Skip to main

Author: harveygavin

March 6, 2024 – Following the acquittal of two men charged with paying bribes to secure and maintain a major multi-billion-pound defence contract with Saudi Arabia, a full independent inquiry is now vital in order to examine the evidence presented in court of the British government’s direct involvement in these corrupt arms deals.

Despite it being accepted that millions of pounds of bribes were paid to senior Saudi officials in exchange for lucrative deals to supply military communications equipment between 2007 and 2012, the two former executives of GPT Special Project Management were today found not guilty of corruption after being prosecuted for overseeing these payments.

The two men had argued that British officials, politicians and diplomats knew about and consented to nearly £60 million worth of bribes to the Gulf state since 1978.

It is reasonable to assume that, in deciding to acquit these men, the jury gave serious weight to the significance of the evidence that was presented in court of the UK government’s involvement in the alleged bribes.

Josie Stewart, Director of Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

“This case involves Europe’s largest defence manufacturer, senior members of the Saudi Royal Family, and allegations of high-level involvement by successive UK governments about systemic corruption that went on for decades. The details that emerged in court wouldn’t look out of place in a Hollywood screenplay but sadly the reality surpasses fiction.

“Ian Foxley, the whistleblower who lifted the original lid, had no idea at the time how far the rot would go. Thanks to the court monitoring work of our partners at Spotlight on Corruption, we now have a good idea: it went far, and it went high. We now need to know how far, and how high.”

The case raises serious questions over whether any of the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) procurement staff queried the corrupt payments. If not, then why not? If so, then to what level and who authorised their continuity? And, who within the MoD authorised the decision to continue opaque payments that may have benefitted Saudi government officials after the case was under investigation?

Transparency International Defence & Security joins Spotlight on Corruption’s urgent call for a transparent, independent judge-led inquiry into the full nature and extent of the UK government’s knowledge of and involvement in these defence contract payments made to Saudi Arabia.

This inquiry must consider whether ongoing contractual arrangements are still at risk of corruption, what measures the MoD is putting in place to prevent this, and the adequacy of the MoD’s measures to protect and enable whistleblowers to uncover corruption. A temporary halt should also be placed on any arms transfer licenses approved by the same officials during the period in question until evidence of responsible and corruption-free arms control systems can be provided.

But this inquiry will not be enough, because this case is not an isolated incident. Enormous budgets, close political ties, and high levels of secrecy make the defence and security sectors fertile ground for hidden payments, undue influence, bribery, and corruption.

It’s imperative that we restore integrity to the arms trade in order to rebuild trust in our institutions, safeguard the public interest, and strengthen global security.

As this case shows, the UK, and governments in all arms-supplier countries, must take action to integrate heightened anti-corruption standards into arms transfers. The current controls are clearly not up to the task. They need strengthening with:

Increased investment in proactive measures to detect corruption risks in arms transfers, including during the arms deal and licensing processes.
Development of arms transfer policies that recognise corruption as a significant risk and establish procedures for investigation and mitigation;
Comprehensive disclosure of all intermediaries, subcontractors, and service providers involved, and independent monitoring of all defence sector contracts in which official support is sought or given;
Verification of recipient countries’ anti-corruption systems and inclusion of this verification as criteria in arms transfer/license decision-making; and
Commitment to share information on corrupt recipient(s) to other arms supplier states.

Join Transparency International Defence and Security online as we explore how conflict, insecurity and corruption fuel gender inequality.

As gender advocates gather at the United Nations for the sixty-eighth session of the Commission on the Status of Women, corruption and conflict are notably absent from the agenda.

Join Transparency International Defence and Security online as we explore how conflict, insecurity and corruption fuel gender inequality, and what the international community can do to prioritise this cross-cutting concern in the future.

Gender inequality, corruption and insecurity are part of a vicious cycle. Corruption is shaped by gendered dynamics which often exacerbate insecurity.

At the same time, gender concerns are rarely integrated into anti-corruption measures, and anti-corruption efforts are often missing from high-level discussions about women’s empowerment and gender equality.

Whether we are looking at conflict prevention, conflict response, or peacebuilding processes, integrating gender into anti-corruption measures must become an international priority.

Register today to hear from our expert panel as we discuss how the absence of corruption and gender considerations feed insecurity in the context of their work, and how they work to fight it.

