Operational Risk:

Very High

Score:

25/100

Next Risk Category Right Arrow
Left Arrow Back to Australia Overview

Disregard of Corruption in-Country

Collapse
Q51 25/100

Do the armed forces have military doctrine addressing corruption as a strategic issue on operations?

View Question
Military doctrine Score: 25 / 100
Although general defence policy documents point to issues of corruption which would apply equally during operations, there is no evidence that the official military…
Explore
Transparency Score: NA / 100
This indicator is scored ,Not Applicable’, as there is no evidence that the official military doctrine specifically addresses enhanced and unique corruption risks during…
Explore
Q52 25/100

Is there training in corruption issues for commanders at all levels in order to ensure that these commanders are clear on the corruption issues they may face during deployment?

View Question
Score: 25 / 100
The nature of training in corruption issues available to commanders is unclear. Defence documents allude to “mandatory and focused training” to “promote… a strong…
Explore
Q53 25/100

Is corruption as a strategic issue considered in the forward planning of operations? If so, is there evidence that commanders at all levels apply this knowledge in the field?

View Question
Forward planning Score: 50 / 100
While anti-corruption initiatives are often highlighted in Australian aid packages and training offered in recent areas of operations, such as Afghanistan [1] and the…
Explore
Application Score: 0 / 100
It is unclear how large a role corruption as a strategic issue plays in forward planning of operations, however, a series of stories on…
Explore

Corruption within Mission

Expand
Q54 0/100

Are trained professionals regularly deployed to monitor corruption risk in the field (whether deployed on operations or peacekeeping missions)?

View Question
Corruption monitoring Score: 0 / 100
Monitoring and evaluation in the field is carried out by evaluators in a variety of different forms and approaches [1], but investigating corruption and…
Explore
M&E policy Score: 0 / 100
Defence monitoring and evaluation guidance that is publicly available does not specifically mention corruption or ethical risk [1]. Multiple attempts by the Country Assessor…
Explore
Transparency Score: NA / 100
This indicator is scored ‘Not Applicable’ as evaluators do not seem to monitor corruption risk in the field according to publicly available policy documents.
Explore

Contracting

Expand
Q55 50/100

Are there guidelines, and staff training, on addressing corruption risks in contracting whilst on deployed operations or peacekeeping missions?

View Question
Comprehensiveness Score: 50 / 100
No specific guidelines exist addressing corruption risks in contracting in relation to operations and peacekeeping, though there are general guidelines and legislation on probity…
Explore
Training Score: 50 / 100
Procurement and contracting is carried out by Defence officials, who are required with some level of frequency and detail to attend training to “promote……
Explore

Private Security Companies

Expand
Q56 NS/100

Are private military contractors employed and if so, are they subject to a similar level of scrutiny as for the armed forces?

View Question
Policies Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. While experts have stated in articles [1] and studies [2, 3] that Australia has…
Explore
Scrutiny Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. Scrutiny of private military contractors and private security companies (PMCs) does not appear to…
Explore
Enforcement Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. Due partially to the level of secrecy surrounding the employment of private military contractors…
Explore