Skip to main

Category: Uncategorised

Less than a month into his new role as Director of our Defence and Security Programme, we sit down with Steve and find out why he joined the fight against corruption and what he’s most looking forward to.

What inspired you to join Transparency International?

I had been aware of TI’s work, especially the Government Defence Index for some time having used the index while studying at Pakistan’s National Defence University. TI’s Corruption Perceptions Index was also in use at the British High Commission in Islamabad during my time there in 2013-15.  But while I was aware of the Movement, I hadn’t necessarily considered it as possible second career option while I was still serving in the military. What I was more certain of however, was that when I did retire from military service, I wanted to find a role in the INGO sector that would allow me to continue to be involved in international development. That said, I was also acutely conscious that although I had worked with and alongside good people from the sector before, moving into it ‘from the outside’ as it were, would be a huge challenge, as anyone that has ‘jumped sector’ would attest to. So when I discovered that TI were recruiting a new Director of the Defence & Security Programme I leapt at the opportunity. It encapsulated everything I was looking for. It would allow me to transition from the military to the INGO sector, yet was a role that would allow me to leverage the experience I had gained over a 30-year career in the Royal Marines. The learning curve would of course still be very steep, but it would be scalable; and I sensed that I could quickly add value, while those other – more sector specific skills – caught up.                    

How has your career in the military shaped your view of corruption?

For most of my career, my understanding of corruption was probably rather rudimentary. When I had come across it, for example as a junior officer working with foreign militaries, it was seen through the lens of low-level criminality. It was generally viewed as something endemic to a culture or a country that had to be accepted as ‘just the way things are’.  Sure, we needed to recognise it; be aware of its pitfalls and work around it, but it wasn’t something that we could tackle. Indeed, it wasn’t even our job to do so, that sort of thing was seen as being for law enforcement agencies to take on, not the military. It wasn’t until I was involved in the Afghan Campaign as planning officer later in my career that I started to realise that one of the reasons why the ISAF coalition could never seem to persuade ordinary Afghans to side with the international community instead of the Taliban, was because although we were offering security, we were doing so without also offering justice. To me, the problem we were facing in Afghanistan seemed to be as much about Justice Sector Reform as it was Defence Sector Reform, yet the international community either failed see it as a priority, or simply equated justice reform with police reform. The flaw in my analysis then, was that while I had recognised a symptom, I hadn’t diagnosed its underlying cause namely the affront that is corruption.  The only consolation is that I wasn’t just me that had failed to recognise the real nature of the insurgency in Afghanistan, most if not all of us had, particularly in the formative stages of the conflict.       

What do you think are the key challenges for tackling corruption in the defence and security sector going forwards?

That’s a difficult one to answer in my first month in TI and when I’m still in the foothills of that learning curve I described. It’s not just the size, complexity and scope of the sector that is a challenge, but also what I’ve heard described as ‘defence exceptionalism’. In essence that (rather convenient) sense within the sector, that defence is inherently different; that by its very nature it has to be shrouded behind a veil of secrecy.  Some parts of it undoubtedly do, but in my experience such areas are actually the exception rather than the rule and the more self-aware, confident and professional a defence institution is, the more it understands that rather than a threat, transparency is actually a strength and a safe guard. Beyond that, a much bigger concern are those forces that together are increasingly challenging liberal democracy and the rules based international order. The headwinds of populism and authoritarianism are stiffening, which will make the job of anyone engaged in ‘speaking truth to power’ both harder and in some cases, more dangerous. Conversely of course, it also makes the job of TI-DS – and many others in civil society – even more important.                 

What are you looking forward to most about the role?

To be able to build an even better and more impactful team around me that can take on the fight against corruption in this most challenging of sectors. We already have a diverse range of fantastically talented and committed people in the Programme and I know there are more out there that both want and deserve to join us in this important endeavour – whether that be here in London, in a sister TI Chapter or working as individuals in support of our projects. I also want to build on the inspired legacy of my predecessor who did so much of the heavy lifting required to chart our current course.      

What can we expect for your team in the coming months?

I hope our scheduled programme of work will speak for itself. What won’t be seen by those outside the team, is all the work we are about to embark on that’s designed to improve our internal management processes. It isn’t glamourous and it isn’t why we joined TI, but it is essential. And if we can get it right – and we will – the pay-off should actually be a reduction in the time spent administrating ourselves and correspondingly more time to think about how we deliver lasting impact – and that’s the fun part of the job.      