Speakers

Dr Sabrina White, Defence and Security Gender Specialist (Moderator)
Dr Ortrun Merkle, Gender and Anti-Corruption Expert
Javiera Thais Santa Cruz, Gender Adviser, OSCE Gender Issues Programme
María Fernanda Galicia Pacheco, Co-Founder and Principal CEO, Mexiro

February 16, 2024 – Transparency International is to shed light on a critical yet overlooked threat at this year’s Munich Security Conference: the use of ‘strategic corruption’ as a covert geopolitical weapon.

Our panel, on February 16 at 3.30-4.15pm CET, jointly hosted with the Basel Institute on Governance, will explore how ‘strategic corruption’ is a weapon wielded by states to further geopolitical aims and poses a grave threat to international peace and security. This insidious form of corruption goes beyond traditional corrupt practices like bribery and embezzlement and involves sophisticated schemes designed to destabilise and manipulate states from within.

Transparency International Defence & Security welcome the focus on corruption high on the agenda at Munich.Corruption is an existential threat to states and societies and a critical barrier to the protection of individuals. It is behind every pressing security issue facing the world today.

The implications of corruption within defence and security sectors are especially profound. These sectors involve huge amounts of money and high levels of secrecy are particularly susceptible to corruption.

We are calling for governments to:

Recognise the role of corruption as a consistent threat behind all of the security risks assessed in the Munich Security Index and the Munich Security Report. Acknowledge that corruption deepens all inequalities within and between states, which drive current conflicts and geopolitical tensions.
Address corruption as a security threat by integrating anti-corruption measures as a priority in all defence and security policies and practices. Recognise long-term insecurity and inequalities, driven by corruption, as the consequence of short-term payoffs in defence and security decision-making.
Introduce robust anti-corruption controls for arms transfers, including corruption risk assessment and mitigation,and making sure recipient countries have strong anti-corruption governance. Governments should also actively work on finding and addressing the risks of corruption leading to arms being diverted.

Make transparency the norm in defence and security, granting access to information as the rule and restricting it on national security grounds as the exception.

Notes to editors:

The Corruption panel will take place on February 16, at 3.30-4.15pm CET (GMT +1)

It will feature President Arévalo from Guatemala, Prime Minister Denkov from Bulgaria, Transparency International Global Vice Chair Ketakandriana (Ke) Rafitoson and US Senator Sheldon Whitehouse.

It will be live streamed on the MSC website.

February 15, 2024 – As African leaders gather in Addis Ababa for the 2024 African Union (AU) Summit, the urgent agenda of addressing peace and security takes centre stage.

While ensuring the safety of citizens remains the primary obligation of governments, many African countries grapple with persistent conflicts and an alarming recurrence of coups. Internal conflicts, often fuelled by the illicit arms trade and the unlawful exploitation of natural resources, has threatened the stability of several countries on the continent.

Corruption has served as a catalyst for conflicts in Burkina Faso, Sudan, Mali, Nigeria and the Central African Republic, which has poured fuel on the flames of grievances against political leaders and incited violent upheavals.

By eroding public trust and undermining the effectiveness of defence and security institutions, corruption has eroded the rule of law and perpetuated instability. This has led to diminished access to essential services for many and fostered environments conducive to human rights abuses. There is a pressing need to recognise corruption as a security threat in itself and prioritise anti-corruption efforts within security sector reform and governance (SSR/G).

It is imperative that AU members unite in addressing corruption within defence and security sectors as a crucial step toward achieving conflict resolution, peace, stability, and security goals.

Transparency International Defence & Security calls on states to:

Recognise corruption in defence as a security threat: Governments must acknowledge the threat of corruption to national security and allocate resources accordingly.
Empower civilian oversight: Governments should encourage active citizen participation in oversight to enhance transparency and accountability.
Integrate anti-corruption in peace efforts and SSR: Embed anti-corruption measures into conflict resolution, peacebuilding and security sector reform agendas for more resilient societies.

Peace and stability in Africa and around the world cannot be safeguarded without making the efforts to address the insidious threat of corruption proportionate to the threat which it represents.

February 6, 2024 – A successful campaign in Ukraine for the publication of prices paid for non-lethal procurement by the country’s Ministry of Defence highlights how greater transparency can result in significant savings, Transparency International Defence & Security said today.

The Ukrainian Anti-Corruption Action Centre announced officials are now publishing the prices they pay for fuel. The campaigners said since the information had been made public, the Ministry of Defence is paying less than the average wholesale price for gasoline.

