Back to Country Monitoring

 

A programme of systematic follow-up to monitor and promote full implementation of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention is required by Article 12 of the Convention. The Working Group on Bribery has undertaken its monitoring work through a system of peer review.

 

The following outlines general issues of country monitoring agreed upon by the Working Group on Bribery in 1998 and revised in 2009.

 

Delegates agree that the monitoring procedure should conform to a number of general principles:

Purpose. The purpose of monitoring is to ensure compliance with the Convention and implementation of the 2009 Recommendations. Monitoring also provides an opportunity to consult on difficulties in implementation and to learn from the experiences of other countries.
 

Effectiveness. Monitoring must be systematic and provide a coherent assessment of whether a participant has implemented the Convention and 2009 Recommendations.
 

Equal treatment. Monitoring must be fair and this means equal treatment for all participants. To ensure equal treatment in the overall monitoring work of the Group, Phase 3 evaluations should be conducted in a way that takes into account the lessons learnt during the Phase 2 evaluation process. The Secretariat has an important role in ensuring the consistent application of procedures and standards, including in ensuring that Phase 3 includes analysis of issues and/or standards which have been developed by the Group since an evaluated country’s Phase 2 evaluation, or were overlooked at the time of the Phase 2 evaluation.
 

Efficiency and effectiveness. The Phase 3 procedure should be efficient, realistic, concise and not overly burdensome. Monitoring must also be effective to guarantee a level playing field.
 

Co-ordination within the OECD. The monitoring of practical applications of some issues might require specific expertise that may be found in other parts of the Organisation. In conducting its evaluation work, the Working Group will endeavour to draw on information and expertise developed by other OECD bodies - particularly the Committee on Fiscal Affairs, the Development Assistance Committee, and the Working Party on Export Credits and Credit Guarantees - on implementation of elements of the Recommendations in their respective fields.
 

Co-ordination with other organisations. International organisations such as the Council of Europe (GRECO and MONEYVAL), the United Nations (UNODC), OAS, and FATF, share the goal of combating corruption and money-laundering, although the scope of their respective efforts and their objectives may differ. All Parties to the Convention want to avoid duplication of effort. The OECD Secretariat will communicate regularly with the Secretariats of relevant organisations, with a view to avoiding duplication among respective exercises to monitor commitments to combat bribery in international business transactions. Contact with these organisations should be particularly attentive to avoiding burdening a particular country with multiple on-site visits, or completion of questionnaires, at the same time or close together.
 

Public information. The 2009 Recommendation on Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions calls on the Working Group to provide regular information to the public on its work and activities and on implementation of the Recommendation. This general responsibility must be balanced against the need for confidentiality which facilitates frank evaluation of performance. If the country being evaluated makes available to the evaluation team information it considers confidential, confidentiality of this information will be respected. Information contained in reports on country performance would remain confidential until it has been declassified. A country concerned could, however, take whatever steps it felt appropriate to release information concerning its report, or to make it publicly available.