16th January 2019, London – Transparency International is delighted to announce, from the start of January, Steve Francis as the new Director of its global programme on Defence & Security. His last assignment in the Royal Marines was in the British High Commission in Islamabad where he served as the UK’s Naval and Air Adviser; at Transparency International he will lead the Movement’s global work aimed at tackling corruption in the defence and security sector.

Steve joined the Royal Marines in 1988. Over the course of a 30-year career he served in a number of different roles, including heading up the Royal Navy’s International Engagement Team and working as the principal aide to the Coalition Deputy Commander in Afghanistan.

Transparency International’s global programme on defence and security is based within Transparency International UK (TI-UK) in London. As Director, Steve joins the Senior Management Team of TI-UK helping to shape the organisation’s strategy as well as leading a team of 20 full-time members of staff based in London and other locations around the world.

Steve Francis, Director of Transparency International Defence and Security Programme, said:

“I’m extremely proud to be taking on a global leadership role in such a well-respected organisation. Having served in a number of conflict ridden and fragile states during my former military career, I have witnessed first-hand how corruption can erode State institutions, undermine public trust, create insecurity and perpetuate conflict and its associated evils like poverty and injustice. I am hugely honoured to be given the opportunity to be part of the fight back against that corruption and its practices around the globe.”

Robert Barrington, Executive Director of Transparency International UK, said:

“I am delighted to welcome Steve to lead TI’s global defence and security work. He brings with him a wealth of experience and knowledge from the armed forces, notably in areas of the world where the problem of corruption is particularly acute. TI has selected the theme of defence & security as a key area of focus as it is notorious for corruption, shrouded in secrecy and has a tangible impact on the lives of ordinary people. Steve joins a dynamic team with a number of major achievements already under its belt and is currently working on some very innovative projects which will build on the success of Steve’s predecessors.”

***ENDS***

Contact:

Dominic Kavakeb
020 3096 7695
079 6456 0340
Dominic.kavakeb@transparency.org.uk

19th June 2018, Kiev – The Independent Defence Anti-Corruption Committee (NAKO) announced on June 19th that it is in favour of the revised tender for an independent audit and strategic analysis of Ukroboronprom. It has reestablished dialogue with Ukroboronprom and intends to monitor the tendering process.

NAKO said that the process is the opportunity to bring light to inefficiencies, corruption risks and structural deficits at Ukroboronprom and will be a first step towards resolving these issues and building a state-owned defence establishment that meets the needs of the public and armed forces. The NAKO committee stated that the creation of the independent Supervisory Board, which was appointed by President Petro Poroshenko this January, was a key step towards having effective governance and will be the main customer in the upcoming tender.

Volodymyr Ohryzko, NAKO Co-Chair, stated:

The Supervisory Board of Ukroboronprom is responsible for reforming the institution so that it meets the interests of the public and the Ukrainian state. This audit, in line with international standards, will aid the Supervisory Board in carrying out their responsibility and raising the company to meet international standards of governance.

The call for tender includes three parts: 1) an assessment of the corporate governance of Ukroboronprom and its members, 2) a legal review, diagnosis and consultation of Ukroboronprom and its member companies, 3) an independent financial audit of Ukroboronprom and its member companies.

The original tender did not include some of these components, including the independent financial audit. The NAKO provided recommendations to Ukroboronprom’s Supervisory Board about what should be included in the tender, and the Supervisory Board revised it in line with these recommendations. Following those amendments, the tender process is currently underway. The deadline has been extended from June 18th to September 28th in order to give a broader range of companies the opportunity to bid.

Drago Kos, NAKO Co-Chair said:

We hope to see a strong pool of auditing firms bidding for this. It is undoubtedly complex – but if it can be reformed, the impact on Ukraine and its future will be historic.

Olena Tregub, NAKO Secretary General confirmed that:

The NAKO continues to monitor this tender; our aim is to ensure that the reform of Ukroboronprom is provided with clear advice on the corporate structure and management, and that a full financial audit will identify financial black holes in the company – and will facilitate an evidence-based reform programme.

More details on the tender can be found here.

***ENDS***

Notes:

The Independent Defence AntiCorruption Committee (NAKO) is a joint initiative to fight corruption in the Ukrainian defence sector run by Transparency International Defence and Security Program Great Britain (TI-DSP) and Transparency International Україна (ТІ Ukraine).

The Committee consists of six members: Editor in Chief of online mediaUkrayinska PravdaSevgil MusaievaBorovyk, Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Former First Deputy Secretary Defence and Security Council of Ukraine Volodymyr Ogryzko, Chairman of Centre UA, coinitiator of Chesno Campaign Oleh Rybachuk, LieutenantGeneral of the British Army and Former Commander of the NATO Allied Rapid Reaction Corps Timothy Evans, Former AntiCorruption Commissioner in Slovenia Drago Kos and Former Head of Oversight of Public Utilities at the UN Mission in Kosovo James Wasserstrom.