Josie Stewart, Head of Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

“This victory for anti-corruption activism illustrates how greater transparency can result in significant savings in procurement and underscores the pivotal role of informed citizens in fortifying integrity in defence and security.

“All too often defence and security matters are deemed beyond the reach of the transparency and accountability that govern other sectors. This case is a reminder that transparency is not just a principle to aspire to, it’s a practical tool that enhances the effectiveness and efficiency of military operations.”

Revelation highlights danger of collusion in arms procurement

February 2, 2024 – Responding to reports that officials in Ukraine had uncovered a mass procurement fraud in the country’s Ministry of Defence, Josie Stewart, Head of Transparency International – Defence & Security, said:

“The confirmation of mass procurement fraud by Ukraine’s Defence Ministry is disheartening and comes at a critical time for a nation grappling with the enduring challenges posed by Russia’s continuing invasion. This revelation poses a significant threat to the safety and security of the Ukrainian people, undermining the effectiveness of the armed forces in their defence efforts.

“We commend the ongoing investigations into this case and the efforts to recover stolen assets, which send a strong signal of Ukraine’s commitment to its continuous and transparent fight against corruption. However, this incident highlights the genuine danger of collusion in arms procurement, with destabilising effects not only on Ukraine’s self-defence but also in neighbouring countries in the Balkans.

“The fight against corruption is an ongoing struggle, and the exposure of such malpractices is a necessary step toward fostering transparency and rebuilding public trust. Transparency International Defence & Security underscores the imperative that, in times of conflict, anti-corruption measures must be central to all defence and security decisions. In Ukraine, corruption in procurement can have life-threatening consequences, compromising military operational capabilities and endangering frontline lives.”

Notes to editors:

Ukraine’s Defence Ministry recently confirmed investigators had uncovered a corruption scheme in the purchase of arms by the country’s military totalling the equivalent of about $40 million.

January 18, 2024 – Transparency International Defence & Security welcomes the seizure of $8.9million that was siphoned off by corrupt Nigerian officials from funds meant to be used to equip the country’s military in its fight against Boko Haram.

The Royal Court in Jersey, a British Crown Dependency, last week ruled that the funds were illicitly obtained by Nigerian officials in 2014.

Instead of being used for legitimate purchases of military equipment, the funds were moved out of Nigeria to a bank account in Jersey. The true source of the funds was obscured using foreign bank accounts and shell companies but the money ultimately benefited family members of Nigeria’s former ruling party.

Nigeria received an ‘E’ in Transparency International Defence & Security’s Government Defence Integrity Index, indicating a very high risk of corruption. Our assessment from 2018/19 showed Nigeria still faces considerable corruption risk across its defence institutions, with extremely limited controls in operations and procurement.

Josie Stewart, Head of Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

“We welcome the Royal Court’s decision to seize these misappropriated funds and begin the process of returning them to the people of Nigeria. This money, rather than supporting the security forces fighting Boko Haram, was diverted to enrich the country’s ruling class.

“This case underscores the pervasive risks of corruption in the defence sector, where the secrecy and complexity inherent in international arms deals, coupled with the large amounts of money at stake, create an environment ripe for abuse of office.

“It is incumbent on the Jersey authorities to return these funds openly and accountably to avoid them being stolen again. The successful return of these assets to the people of Nigeria will not only serve justice but also highlight the critical need for greater transparency in the global arms trade.”

Auwal Ibrahim Musa Rafsanjani, Executive Director of CISLAC/Transparency International Nigeria, added:

“While we wholeheartedly welcome the decision, we are hopeful that when repatriated, the funds will be judiciously utilised in improving the living standards of common Nigerians.

“We find it disturbing that money, rather than supporting the security forces fighting Boko Haram, was diverted to enrich the country’s ruling class.

“We on this note call on Nigerian Government to strengthen the procurement process in the defence and security sector through enhanced transparency and accountability, regular review as well as independent auditing.

“We also call on relevant legislative Committees in the National Assembly and Civil Society to galvanise external oversight of the Defence and Security through regular tracking and scrutiny of budgetary allocation, appropriation, implementation and procurement activities.”

January 17, 2024 – Responding to the escalating violence in Ecuador, Josie Stewart, Head of Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

“Effective civil engagement and open dialogue are the cornerstones for re-establishing peace and stability.

“We emphasise that public trust in defence and security forces hinges on transparency, particularly during times of crisis. It is crucial that the Ecuadorian government maintains transparency and accountability and ensures that its defence and security actions are open to public scrutiny.

