Country: Mali
As Mali’s military expenditure continues to grow, a new report from Transparency International Defence & Security (TI-DS) reveals institutional weaknesses in the country’s external auditing framework—undermining efforts to ensure democratic accountability in the defence and security sectors.
Titled External Auditing of the Defence Sector in Mali: Challenges and Possibilities, the report assesses the current state of external auditing in Mali, with a focus on its performance vis-à vis the defence and security sector. Drawing on data from a desk review and the Government Defence Integrity Index (GDI), the report finds that audit institutions in Mali suffer from performance challenges that manifest across its public sector mandate, as well as in specific failures related to defence and security.
Key challenges identified include:
- A fragmented approach to external auditing, with an overlap of institutional mandates and confusion over the roles and authority of each institution;
- A lack of access to information, particularly within the military, defence and security sector; and
- Weak incentives for institutional actors to pursue democratic accountability in security governance.
Whilst external auditing serves as an important mechanism for holding government to account, this can only be made possible if external auditors have access to information about the finances of the institutions that they are auditing.
The report stresses that while Mali has institutions with the legal mandate to conduct audits, their ability to operate effectively depends on access to reliable and timely information. The absence of both a Right to Information (RTI) law and a State Secrets Law leaves a legal void around what information can be shared, thus further weakening oversight roles due to the lack of transparency, particularly in military procurement and budgeting.
TI-DS emphasises that information sharing within government is crucial for the government to function effectively. In particular, procurement activities must receive appropriate oversight, and to do so, information should be shared with accountability mechanisms such as external auditors.
To address these issues and improve transparency, the report makes the following recommendations:
- Harmonise the external auditing function so that there is one primary entity with the mandate for external audits;
- Develop well-defined legal exceptions to access-to-information laws, ensuring national security concerns are balanced with transparency through public consultation and oversight;
- Legally prescribe information-sharing by the defence sector with other government tactors, concerning its spending and procurement activities; and
- Continue to collaborate with the public on various platforms building on previous successful efforts at citizen engagement by defence and security actors – with emphasis on information-sharing and trust-building.
As a result of the coup d’état of 2021, Mali faces an ongoing failure of democratic accountability, which is reflected in the absence of institutional checks on its rapidly rising military spending. This report underscores the urgent need to strengthen external auditing as a means of re-establishing oversight, promoting transparency, and restoring public trust in governance. Without credible audit mechanisms and access to information, efforts to curb corruption and ensure responsible security sector governance will remain severely constrained.
A French version of this press release is available.
External auditing is an important mechanism for holding government to account – one that is already ingrained within the functioning of the public sector, with existing capacities and mandates to tackle financial corruption. But this is only possible if external auditors have access to information about the finances of the institutions they are auditing.
As Mali’s military expenditure continues to grow, our report reveals significant weaknesses in the country’s external auditing system —marked by fragmented mandates, lack of transparency, and limited access to information.
When Mali’s military took power in 2021, after one of several military coups over the past decades, it promised to end pervasive corruption and improve a security situation worsened by both ethnic separatists and Islamist terrorists. Yet, Mali faces an ongoing failure of democratic accountability, which is reflected in the absence of institutional checks on its rapidly rising military spending: between 2020 and 2024, Mali’s military expenditure grew by 38%.
‘External Auditing of the Defence Sector in Mali: Challenges and Possibilities’ assesses the current state of external auditing in Mali, with a focus on its performance vis-à vis the defence and security sector. The report offers concrete recommendations to strengthen transparency and restore trust in public.
L’audit externe est un mécanisme important pour demander des comptes aux pouvoirs publics. Il est déjà intégré dans le fonctionnement du secteur public, qui dispose de capacités et de mandats pour lutter contre la corruption financière. Mais cela n’est possible que si les auditeurs externes ont accès aux informations sur les finances des institutions qu’ils contrôlent.