The goal for the NAKO is to reduce corruption risks in defence and security sector of Ukraine by means of monitoring, evaluation and analysis of anti-corruption reforms and providing the corresponding recommendations.

Contact:

Dominic Kavakeb
+44 20 3096 7695
+44 79 6456 0340
Dominic.kavakeb@transparency.org.uk

 

11th June 2018, London – Today, NGOs in France, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, the UK and the US are calling upon the agencies investigating Airbus to ensure that the company and its senior executives are properly held to account.

Airbus is under investigation in several jurisdictions for allegedly paying bribes in order to win billions of dollars of contracts. The allegations are egregious and widespread, covering multiple countries and involving several divisions within Airbus including commercial aircraft, helicopters and aerospace and defence.

In February 2018, Airbus reached a €81.25million settlement in Germany to end a corruption investigation into the 2003 Eurofighter deal with Austria. Over the coming months, prosecutors will be weighing up their options, with more settlements as one possible outcome, allowing the company to continue winning government contracts without prosecution.

Today the NGOs in a letter to the heads of the Serious Fraud Office, Parque National Financier and Department of Justice urged the authorities to ensure that:

  • National economic interest, relations with foreign states or the importance of Airbus as a national industry must not affect the investigation or prosecution of alleged bribery by the company;
  • Individuals responsible for the wrongdoing must face prosecution including those at senior levels;
  • No immunity deals should be included in any action taken against Airbus;
  • A settlement should only be given if prosecutors have high confidence that Airbus has fully cooperated and revealed the full extent of wrongdoing, and if it has fully signed up to genuine corporate change including through disciplining of employees responsible for wrongdoing;
  • Countries where it is proven that Airbus has paid bribes must be fully compensated for harm caused; and
  • Any enforcement action must be fully transparent with details of the wrongdoing made publicly available.

Susan Hawley, Director of Policy at Corruption Watch, said:

The Airbus case is a test of the resolve and independence of the prosecuting bodies and their ability to bring widespread and egregious wrongdoing to justice. Airbus and individuals implicated must not be let off lightly if these global allegations are confirmed by law enforcement investigations.”

Andrew Watson, Head of Industry Integrity at Transparency International Defence and Security said:

“If proven, these extensive cases of corruption will have had a significant impact on the public, state institutions and the industry. With such wide-ranging and complex allegations, it will be will be vital for prosecutors to co-ordinate closely if they are to account for the full scale of alleged offending; because individual cases, serious as they may be, won’t tell the whole story.”

“For the punishment to be proportionate to the crime, prosecutors should consider the full range of offending across all jurisdictions when reaching their decisions.” (more…)

22nd September 2017, London – Aleksandar Vulin, Serbia’s Defence Minister, should respond to legitimate questions over his purchase of a 205,000 euro property with transparency.

In December 2015 Serbia’s Anti-Corruption Agency sent a report to the prosecutor’s office after Vulin bought a 205,000 Euro property that did not appear to match with his declared income.  Since then, media reports have suggested that the Serbian police have refused to investigate the matter, despite the involvement of the Anti-Corruption Agency.

So far, Vulin has failed to provide any substantive response to the allegation, but has instead made disparaging comments about journalists reporting on this case.

Katherine Dixon, Director Transparency International Defence & Security, said:

 “Denigrating journalists who are working to expose corruption is not the answer to awkward questions. The only acceptable response by a senior government figure to questions of this nature is transparency.”

“It is vital for the maintenance of public trust in both the government and its institutions that Defence Minister Vulin now responds constructively to legitimate issues raised by the country’s Anti-Corruption Agency.  Integrity in the defence sector is vital for national security and the Defence Minister should be setting a strong tone from the top, by acting with transparency and supporting the role of the anti-corruption agency.”

***ENDS***

Contact:
Dominic Kavakeb
Dominic.kavakeb@transparency.org.uk
0044 20 3096 7695
0044 796 456 0340

4th August 2017. The Ukrainian MoD’s Medical Department invited NGOs and volunteer organizations to help develop new technical requirements for individual first-aid kits used at the frontline of military operations. Experts from the Independent Anti-Corruption Committee on Defense (NAKO), a joint initiative of TI Ukraine and TI Defence & Security, took part in their development, providing input on how to reduce corruption risk. The MOD granted final approval for the technical requirements last week, and Ukrainian servicemen should receive their new first-aid kits this autumn.