“We firmly support the Ecuadorian citizens in their pursuit of a defence and security sector that is not only effective but also operates with transparency and accountability.”

Transparency International highlights key areas for anti-corruption efforts

January 15, 2024 – Following the elections in Taiwan, Ara Marcen Naval, Head of Advocacy at Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

“Following Taiwan’s important election, it’s imperative for the new president and legislature to balance their approach towards external threats with a strong stance against corruption. The country has already taken significant steps to mitigate corruption risk in its defence & security sector, as evidenced by its high score in our Government Defence Integrity Index, but challenges remain in defence contract offsets and the roles of brokers and agents in arms deals.

“These murky areas are especially prone to corruption, which can undermine national security and public trust. We urge the incoming administration to enhance efforts to ensure transparency and integrity, particularly in defence procurement. Strengthening these areas will build on existing progress and ensure that Taiwan’s defence sector not only remains effective and resilient, but also fosters a sense of accountability and credibility within the international community.

“By prioritising transparency and integrity in defence procurement, the incoming administration can fortify Taiwan’s position as a responsible global player. This commitment will not only bolster national security but also contribute to building enduring partnerships, fostering regional stability, and upholding the principles of good governance on the global stage.”

Notes to editors:

The Government Defence Integrity Index (GDI) scores and ranks nearly 90 countries on the quality of institutional controls to manage the risk of corruption in defence and security institutions.

Taiwan achieved an overall rank of B, indicating a low risk of defence & security corruption.

However Taiwan was ranked C, indicating a moderate risk of corruption, on the Index’s ‘procurement’ indicator.

This assesses the level of safeguards against corruption in arms deals and includes the use of defence contract offsets and the roles of brokers and agents.

Transparency International Defence & Security will be publishing new research on the corruption risk posed by offsets later this year.

December 19, 2023 – Transparency International Defence & Security welcomes the action taken in sanctioning two former Afghan officials for ‘widespread involvement in international corruption’. This move is an important step in acknowledging and addressing the impacts that corrupt practices in the defence and security sectors have on both national and international security.

The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) recently announced that the US Treasury Department had sanctioned two individuals for corruption during 2014 to 2019 that included theft of fuel intended for the prior Afghan government’s security forces.

SIGAR said this theft denied coalition and Afghan forces of a vital resource and only made the Taliban stronger.

This corruption took place at a time when national and international efforts were supposed to be focussed on building the Afghan forces to make them more able to provide effective security. Instead, initiatives to reform and rebuild the security sector took place without the necessary focus on anti-corruption.

Josie Stewart, Director of Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

“These welcome sanctions underscore a stark reality: corruption in the defence sector is not just about theft of resources, but a direct threat to national and global security. Authorities in the United States deserve congratulations for their work in blocking these individuals from accessing the proceeds of their corruption.

“The theft of vital resources like fuel can strengthen adversaries such as the Taliban while simultaneously weakening the security forces tasked with keeping citizens safe.

“This case should highlight vividly why it’s time for more countries to step up and work towards ending the grave impact of corruption on global peace and security.

“Rather than addressing the issue after it has already had chance to take root, the international community must work urgently on strengthening defence and security institutions against the threat of corruption before its corrosive effects can set in.”

Notes to editors:

This case study by Transparency International Defence & Security highlights how rampant corruption – from seemingly petty offences to grand-scale corruption– affected all levels of the Afghan government during the initial US and subsequent International Security Assistance Force operations in the country.

A 2022 report by the UK’s Independent Commission for Aid Impact into Britain’s £3.5bn aid to Afghanistan between 2000 and 2020 concluded that “channelling funding in such high volumes through weak state institutions distorted the political process and contributed to entrenched corruption.”

Josie Stewart, head of Transparency International Defence & Security, reflects on a busy week at the Tenth session of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption in Atlanta.

The 10th session of the Conference of the States Parties (CoSP) to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) showed two things very clearly: the fight against corruption is receiving more attention than ever – but that attention has not yet translated into enough action, especially in defence and security.

Let’s start with the good news. The past week, I and more than 1,000 others spent six days running around a bustling conference centre in Atlanta, USA. Countries sent large delegations, and negotiations continued late into the nights. Unlike previous CoSPs, the 10th session saw significant attendance from global civil society, ensuring transparency and meaningful engagement.