Alors que les dépenses militaires du Mali continuent d’augmenter, notre nouveau rapport révèle d’importantes faiblesses dans le système d’audit externe du pays, caractérisé par des mandats fragmentés, un manque de transparence et un accès limité à l’information.
Lorsque l’armée malienne a pris le pouvoir en 2021, après l’un des nombreux coups d’État militaires de ces dernières décennies, elle a promis de mettre fin à la corruption généralisée et d’améliorer la situation sécuritaire aggravée par les séparatistes ethniques et les terroristes islamistes. Pourtant, le Mali est confronté à un échec persistant de la responsabilité démocratique, qui se traduit par l’absence de contrôles institutionnels sur ses dépenses militaires en forte augmentation : entre 2020 et 2024, les dépenses militaires du Mali ont augmenté de 38 %.
‘L’audit externe du secteur de la défense au Mali : Défis et possibilités’ évalue l’état actuel de l’audit externe au Mali, en mettant l’accent sur ses performances dans le secteur de la défense et de la sécurité. Le rapport formule des recommandations concrètes pour renforcer la transparence et restaurer la confiance du public.
“Sabotaging Peace: Corruption as a Threat to International Peace and Security” examines the relationship between corruption, conflict, and insecurity. The new report by Transparency International Defence & Security (TI-DS) explores how corruption in the defence and security sectors distorts and undermines security governance and peace processes. It also highlights the harmful influence of national political elites in obstructing governance reforms often advocated by local civil society organisations and the broader international community.
Overview
Peace, stability, and security are some of the key priorities for countries as they navigate an increasingly fragmented and violent world. However, the threat that corruption poses to achieving these objectives is frequently overlooked. At best, it is considered a problem only in the aftermath of conflicts and crises, or when evaluating their long-term impact on development and aid.
The report’s case studies, including state-building in Afghanistan, illicit networks and arms flow in Mali and Sudan, organised criminal networks in Ecuador and Venezuela, defence procurement in Ukraine, and elite state-capture in Iraq – illustrate how rampant, unchecked, and often systemic corruption becomes exceedingly difficult to address once it takes root.
The evidence outlined in this report indicates that defence and security sector-related corruption threatens international peace and security because:
- It fuels violence and armed conflict.
- It empowers and enables organised crime groups and violent non-state actors.
- It contributes to the illicit proliferation and diversion of weapons.
- It weakens and even undermines post-conflict peacebuilding processes.
With the defence and security sector receiving an increase of funding and wielding significant influence and authority – especially in peacekeeping and post-conflict peacebuilding – strong integrity, accountability, and governance standards are essential to ensuring sustainable peace and security internationally.
Key recommendations include:
Making anti-corruption a priority across national and international policy agendas and peace interventions can create opportunities to enhance human, national, and international security. Based on the findings of the report, we urge international institutions (UN and regional bodies) alongside national governments to explicitly embed corruption as a threat to international peace and security in concrete actions for change, including:
- Enhancing global coordination and collaboration on tackling corruption in defence and security.
- Strengthening corruption risk assessments and improving military assistance standards.
- Embedding integrity and anti-corruption measures into defence governance and security sector reform processes.
- Strengthening civil society and whistleblower protections in defence and security.
January 15, 2025 – Transparency International – Defence & Security (TI-DS) today launches a series of policy briefs examining the institutional resilience of the defence and security sectors in Nigeria, Tunisia, Niger and Mali.
Against a backdrop of democratic backsliding, political upheaval and mounting security threats, the briefs lay out clear, country-specific policy recommendations for tackling the corruption risks undermining effective defence governance and stability across West and North Africa.
Read the briefs: Nigeria | Tunisia | Niger | Mali
Michael Ofori-Mensah, Head of Research at Transparency International Defence & Security, said:
“Transparency and accountability are not only moral imperatives but also practical necessities for effective defence and security sectors. The evidence outlined in these policy briefs clearly shows the effects of weak defence governance – where corruption is allowed to fester, peace and stability suffer. Our recommendations offer governments, policymakers, and civil society organisations a clear roadmap to tackle the corrosive effects of corruption on national security.”
