A good strategy should aim to focus on the causes of corruption and not just its symptoms, on cures and not just diagnosis, on corrupt systems and not just isolated units. It should seek to establish a systematic and concerted approach to countering corruption using the various institutions and mechanisms at its disposal.

The following section provides an overview of the kinds of measures anti-corruption strategies should ideally include.

public service rules

These should include measures aimed at advancing the integrity, transparency and accountability of the public service.

• Regulating official discretion: Provision should be made to ensure appropriate oversight of discretionary decision-making and govern conflicts of interest. Systems ensuring that contacts between government officials and service users are free from undue and improper influence should be put in place. Officials should be able to report any such misconduct without endangering their safety and professional reputation.

• Maintaining a professional and ethical employee culture: Measures aimed at establishing open, transparent, efficient and fair employment systems for public officials should be introduced. These should aim to enforce the highest levels of competence and integrity, foster impartiality of the civil service, safeguard equitable and adequate compensation and encourage hiring and promotion practices that avoid patronage, nepotism and favouritism. This can be achieved through the promotion of codes of conduct and the provision of corresponding education, training and supervision of officials to help them better understand and apply these codes.

• Reducing procedural complexity and enhancing transparency: Measures ensuring clear and transparent procedures extending to all aspects of government regulated transactions, such as state licensing, government guaranteed loans and tax breaks, should be enforced. These procedures should promote fair competition and deter corrupt activity by establishing simplified regulatory environments which abolish overlapping, ambiguous or excessive regulations.

• Establishing effective internal and external reporting procedures: Actions should be taken to safeguard accountability of the public service through, inter alia, appropriate auditing procedures applicable to public administrations, disclosure and/or monitoring of personal assets and liabilities and systems to ensure effective ongoing oversight and reporting.

public participation and oversight

Increased citizen oversight is a key preventative measure, which can act as a deterrent for corrupt practices. Oversight can be made more effective through:

• Public education: Educational campaigns directed at citizens should be conducted, addressing issues such as how public systems work, how to organise effective citizen monitoring, and the role of civil society groups such as NGOs, labour unions, the media, and other organisations. The role of the private sector should also be addressed, including the role played by chambers of commerce and professional associations.

• Public access to information: Systems for access to information extending to areas such as political party finance and electoral campaign funding and expenditure should be promoted. Requirements should be introduced ensuring provision to the public of information including statements on government efforts to ensure lawfulness, honesty and public scrutiny in all its activities. Information concerning corruption, the factors and circumstances that enable it to occur, and measures provided for its prevention should also be made available to the public, non-governmental organisations and other civil society institutions.

• Public scrutiny and accountability: Provisions ensuring transparency in the allocation and management of public resources should be introduced, thus leading to increased accountability through specialised independent anti-corruption bodies as well as civil society groups. Civil society should be engaged in monitoring public sector programmes and activities, and measures should be taken to ensure that they are equipped with the necessary methods and skills to do so.

It is widely recognised that the prevention of corruption should be at the forefront of reform efforts. Enforcement, however, is just as important and it is widely recognised that these two aspects serve to mutually reinforce each other.

domestic law elements

When discussing possible anti-corruption laws, it is important to note that a range of legislative avenues can be followed, including:

• Civil and/or criminal law provisions: These regulate specific bribery and corruption offences and provide for sanctions in cases of guilt. It is important that corruption be regulated as an offence both in its active and passive forms and that both public and private sector corruption is covered. Offences falling under criminal law jurisdiction should be accompanied by adequate criminal procedure provisions regulating the detection, investigation and prosecution of cases. This first category is most commonly found in a country's civil/criminal code.

• Specific anti-corruption laws: These are increasingly being adopted worldwide, but particularly in transition countries, where legislation is often being revisited as a whole and where new laws are being introduced to replace obsolete regulations. These laws can provide a framework for a range of prevention and enforcement aspects, as well as for the establishment of special anti-corruption institutions and agencies. International comparative expertise on such legislation is gradually emerging and should be consulted before and during the drafting process.

• Other legislative pieces: These are laws regulating such issues as access to information, conflict of interest, whistleblower protection, freedom of expression and media freedom. Such legislation is almost, if not equally, as important as the laws directly regulating corruption offences. If effective, they can act both as an important deterrent to corruption and contribute to an environment in which further remedies can be developed.

• Complete legal framework: In summary, for individual laws to be effective they need to be considered in terms of an entire legislative package. Their sum total should reach beyond traditional criminal law provisions and lay the legal framework for prevention, punishment and cure of corruption.

international law elements

Accession to relevant regional and international treaties is an important aspect of anti-corruption efforts and should be provided for in a country's national strategy. Treaties create additional legal commitments for governments to implement via domestic anti-corruption measures. For example, the Council of Europe Conventions prescribe effective and far-reaching domestic criminal and civil law provisions. In addition, due to its often transnational character, there are aspects of corruption that can only be regulated at the international level.

• Additional legal commitments: In this regard, success depends on the effectiveness of provisions contained in the treaty that provide for monitoring of its implementation at the national level, including reporting and evaluation mechanisms.