And there is more good news. Thanks in part to the host country’s leadership, we saw corruption recognised as the security threat that it is. During the two days of opening remarks from participants, speaker after speaker acknowledged the impact that corruption has on stability, peace, and security, and I also had the pleasure of taking part in a panel discussion on this topic. We hope to see this sentiment reflected in the flagship resolution of the CoSP, the Atlanta Declaration, once it is published.

But here come the caveats. We all spent a lot of time admiring the problem, rehashing time and again the fact that corruption is bad, and there was a lot of preaching to the choir. Even in the many policy discussions and panel events that took place alongside the formal negotiations, where there was markedly little challenge, new thinking that could really push the anti-corruption agenda forward, or focus on concrete actions that could and should be advanced.

Without concrete actions, acknowledgement of corruption as a security threat remains just the first step to addressing it. And at CoSP10, the international anti-corruption community was a long way short of real action when it comes to addressing corruption in defence and security.

I’ve seen the effects of this first hand – and they are devastating.

During my time leading the UK Government’s anti-corruption agenda in Afghanistan, I witnessed the devastating effects of neglecting corruption. The failure to prioritize combating corruption led to the disintegration of the Afghan national defence forces as the Taliban advanced. In South Sudan, while working on defence governance reform, I saw how accountability and transparency were sidelined, allowing corruption in the military to fester.

Corruption is about money and power, and there’s an abundance of both in defence and security. Yet anti-corruption policy communities rarely have meaningful engagement with national security and defence policy communities. Until this week, there was no discussion about defence and security at the UNCAC CoSP

So now the words are there at least, what needs to be done?

We’re challenging states to examine how well their anti-corruption efforts are identifying and taking on the tough political choices that are needed in order to address corruption as a security threat, and we’re challenging states to focus on addressing corruption within their defence and security sectors as a critical aspect of their wider anti-corruption agendas. We want an agreed resolution on this in two years’ time, when the next UNCAC CoSP takes place.

We need to call corruption in defence and security by its name: a threat to human, national and international security. These words are now being spoken by many, but getting from words to actions, from acknowledgements to clear commitments, is the next challenge, and it is a challenge that we are committed to meet head on.

December 5, 2023 – Four of the world’s 10 biggest arms producers listed in new research from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) show a concerning lack of commitment to anti-corruption, Transparency International Defence & Security said today.

SIPRI’s 2022 Arms Industry Database lists the top 100 arms-producing and military services companies. Four of the top 10 score either an E or F Transparency International’s Defence Companies Index (DCI), which assesses and ranks major global defence companies based on their commitment to anti-corruption and transparency.

In the top four, SIPRI’s data shows General Dynamics (US), NORINCO and AVIC (China), and Rostec (Russia), collectively responsible for $876 billion in global arms trade last year. All scored poorly in the DCI, indicating a minimal or extremely poor commitment to anti-corruption.

The problem extends beyond these firms, with dozens of other companies in the top 100 assessed by the DCI to show poor or non-existent commitment to anti-corruption.

This is alarming given SIPRI’s data on the increasing demand for arms and military services globally. Corruption in the arms trade can have devastating impacts on people’s lives, leading to heightened conflict and violence, undermining governance and the rule of law, diverting resources from essential public services, and eroding trust in institutions.

Josie Stewart, Programme Director at Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

“The latest SIPRI report, when combined with our previous research on arms producers’ commitment to anti-corruption, paints a troubling picture. Far too many of the world’s biggest arms producers are falling short in addressing corruption risks.

“This should urgently motivate governments and the international community to prioritise addressing these issues in the defence and security sectors.

“As demand for arms and military services grows, it’s crucial to ensure that anti-corruption standards remain a forefront consideration, not secondary to trade, foreign, and defence policy objectives. The cost of neglecting integrity and transparency in these sectors is too great to ignore.”

Notes to editors:

Transparency International is a global movement that combats corruption and promotes transparency, accountability, and integrity in government, politics, and business worldwide.

Transparency International – Defence & Security is one of Transparency International’s global programmes and is committed to tackling corruption in the global defence and security sector.

The Defence Companies Index on Anti-Corruption and Corporate Transparency (DCI) assesses the levels of public commitment to anti-corruption and transparency in the corporate policies and procedures of 134 of the world’s largest defence companies. By analysing what companies are publicly committing to in terms of their openness, policies and procedures, the DCI seeks to inspire reform in the defence sector, thereby reducing corruption and its impact.