Each policy brief offers a blueprint for improved institutional resilience in the defence and security sector, grounded in data from our Government Defence Integrity Index (GDI), the world’s leading assessment of corruption risks in government defence institutions.
The analysis draws on:
- Country-specific context: Recent political events, military spending, arms imports, and public opinion on governance and democracy.
- Institutional resilience assessment: A breakdown of existing corruption safeguards and vulnerabilities in defence governance, informed by GDI data and comparisons with regional peers.
- Policy recommendations: Practical steps, developed in partnership with Nigeria/CISLAC, TI Tunisia/IWatch, and TI Niger/ANLC for improving transparency, accountability and ultimately providing peace and security for citizens.
Country summaries
Systemic corruption continues to plague the defence sector and cause a major hindrance to security in the face of significant threats. Defence budgets and procurement processes remain largely opaque. Decisive reforms to boost transparency – especially in military spending – and the reinforcing of both accountability and civilian oversight are key pillars for long-term institutional resilience.
Defence governance suffers from weak legislative functions and limited scrutiny over a highly centralised executive. With critical information restricted, parliamentary and civilian oversight remain fragile. Enhanced dialogue with civil society, clearer legal frameworks on access to information and a commitment to establishing best-practice exceptions for genuine national security concerns would go a long way to improving resilience against corruption.
A severe lack of transparency and oversight surrounds military activities, particularly defence expenditure, procurement and disposal of military-owned assets. Opening dialogue with civil society, strengthening accountability and embedding corruption risk mitigation into military operations are essential steps for rebuilding trust and stability amid the country’s evolving political landscape.
Systemic weaknesses provide opportunities for the diversion of military funds and influence-peddling, compromising both equipment on the front lines and broader political and economic stability. Defence procurement is shrouded in secrecy, blocking effective scrutiny of military purchases and how equipment is used. The release of key procurement information and auditing mechanisms are vital to creating sustainable institutional resilience against corruption.
This policy brief aims to highlight findings from the 2020 Government Defence Integrity Index (GDI) that are most pertinent to enhanced institutional resilience to corruption in the Mali’s defence sector.
It is based on a close reading of the GDI results for Mali, as well as context and problem analyses conducted by TI-DS, policy literature, and news reporting on Mali over the past decade.
July 30, 2024 – Transparency International Defence & Security (TI-DS) expresses deep concern that the potential ‘disintegration’ of state cooperation in West Africa could exacerbate conflict in the already unstable region.
Following a summit of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) earlier this month, the bloc cautioned the formation of a breakway union, run by the military juntas in Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso, would worsen insecurity and disrupt the work of a long-proposed regional force.
Research by TI-DS previously found that Mali, Niger, Ghana and Nigeria all face a very high risk of corruption in their defence and security sectors, while Burkina Faso is at a critical risk. Corruption in these sectors increases the risk of conflict and weakens the ability to manage and resolve unrest, compromising regional stability.
Sara Bandali, Director of International Engagement at Transparency International UK, said:
“We express deep concern over the recent warning from ECOWAS about the potential damage to the region’s security following the formation of a breakaway union by the military rulers of Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso. In a region already marred by conflict and insecurity – much of which has been caused or exacerbated by corruption in the defence and security sectors – this move threatens to make the region and its people less safe.
“Cooperation, not competition, are key to addressing the corruption and insecurity issues the region faces. It’s clear that corruption in the defence and security sectors makes conflict more likely by fuelling the flames of grievance and unrest, while simultaneously making it harder to manage conflicts after they arise by weakening the effectiveness of military response.
“We urge regional leaders to prioritise unity and collective action for a secure future free from corruption and the conflict that both stems from, and is fuelled by it. We stand ready to support governments and civil society in the region in this vital endeavor.”
Notes to editors:
Mali, Niger, Ghana and Nigeria and Burkina Faso feature in Transparency International Defence & Security’s 2020 Government Defence Integrity Index (GDI).
