http://www.transparency.org http://www.transparency.org/assets/images/shared/logo_without_motto_88x19.jpg A collection of the latest publications from Transparency International press@transparency.org Copyright 2017 2017-07-13T19:34:54+02:00 daily 2 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/create_lebanon https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/create_lebanon This report presents research that looked at the assistance provided to Syrian refugees and affected host communities in Lebanon, as part of the CREATE project (Collective Commitment to Enhance Accountability and Transparency in Emergencies) led by Transparency International (TI) in partnership with Humanitarian Outcomes (HO) and Groupe URD, funded by the European Commission Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO). The objectives of the research were: to highlight the risks to integrity which humanitarian actors face in Lebanon; to highlight the preventive/mitigation measures, tools and good practices implemented by humanitarian actors to guarantee the integrity of their operations; and to make actionable recommendations to humanitarian actors to enhance the integrity of the response to the Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon. 
]]> 2017-06-15T07:00:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/transparency_participation_an_evaluation_anti_corruption_review_mechanisms https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/transparency_participation_an_evaluation_anti_corruption_review_mechanisms This report investigates levels of transparency and civil society participation in the international meetings of six anti-corruption review mechanisms and finds important deficiencies in their frameworks and performance. Anti-corruption review mechanisms and their processes assess national compliance with international anti-corruption standards and formulate related policies and priorities. However, the mechanisms are performing badly when it comes to respect for international human rights standards on access to information and civil society participation. The report argues that this failure to comply with international standards undermines the legitimacy, credibility and effectiveness of the work of the anti-corruption review mechanisms and should be promptly remedied.  
]]> 2017-06-12T10:24:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/methodological_note_for_sdg_shadow_reporting_questionnaire https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/methodological_note_for_sdg_shadow_reporting_questionnaire The questionnaire is designed to help assess progress towards three SDG targets linked to anti-corruption and government transparency – 16.4, 16.5 and 16.10. A number of policy areas are covered under each of these three SDG targets. They provide a holistic overview of a country’s anti-corruption progress in a way that goes beyond the narrow understanding of corruption captured by the official global indicators.

Each policy area is assessed against three elements. First, a total of 66 questions (13 of which are optional) relate to the de jure legal and institutional framework. These questions require the researcher to provide a score, which can be used to develop a legal scorecard for each country. Second, 18 questions (8 of which are optional) concern country data from assessments and indices produced by civil society groups and international organisations. Finally, there are 61 questions (including 20 optional ones) which ask the researcher to provide a qualitative appraisal of the country’s de facto efforts to tackle corruption.

The questionnaire itself can be found here. 
]]>
Each policy area is assessed against three elements. First, a total of 66 questions (13 of which are optional) relate to the de jure legal and institutional framework. These questions require the researcher to provide a score, which can be used to develop a legal scorecard for each country. Second, 18 questions (8 of which are optional) concern country data from assessments and indices produced by civil society groups and international organisations. Finally, there are 61 questions (including 20 optional ones) which ask the researcher to provide a qualitative appraisal of the country’s de facto efforts to tackle corruption.

The questionnaire itself can be found here.]]> 2017-05-19T14:07:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/corruption_and_sustainable_development_goals_shadow_reporting_questionnaire https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/corruption_and_sustainable_development_goals_shadow_reporting_questionnaire The purpose of this questionnaire is to enable civil society organisations to conduct an independent appraisal of their country’s progress in fighting corruption, tackling illicit financial flows, and improving transparency and access to information, as national governments begin implementing the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.

The information gleaned from this exercise can be used as an input into two processes. At the global level, this information can be used to complement National Voluntary Reviews at the High-Level Political Forum in July 2017, while at national level, the information generated can feed into governmental SDG reporting processes taking place on a rolling basis in each country.

The methodological note can be found here. 
]]>
The information gleaned from this exercise can be used as an input into two processes. At the global level, this information can be used to complement National Voluntary Reviews at the High-Level Political Forum in July 2017, while at national level, the information generated can feed into governmental SDG reporting processes taking place on a rolling basis in each country.

