Operational Risk:

Critical

Score:

16/100

Next Risk Category Right Arrow
Left Arrow Back to Canada Overview

Disregard of Corruption in-Country

Collapse
Q51 0/100

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

View Question
Military doctrine Score: 0 / 100
While there are specific Defence Administrative Orders and Directives (DAODs) on Alcohol Misconduct, Academic Misconduct, and Sexual Misconduct in the Canadian Forces, none explicitly…
Explore
Transparency Score: NA / 100
There is no doctrine that considers corruption a ‘strategic issue’ for operations. [1] [2] As such, this indicator is scored ‘Not Applicable’.
Explore
Q52 NEI/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: NEI / 100
There is not enough evidence to score this indicator. There may be very specific elements of training for those going on deployment to areas…
Explore
Q53 38/100

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: 25 / 100
Most of the focus for forward planning of missions, is the emphasis Canada places on training partner military organisations. Canada has had a strong…
Explore
Application Score: 50 / 100
As noted in 53A, most references to corruption in the forward planning of operations are framed as something the Canadian Military can teach others…
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
There are no trained professionals deployed to monitor corruption risk in the field. [1] One of the few explicit references to corruption in training/deployment…
Explore
M&E policy Score: 0 / 100
There is no M&E guidance for missions on how to monitor corruption risks. Canada’s defence policy specifically references Monitoring and Evaluation to incorporate gender-based…
Explore
Transparency Score: NA / 100
There are no trained professionals deployed to monitor corruption risk in the field. [1] As such, this indicator is scored ‘Not Applicable’.
Explore

Contracting

Expand
Q55 25/100

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

View Question
Comprehensiveness Score: 0 / 100
There are no clear guidelines or staff training on addressing corruption risks in contracting whilst on deployed/peacekeeping operations. [1] The only guidelines are those…
Explore
Training Score: 50 / 100
There are no clear guidelines or staff training on addressing corruption risks in contracting whilst on deployed/peacekeeping operations. [1] The only consistent guidelines are…
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. In the past, private military contractors (PMCs) were used on an ad hoc basis…
Explore
Scrutiny Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. As with all Government Contracts and Procurement initiatives, PMCs are required to compete in…
Explore
Enforcement Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. Enforcement could come as a result of a breach in the contract and/or the…
Explore