The Index scores and ranks countries based on the strength of their safeguards against defence and security corruption.
Mali, Niger, Ghana and Nigeria all appear in band ‘E’, indicating a ‘very high’ risk of corruption. Burkina Faso is in band ‘F’, indicating a ‘critical’ risk.
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.
Negotiations have been taking place in Geneva this month around the control and accountability of private military and security companies (PMSCs). Transparency International Defence and Security’s Ara Marcen Naval contributed to the discussions in Switzerland. Here she delivers a call to action to other civil society organisations.
As an NGO committed to promoting transparency and accountability in the defence and security sector, Transparency International Defence and Security (TI-DS) is deeply concerned about the corruption risks associated with the activities of PMSCs. These groups, while playing a role in enhancing security in some cases, often operate in secrecy, outside standard transparency and accountability structures. This permissive environment creates opportunities for corruption and conflict to thrive, deprives governments and citizens of financial resources, and undermines security and human rights.
I write having participated last week in the discussions of the Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group on PMSCs. This fourth session was convened to discuss a new draft of an international instrument to regulate the activities of PMSCs. This is a critical platform for addressing these concerns and others related to companies’ human rights obligations. There are various questions: how to ensure their activities comply with international humanitarian law? Should these companies be allowed to participate directly in hostilities?
The PMSC industry is a rapidly evolving and intrinsically international one, with a well-documented link to global conflict. The lack of regulatory oversight has led to heightened global risks of fraud, corruption, and violence, with little in the way of accountability mechanisms at both the national and international levels, so progress at a global level is key.
Current initiatives to try and regulate the market, such as the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers, are a step in the right direction. However, these initiatives have limited support among states around the world. They do not cover some key military and intelligence services and exclude some important anticorruption measures. TI-DS thinks these initiatives don’t go far enough to address the risks posed. We are hopeful that the efforts of the working group will provide a much-needed stronger set of enforceable standards.
TI-DS welcomes the progress made in the revised draft discussed last week, including references to the UN Convention Against Corruption and the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime. These references are essential steps towards policy and legal coherence, aligning efforts to regulate PMSCs with international legal obligations related to corruption and transnational organised crime.
While in Geneva I continued to propose ways that the text of the draft instrument can better incorporate anticorruption standards, including transparency of contracts and beneficial ownership, and through the recognition of corruption-related crimes as well as human rights abuses.
But we are deeply concerned about the overall lack of engagement. The room was almost empty, with many states not attending the discussions and a general lack of civil society actors actively following this critical process – prospective changes that could significantly impact conflict dynamics, international security, human rights and respect for international humanitarian law.
This is the Geneva Paradox. Other similar processes, like those related to business and human rights or others trying to get a grasp of new types of weapons systems, are filling the rooms of the United Nations, with both states and civil society in attendance. We feel that this process – which is attempting to regulate the activities of PMSCs to stop the trend of these corporate actors becoming rogue actors in wars and conflicts around the world – deserves equal attention.
In September, the Human Rights Council will set the agenda for this issue going forward. We hope that more states and civil society organisations join efforts in the coming period to give this issue the critical attention and scrutiny it deserves.
A working group of the United Nations assembled in Geneva, Switzerland on April 17, 2023 to evaluate and negotiate regulation of private military and security security companies (PMSCs).
Transparency International Defence and Security Head of Advocacy Ara Marcen Naval joined and delivered the following statement:
Mr. Chairperson rapporteur, distinguished delegates,
I stand before you today at this crucial discussion to bring to your attention, and consideration, the corruption risks linked to the activities of Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) with a sense of urgency and resolve. PMSCs can play an important role in government efforts to enhance security, but they often operate in secret and outside standard transparency and accountability structures. This dynamic provides a permissive environment for corruption and conflict to thrive and deprives governments and its citizens of financial resources and security.
