43 countries, 600 commitments: Was the London Anti-Corruption Summit a success?

43 countries, 600 commitments: Was the London Anti-Corruption Summit a success?

Forty three countries from all global regions came to London in May for the Anti-Corruption Summit, a Summit intending to "put fighting corruption at the heart of our international institutions". They signed the  Global Declaration against Corruption and made 600 country-specific Summit commitments.

We assessed whether these commitments are

Downloads with full results

Download the full results commitment database

Download and read our full report about the 2016 Anti-Corruption Summit


Overall Transparency International judged the Summit a success in promoting new and ambitious anti-corruption pledges on a comprehensive set of key issues in a wide range of countries. But the real verdict will only come when governments follow through and adopt the reforms that prevent corruption and prosecute corruption when it happens. 

Transparency International found that:

  • More than half of all Summit commitments - 56 per cent - are concrete.
  • About a third – 33 per cent – are new, that is, generated by the Summit
  • About a third – 30 per cent – are ambitious. 

Key findings

Transparency International called for the Summit to deliver concrete, ambitious and measureable pledges on preventing corruption, punishing the corrupt and ending impunity and protecting and empowering citizens who report corruption. Here are some of the key findings:

  • Beneficial ownership information generated the largest number of commitments from Summit participants. Thirty-six countries made a total of 110 commitments.
  • Transparency International also called for governments to support protective measures for activists and whistleblowers. Fifteen countries said they would make it easier for citizens to report corruption and to protect whistleblowers who take personal risks to unveil corruption.
  • Georgia, Switzerland, the Ukraine and the UK made mostly ‘new’ commitments.
  • The majority of commitments made by Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Trinidad and Tobago and Mexico from the Americas are considered ‘not new’.
  • China and South Africa are the only two countries to make not a single “new” commitment.

Fantastically corrupt, or fantastically ambitious?

Afghanistan and Nigeria, two countries labelled as ‘fantastically corrupt’ just days before the Summit, exceeded the expectations of many. Both are in the top 5 countries making the most new commitments. In addition, 80 per cent of Afghanistan’s commitments and 72 per cent of Nigeria’s commitments are judged ‘ambitious’ or ‘somewhat ambitious’.

In contrast, some of the world’s major and emerging economies fell short. The majority of Brazil’s commitments are judged ‘not new’ and ‘not ambitious’. Although all of China’s commitments are assessed as ambitious, none are new.


Civil Society's role

Governments did not adopt any formal mechanism for implementation of Summit commitments although the UN have stated they will discuss follow up at the UN General Assembly in September 2017. It is absolutely crucial therefore that civil society pick up the baton and ensure that countries are held accountable for the commitments made.

Timed with the release of the global database, Transparency International UK releases their method for monitoring the commitments made by the UK government. Their UK Anti-Corruption Pledge Tracker will show exactly what commitments are made, who is responsible for them and the state of play according to publicly available information. This also ensures that governments must be transparent and communicative in their efforts to implement their own commitments.

By the UN General Assembly in 2017 we should be able to see which countries have been true to their words and which have walked away. Along the way will do all we can to keep them honest.

Download and read our full report about the 2016 Summit

Editor's note: On 24 May 2017 this feature was amended to correct the link to the UK Anti-Corruption Pledge Tracker.

For any press enquiries please contact press@transparency.org

Latest

Support Transparency International

Support Us

Next week governments can take a step to close down secrecy jurisdictions. Will they?

National financial regulators attending the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) plenary in Paris 16 – 21 February have the opportunity to significantly reduce money laundering, corruption and terror financing. They must not squander the opportunity.

Why don’t the victims of bribery share in the record-breaking Airbus settlement?

Last Friday, French, UK and US authorities announced that Airbus would pay record penalties for foreign bribery. Notably absent in the agreements are any plans to share the penalty payment with the countries where the company was paying bribes.

Nadie es perfecto

Los países con las puntuaciones más altas en el IPC, como Dinamarca, Suiza e Islandia, no son inmunes a la corrupción. Si bien el IPC muestra que los sectores públicos en estos países están entre los menos corruptos del mundo, la corrupción existe, especialmente en casos de lavado de dinero y otras formas de corrupción en el sector privado.

مشكلة في الأعلى

Переполох на верху

Страны с самым высоким рейтингом по ИВК, такие как Дания, Швейцария и Исландия, не защищены от коррупции. Хотя ИВК показывает, что государственный сектор в этих странах является одним из самых чистых в мире, коррупция все еще существует, особенно в случаях отмывания денег и другой коррупции в частном секторе.

Problèmes au sommet

Les pays les mieux classés sur l’IPC comme le Danemark, la Suisse et l’Islande ne sont pas à l’abri de la corruption. Bien que l’IPC montre que les secteurs publics de ces pays sont parmi les moins corrompus au monde, la corruption existe toujours, en particulier dans les cas de blanchiment d’argent et d’autres formes de corruption du secteur privé.

Индекс восприятия коррупции 2019

Индекс восприятия коррупции 2019 года выявил, что огромное число стран практически не показывает улучшения в борьбе с коррупцией. Наш анализ также показывает, что сокращение больших денег в политике и содействие инклюзивному принятию политических решений необходимы для сдерживания коррупции.

Social Media

Follow us on Social Media