors and national governments must do more to ensure transparency in public procurement by introducing no-bribery clauses into all major projects.” Speaking in Bogota, Colombia, today, she said: “Tough sanctions are needed against companies caught bribing, including forfeit of the contract and blacklisting from future bidding.” - Rosa Robledo further urged companies from OECD countries to fulfill their obligations under the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention and stop paying bribes at home and abroad. In countries such as Ghana, it is in our own interest to see to the implementation of the newly passed public procurement legislation. We congratulate the government for passing the Public Procurement Act, and we wait to see the integrity with which the new Procurement Board oversees the public procurement process from now on.

For full details of the TI CPI 2004, visit http://www.transparency.org/surveys/#cpi