The Defence and Security Programme of Transparency International welcomes the progress made in the revised draft and the changes made to include references to the Convention Against Corruption and Convention against transnational crime. These references are important steps towards policy and legal coherence and to ensure that the efforts to regulate the activities of PMSCs align with the international legal obligations in relation to corruption and transnational organised crime.
Corruption and the unchecked actions of PMSCs have far-reaching consequences, eroding the rule of law, undermining human rights and security, and threatening the legitimacy of governments. It corrodes public trust, undermines democratic institutions, and creates a culture of impunity that breeds more corruption. It can also weaken the fabric of societies, divert resources meant for development, and perpetuate inequality and injustice.
Transparency International has identified dozens of cases in which PMSCs are suspected of involvement in corruption and fraud. Some of the most concerning cases involve PMSCs colluding with government officials to inflate threat perceptions to win or sustain contracts. In one case, this action led to excessive use of force against protesters resulting in unnecessary injuries to civilians and security forces.
Transparency International has also raised concerns about some of the practices of PMSCs failing to disclose conflict of interests that could undermine government decisions, or even threaten national security.
In some cases multinational PMSCs have fuelled corruption by requiring local partners to pay kickbacks for participating in government funded contracts.
In these cases, the opaque arrangements prevalent in the sector make it extremely difficult to ascertain chains of command, responsibilities and levels of coordination among the different security actors, and undermine monitoring efforts and accountability. Furthermore, it is usually difficult to find public confirmation of the nature of the contract and the identity of subcontractors in the event that they are hired.
We hope that during the discussions on the potential instrument, the distinguished delegates will confront the implications corruption has and the abuses of PMSCs head-on and work together to prevent, detect, and punish corruption in all its forms. Transparency and reporting are the greatest steps that states can take to allow for effective monitoring and oversight of private military and security companies and other actors providing security services in order to effectively prevent, address and remedy any abuses committed.
Distinguished delegates, the stakes are high. The impact of corruption and the actions of PMSCs are felt by communities around the world, often with dire consequences for the most vulnerable among us. The fight against corruption and the responsible use of PMSCs requires our unwavering commitment and concerted and holistic action. Thank you.
press@transparency.org.uk
+ 44 (0)20 3096 7695
Out of hours – Weekends; Weekdays (UK 17.30-21.30): +44 (0)79 6456 034
Responding to the latest annual data on global arms transfers, published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) this month, Sara Bandali, Transparency International Defence and Security Director of International Engagement, said:
While international arms sales have decreased over the last decade, the bloody legacies of corruption in arms transfers linger.
Across Africa’s Sahel region, national weapon stockpiles have been depleted, with the corrupt diversion of arms bolstering groups such as Islamic State and Boko Haram. Killing of civilians and sexual and gender-based violence perpetuates, with the people of countries such as Nigeria and Mali left no safer by the arms that have entered their nations.
These risks are not constrained to the Sahel. Our latest Government Defence Integrity index shows almost half (49 per cent) of global arms imports are going to countries facing a high to critical risk of defence corruption.
Governments should strengthen transparency and accountability in arms transfer decision making to meet the reporting obligations of the Arms Trade Treaty. The scrutiny of lawmakers, auditors and civil society can deliver arms deals that truly enhance security.
press@transparency.org.uk
+ 44 (0)20 3096 7695
Out of hours – Weekends; Weekdays (UK 17.30-21.30): +44 (0)79 6456 0340
We know that corruption can be gender-specific in both form and impact. We know that it can perpetuate sexual and gender-based violence and gender inequality, and we know that the risks of this are highest in conflict, defence and security realms.
Sexual forms of corruption – often labelled as ‘survival sex’ – are commonplace in conflict, peacekeeping missions and humanitarian crises, with security and humanitarian individuals and groups among the main perpetrators.
Women’s exclusion from peace processes also undermine efforts to promote anti-corruption.
In response, we are leading the development of new approaches to integrate a gender-perspective across our work and the work of others at the intersection of conflict, defence and security, and corruption.
#InternationalWomensDay