As we enter the final stretch of India’s Presidency of the G20, what progress has been made in relation to key anti-corruption priorities? Sanjeeta Pant and Kathryn Westmore take a closer look.

The G20 Indian Presidency and Anti-Corruption Priorities

When India took over the Presidency of the G20 earlier this year, there was real hope that it would herald an increased focus on anti-corruption issues. As the final meeting of the Anti-Corruption Working Group (ACWG) approaches, attention has turned to what progress has been made on the three anti-corruption priorities for this year and what might lie ahead for the Brazilian G20 Presidency. 

Integrity and Effectiveness of Public Bodies 

Article 6 under the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), which all the G20 countries have adopted, lays out the framework for preventive anti-corruption bodies. The G20’s approach under this Article focuses on strengthening anti-corruption frameworks through robust policies, codes of conduct, sharing best practices, and strengthening audit institutions. The Indian G20 Presidency aims to deliver a ‘High-Level Principles on the Integrity and Effectiveness of Public Bodies and Authorities Responsible for Preventing and Combating Corruption.’

So far, the G20’s progress on this has been mixed. For instance, the latest reports through the UNCAC reviews show that countries like Australia, Germany, Italy, the Republic of Korea, the UK, and the US have the necessary legal and legislative frameworks to ensure an independent and well-resourced anti-corruption body to prevent and fight corruption. Whereas anti-corruption bodies in member countries like Mexico and South Africa are not entirely independent or do not have the necessary staff or resources to carry out their mandates effectively. Some examples of good practice include the funding of Italy’s National Anti-Corruption Authority through the levying of a service charge in the public procurement process; and the active participation of multiple stakeholders- including civil society and the private sector- in monitoring anti-corruption policies in Korea.

Information sharing and law enforcement 

Following the conclusion of the ACWG’s work for the year, the group will publish the ‘High-Level Principles for Strengthening Law Enforcement related International Cooperation and Information Sharing for Combating Corruption.’ Corruption is a crime that crosses borders; that is why international cooperation and collaboration are essential and have been a key area of focus for the G20 for many years. Article 48 of UNCAC – the only legally binding international anti-corruption multilateral treaty – recognizes its importance. 

Despite many international initiatives led by the G20 and member countries over the last decade, such as the International Anti-Corruption Coordination Centre (IACCC) and the GlobE network, studies have found significant challenges in implementing effective cross-border collaboration. These challenges include a lack of resources or capacity, cultural and/or language differences, and a lack of trust between countries. There is also an overreliance by law enforcement authorities on cumbersome formal processes of international information sharing, and there is a need for more informal mechanisms which can allow for near-real-time and proactive sharing of information. It is expected that these challenges will feature in the new principles published by the ACWG shortly, along with the need for G20 countries to invest in capacity building and the provision of technical assistance to developing countries. 

Asset recovery 

Improving the woeful global track record on asset recovery is essential for the G20 and other international bodies such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and Interpol. While Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has sparked an international debate about what to do with Russian assets which may be the proceeds of corruption, asset recovery has been a priority for the G20 for many years. 

There have been some notable examples of successes when it comes to asset recovery recently. The United States has led efforts to repatriate funds linked to the former Nigerian Dictator General Sani Abacha and his co-conspirators back to Nigeria. Over $330m has been returned to the Nigerian government in the last three years. France has introduced a law called Biens Mal Acquis (“ill-gotten gains”) which allows activists and civil society to take action against corrupt officials in former French colonies, recover the assets and repatriate them. This is an excellent example of the role of civil society in ensuring successful asset recovery, and the model has been used in other countries, including Spain and Switzerland. Under the current Presidency, the ACWG has also been working on collating step-by-step guides to asset recovery in each of the G20 countries. While this is an excellent initiative, only four countries- Canada, India, Mexico and Turkey- have contributed to date. Completing this process for all G20 countries before the end of the Indian Presidency will be an important step. 

Crisis of Corruption

Countries worldwide are going through a poly-crisis- from economic downturns to conflicts to the impacts of climate change- with minimal financial resources. Corruption is not regarded as a global crisis, although it robs developing economies of an estimated $20bn to $40bn a year. Similarly, data indicates that the least corrupt countries within the same income bracket collect 4% more of GDP in tax revenues than highly corrupt countries. Corruption is a global crisis- and whether the Brazilian Presidency will address the right anti-corruption issues and will build the relevant partnerships to address them remains to be seen.

*Kathryn Westmore is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Financial Crime and Security at RUSI. Sanjeeta Pant is a Programs and Learning Manager at Accountability Lab. 

Accountability Lab