# Missing in action: Where is civic space in UNCAC reviews? URL: https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/missing-in-action-where-is-civic-space-in-uncac-reviews Type: Publication or report Published: 2025-12-09 Updated: 2025-12-15 --- 09 December 2025 Civil society actors in many countries face attacks and significant restrictions in retaliation for exposing and fighting against corruption. They suffer prosecution, detention, violence and intimidation, as well as legal constraints on the establishment, operation and funding of their organisations. This undermines efforts to achieve the objectives of the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), which explicitly recognises the important role of civil society in fighting corruption. The UNCAC Implementation Review Mechanism (IRM) has a key role to play. Through the mechanism, UNCAC States Parties review countries’ implementation of the convention, including their obligations to foster the active participation of civil society. However, the IRM is failing to promote their participation effectively. Forty-three per cent of 115 countries that were reviewed by the IRM did not receive a single recommendation on their implementation of article 13, the section that reflects the right of civil society actors to participate in anti-corruption efforts. In some of these countries, the civic space is effectively closed, such as Afghanistan, Cuba, Russia and Venezuela. When recommendations are made, they are in most cases a mere repetition of what the convention says. Only 27 per cent of recommendations are specific and tailored to the context of the country reviewed, for example recommending a specific reform. The remaining 73 per cent are vague and generic and do not provide meaningful guidance for the implementation of article 13. The IRM paints a picture of a world with very few challenges to civil society’s participation and an abundance of good practices, which does not match reality. The real issues that affect civil society participation – attacks, impunity for attacks, and enforcement of laws that restrict civic space, freedom of association, assembly and expression – are absent from the reviews. The inadequacy of the results is evident when reading the findings of United Nations (UN) human rights bodies for the same countries. In 86 per cent of the cases reviewed for this report, we identified clear differences between what the IRM says on civil society participation and what is documented by UN human rights bodies. To ensure that the UNCAC implementation review process promotes an enabling environment for civil society participation in anti-corruption efforts, Transparency International outlines in this report how the reviews of States’ implementation of article 13 should be strengthened: - The reviews should assess whether the necessary conditions are present for civil society actors to contribute to anti-corruption efforts, including respect for the core freedoms of association, assembly and expression. - They should draw upon the findings and recommendations of UN human rights mechanisms, which are a legitimate source of information for the UNCAC review process. - Technical guidance and documents for reviewers should be amended to ensure clarity on these points. - Transparency and meaningful participation of civil society in the review process should be strengthened. ### Related publications ## [Regional Assessment of Integrity in Political Finance in South Asia, Southeast Asia and East Asia](https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/integrity-political-finance-asia) Publication • 03 September 2026 This report reviews systems across 17 countries to identify the areas of political finance most in need of reform. ## [Connecting the Dots: How financial intelligence units expose corrupt money flows and how they could do more](https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/connecting-the-dots) Publication • 24 June 2026 Financial intelligence units can play a key role in uncovering corruption, but only if they have the powers, resources and access to information they need. ## [Whistleblowing Authorities in Europe: Roles, challenges and lessons learned](https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/whistleblowing-authorities-in-europe-roles-challenges-and-lessons-learned) Publication • 19 June 2026 This report examines the institutional design, mandates and functioning of national whistleblowing authorities across Europe. ## [Strengthening Public Oversight: Good practices for partnerships between civil society and supreme audit institutions](https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/strengthening-public-oversight-good-practices-for-partnerships-between-civil-society-and-supreme-audit-institutions) Publication • 29 May 2026 Stronger collaboration between Supreme Audit Institutions and Civil Society Organisations is needed for better public financial oversight. ## Regions - [Global](https://www.transparency.org/en/region/global) ## Projects - [EU System for an Enabling Environment for Civil Society (EU SEE)](https://www.transparency.org/en/projects/eu-system-for-an-enabling-environment-for-civil-society-eu-see) ![](https://images.transparencycdn.org/images/Report_Missing-in-Action-IMG.png?auto=compress&fit=crop&fm=webp&w=1200) [Download](https://images.transparencycdn.org/images/2025_Report_MissingInActionCivicSpace_EN.pdf)