The need to develop new technical requirements arose as military and volunteers repeatedly complained about the poor quality of individual first-aid kits (IFAKs) used at the front. Previous IFAK components had been approved in February 2015. However, the list of components for the first-aid kit was less comprehensive, and the standards lower, than those used in NATO countries. In addition, the IFAK technical requirements were often developed by the IFAK manufacturers themselves, meaning that they could shape the MOD’s procurement requirements to suit what they could provide. The new specifications allow the MoD to require manufacturers to ensure each component of the kit is of the highest standard of quality.

The MoD began work on creating new technical requirements for IFAKs in September 2016. Initially, the key stakeholders in the process were representatives of the Ministry of Defense and Ukrainian manufacturing companies, but this approach created significant corruption risks.

But in April 2017, the MOD changed its approach, creating a separate working group in order to minimise the influence of pharmaceutical companies and to avoid corruption risks. This new working group created by the Ministry of Defence included leading medical experts, NGO representatives and volunteer organisations, as well as NAKO experts. This group of experts have worked together alongside the MOD to improve the technical requirements of the first-aid kits to match the NATO standards.

We insisted on minimising corruption risks. Previously, there was a risk that the specifications would match the preferences of a particular manufacturer, rather than respond to real frontline needs,” said Taras Yemchura, a NAKO researcher. “This could also lead to discrimination against particular participants in the procurement process. For example, we pushed for the abolition of unlawful requirements for special markings on the product packaging, which does not actually affect the quality of the goods, but significantly reduces the range of potential suppliers.”

In the future, NAKO intends to continue monitoring the process of IFAK purchasing, scrutinising the formation of lots, bidding, contracting, and quality control.

The committee is convinced that the active participation of independent experts and high-quality public monitoring of each procurement stage will help counteract corruption risks in the procurement of first-aid kits, decrease the risk of poor-quality goods being supplied, and will help save the lives of soldiers who fight in the Donbass.

**ENDS**

Media contact:

Sevgil Musaeva

+38-050-217-1817

sevamusaeva@gmail.com

The Independent Defense AntiCorruption Committee (NAKO) is a joint initiative established by Ukrainian public activists, journalists and international experts to fight corruption in Ukraine’s security and defense sector. NAKO is a joint international project of Transparency International Defense & Security and Transparency International Ukraine, supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands.

Joint national-international committee sets sights on increasing transparency and accountability in country’s most vital sector

25 October 2016, Kyiv – The Independent Defence Anti-Corruption Committee (Nezalezhny Antikorrupciynii Komitet z pytan oborony, or “NAKO”) held its inaugural meeting in Kyiv last week, setting forth its intention to fight corruption in the Ukrainian defence sector. The Committee comprises six members, three national – Sevgil Musaeva, Volodymyr Ogryzko, Oleh Rybachuk (co-chair) – and three international experts – Lt Gen Tim Evans, Drago Kos (co-chair), and James Wasserstrom.

“Corruption in the Ukrainian defence sector is costing lives,” said Oleh Rybachuk. “Our soldiers and citizens deserve an MOD that is efficient, accountable, and serves their interests – our aim is to help our MOD achieve those aims.”

The Committee will develop a strategy 2017-2018. Its mandate, agreed on Thursday 20th of October, includes analysing and evaluating anti-corruption efforts in the defence sector, the development of recommendations, reporting to Ukrainian authorities and the public, promoting transparency, and strengthening accountability structures. It will also, later this year, enable citizens and soldiers to anonymously report corruption concerns to the group.

As a first step, the NAKO will produce a report on lessons learned from other monitoring groups, including the Monitoring & Evaluation Committee in Afghanistan. It will also analyse corruption risks and mechanisms for monitoring security assistance and military aid. Drawing on the findings from the 2015 Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index, produced by TI Defence & Security, it will submit recommendations for inclusion in the Annual National Programme 2017.

“In Afghanistan and Iraq, I saw first-hand the impact that corruption can have on the success of military operations. Without integrity, an Army can’t function effectively – and our aim, in the long-term, is to help the Ukrainian defence forces protect its people and its country,” said Lt Gen Timothy Evans, former commander of the NATO Allied Rapid Reaction Corps.

The idea for a dedicated monitoring body is based on learning from previous efforts in Afghanistan, Guatemala and Palestine. The committee was selected by a joint board of TI Ukraine and TI Defence & Security, following a public call for nominations earlier this year.

The NAKO is a project of TI Defence & Security, based in London, and TI Ukraine, and is supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands.