The methodological note can be found here.]]> 2017-05-19T13:57:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_clean_supply_chains_2017 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_clean_supply_chains_2017 In a globalised world, acting with integrity is not limited to refraining from giving or demanding a bribe. It also includes not violating human rights or the environment. Companies and their suppliers need to be clean and meet social and environmental standards. 
]]> 2017-05-17T18:34:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_open_data_and_corruption_2017 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_open_data_and_corruption_2017 As technology advances, the methods of the corrupt are also getting more sophisticated and difficult to foil. It is clear that the digital revolution opportunities for anti-corruption professionals and activists. With millions of gigabytes of data produced every day by governments and businesses worldwide, whole new avenues open up for the fight against corruption. When government and other data relevant to governance is open, accessible and interoperable, the possibilities for scrutiny and accountability increase immensely. 
]]> 2017-05-17T18:31:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_open_contracting_in_healthcare_procurement_2017 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_open_contracting_in_healthcare_procurement_2017 Procuring decent medicines, quality facilities and suitable equipment are keystones in the delivery of effective healthcare. But deciding what to buy, at what price and from whom is a difficult job. Healthcare providers need access to stocks of several hundred medicines and a wide range of non-durable goods, which are all continually depleted and must be renewed. Healthcare and public procurement both suffer from high levels of corruption. 
]]> 2017-05-17T18:28:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_professional_gatekeepers_real_estate_and_luxury_goods_20 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_professional_gatekeepers_real_estate_and_luxury_goods_20 Two of the sectors that are particularly attractive for the laundering of corrupt proceeds, in particular in cases of Grand Corruption, are the real estate and luxury goods and assets sectors. Assessments of national anti-money laundering frameworks consistently identify non-financial sectors as being at risk of facilitating the laundering of corrupt and criminal funds. 
]]> 2017-05-17T18:24:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_anti_money_laundering_2017 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_anti_money_laundering_2017 Policy discussions within the confines of a largely closed, expert-driven anti-money laundering (AML) space have not generated sufficiently effective AML policies. No country is yet compliant with the international FATF standards. 
]]> 2017-05-17T18:19:00+00:00 https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/protecting_climate_finance_progress_report_on_the_cifs_anti_corruption_poli https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/protecting_climate_finance_progress_report_on_the_cifs_anti_corruption_poli In 2014, Transparency International published its first Anti-corruption Assessment of the Climate Investment Funds. The assessment reviewed the Funds’ governance designs and their transparency, accountability, and integrity policies and procedures with a view to identifying and promoting best practices for the effective governance of climate finance. The initial assessment recognised a number of best practices exhibited by the Funds, including their commitment to transparency, accountability and participation. It also identified areas for improvement, including the need for an ethics policy, better disclosure of key policies and contracts, and coordinated stakeholder engagement.

This Progress Report reviews the steps taken by the Climate Investment Funds to respond to TI’s 2014 recommendations. The review was conducted by a desk study which assessed documentation and decisions taken between the 12th and 15th Joint Clean Technology Fund-Strategic Climate Fund Trust Fund Committee meetings (June 2014-June 2016). The review was further supported by engaging with the Climate Investment Funds Administration Unit for comments based on the desk study findings, as well as respective multilateral development banks (as relevant). Overall, the review tracked progress against three categories: sufficient progress, medium progress, and no/little progress, as defined in the attached methodology. The Progress Report also recognises that the future direction of the Climate Investment Funds is under consideration, and therefore the application of outstanding recommendations may be affected accordingly. 
]]>
This Progress Report reviews the steps taken by the Climate Investment Funds to respond to TI’s 2014 recommendations. The review was conducted by a desk study which assessed documentation and decisions taken between the 12th and 15th Joint Clean Technology Fund-Strategic Climate Fund Trust Fund Committee meetings (June 2014-June 2016). The review was further supported by engaging with the Climate Investment Funds Administration Unit for comments based on the desk study findings, as well as respective multilateral development banks (as relevant). Overall, the review tracked progress against three categories: sufficient progress, medium progress, and no/little progress, as defined in the attached methodology. The Progress Report also recognises that the future direction of the Climate Investment Funds is under consideration, and therefore the application of outstanding recommendations may be affected accordingly.]]> 2017-05-05T09:37:00+00:00