• Transnational crime: Provisions should be made for mutual legal assistance (through bilateral and multilateral arrangements) for dealing with extraditions, illicit transfers of assets and subsequent repatriation of the proceeds of corruption across borders. These are complex areas involving cross-jurisdictional law enforcement and litigation issues as well as international banking regulations and anti-money laundering provisions.

The strengthening of key institutions to face up to the challenge of countering corruption is one of the most essential aspects in securing the success of anti-corruption reforms. The task here is twofold: to take measures to free the institutions of corruption and to strengthen them so that they can successfully play their role in countering corruption in the country. Many such institutions will be examined separately, as Resource Pages in this Handbook. Listed in this section are therefore some of the main issues relating to these institutional pillars:

• Strengthening key pillars: Comprehensive reforms aimed at ensuring independence, impartiality and competence of the executive, legislative and judiciary should be sequenced and implemented as a matter of utmost priority.

• Institution building at local and regional government levels: Local government, often overlooked in the past, and frequently the first point of contact for citizens accessing public services, is a key pillar. Reforms aimed at ensuring efficient public service delivery, fiscal transparency and public participation in decision-making should be designed and implemented.

• Establishing specialised anti-corruption institutions (such as independent anti-corruption agencies): The establishment of independent agencies should be considered where proper analysis deems that this is appropriate. Such options should only be considered when conventional prevention and law enforcement mechanisms are insufficient or ineffective. Key elements to address are that such institutions have a clear and adequate mandate, are independent from the executive, and have sufficient resources and capacity.

• Civil society development: Measures should be aimed at providing the necessary legal and regulatory frameworks for the successful development of an independent and vibrant civil society as well as at empowering civil society groups to engage in anti-corruption efforts as a key stakeholder.

• Media and watchdogs: Measures should be aimed at securing proper frameworks to ensure the full functioning of independent media and investigative public interest organisations.

• Private sector development: Strengthening the development of a healthy private sector through improving business practice standards and promoting corporate social responsibility is a key priority. Measures can derive from international legal frameworks provided by regional and international conventions, but can also be initiated through business-civil society partnerships. The aim should be to help businesses develop and conscribe to fair, ethical and transparent business practices, whether operating at home or abroad.

The role of civil society in the context of public participation and citizen oversight has already been highlighted in the section on Prevention. In addition to this, civil society can play a significant role throughout the process of implementation of anti-corruption strategies. The following measures underpin this important role:

• Mobilisation: Ongoing information campaigns, public debate and activism should be promoted and facilitated. Practical co-operation in anti-corruption work among government agencies, NGOs, the private sector, professional bodies and scientific-analytical centres should be broadened.

• Consultation: Suitable permanent mechanisms to allow on-going consultation with civil society throughout the reform effort should be established. Clear legal frameworks that guarantee NGOs and other civil society groups the necessary rights to ensure their effective participation in anti-corruption work should be established or strengthened.

• Leadership: The scope for establishing practical roles for civil society leaders in reform efforts, such as appointments to oversight committees, should be considered.

Anti-corruption strategies should contain effective evaluation and monitoring provisions. For example:

• Evaluation: Short, medium and long-term evaluation mechanisms should be developed. Surveys and assessments quantifying corruption at different stages of the strategy (from design to implementation) should be used for this purpose.

• Participatory monitoring at national level: This needs to be done on an on-going basis and is detailed in the paragraphs above. The role of civil society agents is crucial in achieving this.

• Monitoring and know-how exchange at international level: This can often be done effectively in the framework of country implementation reports on regional or international conventions and initiatives, where governments have to report on specific anti-corruption measures taken. These provide a good forum for cross-country comparisons and recommendations. Comparisons can also be successfully pursued through more informal exchanges of expertise at international level.

• ACS need to be locally owned and supported by political will. They can be encouraged and supported by outside partners, such as donors, but the drive and leadership for reform must come from within.
• ACS have significantly improved chances of being successful tools in the hands of reformers when: they are holistic and balanced; tailored to be needs-based, targeted and appropriately sequenced; designed with due consideration of the resources and capacities available to deliver them; and provide for mechanisms to measure and monitor results.
• The mere existence of a strategy is not a panacea for corruption and maladministration, and a series of challenges (both on the domestic and international front) are likely to emerge. These need to be systematically addressed and are likely to include such factors as: resistance from powerful elites implicitly obstructing reforms; political manipulation and abuse of the anti-corruption drive for political purposes; lack of a mobilised civil society; lack of institutional capacity to deliver the results needed. Challenges associated with international aid and assistance provided to implement reforms should also be addressed from the outset. These are likely to include: the imposition of reforms not tailored to the local context; the short to medium term nature of resources and capacity provided; and the perceived public credibility of 'imported' reforms.
• To make implementation feasible, achievable and measurable, strategies should detail the specific anti-corruption measures planned. While content will differ depending on each country's needs, some of the key elements to consider include: effective prevention and law enforcement measures; systemic institution building; civil society mobilisation initiatives; and provisions to monitor and measure implementation. Measures need to be carefully framed and timed to allow for effective sequencing of reform efforts: another crucial element in ensuring overall success.