No matter how overt and obvious its consequences are for society, corruption is a crime that prefers to remain covert and concealed. It can take root in many areas of a society, whether in government or law enforcement, or among other actors like the media, business, political parties and so on.
Transparency International developed the National Integrity System approach as a comprehensive means of assessing a country’s anti-corruption efficacy sector by sector. It allows a nuanced analysis of national efforts to stamp out corruption.
Pillars of national integrity
The National Integrity System evaluates key ‘pillars’ in a country’s governance system, both in terms of their internal corruption risks and their contribution to fighting corruption in society at large.
When all the pillars in a National Integrity System are functioning well, corruption remains in check. If some or all of the pillars wobble, these weaknesses can allow corruption to thrive and damage a society.
The pillars analysed in a National Integrity System assessment typically include:
- Legislative branch of government
- Executive branch of government
- Public sector
- Law enforcement
- Electoral management body
- Audit institution
- Anti-corruption agencies
- Political parties
- Civil society
National Integrity System assessments
A National Integrity System assessment examines both the formal framework of each pillar and the actual institutional practice. The analysis highlights discrepancies between the formal provisions and reality on the ground, making it clear where there is room for improvement.
The analysis is undertaken via a consultative approach, involving the key anti-corruption agents in government, civil society, the business community and other sectors.
Conclusions are drawn together in a comprehensive national report to build momentum, political will and civic pressure for relevant reform initiatives.
Ultimately, strengthening the National Integrity System promotes better governance across all aspects of a society and contributes to a more just society overall.
For further information about the National Integrity Systems approach, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org
Surveys - The 2013 New Zealand National Integrity System (NIS) Assessment finds that New Zealand’s national integrity system remains fundamentally strong. Since the first NIS assessment of New Zealand in 2003, a welcome strengthening of transparency and accountability has occurred in some areas.
Surveys - This report presents the Belgian « National Integrity System » (NIS). The thirteen pillars which form the NIS have been analysed through a series of questions. For the most part, the formal framework (legal framework) and, to a lesser degree, the practical implementation (practice) has been ...
Surveys - This NIS aims to give a holistic view of the whole national integrity system in the Netherlands, and encompasses the evaluation of a broad range of institutions. This is at the expense of a very detailed assessment of specific aspects of the anti-corruption system.
Surveys - According with the results of the Portuguese NIS study, the political system (Executive and Legislative pillars) and the enforcement system (Judiciary, Law Enforcement and Anti‐Corruption Agencies pillars) are the most fragile areas of the National Integrity System. Without the political will and ...
Surveys - Italy's National Integrity System is far from robust, with an average NIS score of 55.04 per cent (scores range from 0 [lowest or worst] to 100 [highest or best]). Corruption is able to flourish almost everywhere, as state institutions enjoy considerable autonomy, which does not correspond to ...