27 / 56
ENHANCING JUDICIARY`S ABILITY TO CURB CORRUPTION - A PRACTICAL GUIDE
25
Detection
Before a crime reaches the first phase of the criminal justice system (the investigation phase) it needs
to be detected. The ‘detection’ stage refers to how a state and society uncovers or reports corruption,
prior to judiciary engagement. In the following table, common gaps and loopholes are listed in the
column on the left. In the right-hand column anti-corruption measures or standards that could be
implemented to plug the loopholes and counter the corruption risks are listed
.
GAPS AND loopholes
•
Limited awareness regarding the meaning
of corruption
•
Limited and discretionary access to
complaint mechanisms
•
Limited professional capacity to detect
corruption
•
Limited competencies and capacity to
secure evidence
•
No institutional or international cooperation
•
Limited accountability of the authorities with
regard to their performance in detecting
corruption due to limited transparency
concerning the solutions provided in the
detected corruption cases
•
There are jurisdictions in which protection
of reporting persons is not provided.
•
Across the national or federal jurisdiction
there is no log recording and monitoring
of the unique numbers assigned to each
reported or identified case of corruption.
Reccomendations to
counter THEM
•
Regular citizens and companies have
unrestricted rights to report cases
•
NGOs are recognised as public interest
litigants
•
Administrative bodies and other public
entities, as well as public officials have
legal obligations to report corruption and
are legally liable if they do not report it
•
Anticorruption bodies and antifraud
institutions should report all cases they
investigate and the follow-up of those
cases
•
Judicial authorities have legal competence
to start investigating / prosecuting cases
revealed by media reports and by any other
sources, through ex-officio undersigning
the case procedure
•
The statistic data on the results of the case
detection performance are transparent and
provide grounds for keeping public entities
accountable for their capacity in detecting
corruption
•
Administrative, anticorruption and antifraud
bodies, as well as other public entities with
investigative powers have the legal and the
practical means to preserve the evidence
they have found and which have led to
their reporting of corruption cases
•
Regular citizens and companies can record
evidence of the corruption they report
(such as documents, photos or audio /
video recordings of the bribe request) and
are admissible to be analysed by the court
•
Adequate witnesses and whistleblowers`
protection
•
A `Single Record of Corruption` system to
facilitate monitoring of the progress of the
case