***ENDS***

Contact:
Ukrainian – Sevgil Musaeva, sevamusaeva@gmail.com, +380 502171817
English – Leah Wawro, leah.wawro@transparency.org.uk, +44 789 4219638

Notes to editors

Biographies of NAKO members:

Lieutenant General Timothy Evans CB CBE DSO: A 3 star General in the British Army and former Commander of the NATO Allied Rapid Reaction Corps.

Drago Kos (co-chair): Former Anti-Corruption Commissioner in Slovenia, Former Chair of GRECO, and current Chair of the OECD Working Group on Bribery. “I’ve been coming to Ukraine for 15 years and for the first time I feel the country is ready for real change – and it’s time to include the defence sector too.”

Sevgil Musaeva: Editor in Chief of Ukrainska Pravda and author of investigative reports for Reuters, Forbes Ukraine, and the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. “I understood the problems of a weak defence sector when Crimea, my region, was annexed. So for me, it’s personal—I want to make the our armed forces more transparent and effective.”

Oleh Rybachuk (co-chair): Chairman of Centre UA, co-initiator of Chesno Campaign, and former Vice Prime Minister for European Integration and Chief of Staff to the president.

Volodymyr Ogryzko: Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, First Deputy Secretary Defence and Security Council of Ukraine. “We badly need international support to fight corruption in Ukraine.”

James Wasserstrom: Former Head of Oversight of Public Utilities at the UN Mission in Kosovo, Senior Advisor on Anti-Corruption at the US Embassy Kabul, and strategy advisor and lead anti-corruption at the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. “Countries in conflict are always immense opportunities for nefarious activities, especially corruption, profiteering, and egregious mismanagement. I look forward to this body tackling all of the above.”

image: flickr.com/Sasha Maksymenko cropped by TI-DSP

This article was first publidhed by Defence One here

A recent anti-corruption summit produced hundreds of commitments, exactly eight of which concerned defense.

Slowly but surely, the world is realizing that corruption defies borders and that governments must work together to ensure the integrity of their institutions. (See: the Inter-American Anti-Corruption Convention, signed in 1996; the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, 1997; and the UN Convention against Corruption, 2003.) But there is one area that remains all but untouched by these reforms: defense.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in January, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called corruption a threat to “global growth, global stability, and indeed the global future” and asked governments to fight it as a “first-order, national-security priority.” Five months later, countries at the London Anti-Corruption Summit released a “Global Declaration against Corruption,” in which they pledged to “put fighting corruption at the heart of our international institutions” and advance inter-state cooperation to stop corruption. By Transparency International’s count, 42 individual countries made 648 commitments across 20 issue areas, nearly one-third of which we deem both new and ambitious.

Click here to read the rest of the article

Author: Hilary Hurd – Transparency International Defence & Security Programme

Photo: © Crown Copyright.

Opaque, unaccountable defense spending threatens to derail the global development agenda.  If the United Nations and its member states are serious about implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030, they’re going to have to abandon their exceptional treatment of the defense sector and start asking what countries really spend on their militaries.

(more…)

In response to President Zuma’s release yesterday of the Seriti Commission’s report, Corruption Watch notes that, given the thoroughly flawed and irregular proceedings of the commission over the last four years, this outcome is hardly surprising. The report’s eventual failure to address long-standing allegations of corruption in the arms deal prevents closure of this sordid chapter in the governance of large scale public procurement.

(more…)

The Defence Integrity Action Fund is a fund disbursed by Transparency International Defence and Security to support TI Chapters in their efforts to reduce defence and security corruption worldwide.

  • TI National Chapters and Chapters in Formation will be eligible to apply.
  • The grant size will range from EUR 5,000-20,000 and the project duration will be 3-12 months.
  • Complete projects, existing projects, or parts of projects through match funding can be funded.
  • All projects need to be directly relevant and contribute to the TI Defence and Security strategy, which specifies how sustainable progress in this particular area can be made based on extensive consultations, research, and lessons identified from more than 10 years of working on these issues.
  • Download the full specification here.

The deadline for grant applications is 14 March 2016. Please submit your proposals to amira.elsayed@transparency.org.uk.

Transparency International warns of ongoing corruption risks contributing to instability

All states in the Middle East and North Africa are at high risk of corruption posing a continuing threat to security and stability in the region according to a new Government Defence Index from Transparency International.

Sixteen of the seventeen states assessed in the index receive either E or F grades, representing either a “very high” or “critical” risk of defence corruption.  Only Tunisia performs better, although is still classed as “high risk”.

(more…)