Q37.
Is special attention paid to the selection, time in post, and oversight of personnel in sensitive positions, including officials and personnel in defence procurement, contracting, financial management, and commercial management?
37a. Coverage of sensitive (higher-risk) positions
Score
SCORE: 50/100
Rubric
Canada score: 50/100
Score: 0/100
There is no recognition that certain positions may be more open to corruption opportunities than others.
Score: 50/100
Some attention is paid to personnel in sensitive positions, i.e., individuals with significant autonomy over personnel, resources, and the policies/plans that determine them. Only one or two areas may be targeted as high risk (e.g., procurement), leaving other areas without special focus.
Score: 100/100
Special attention is paid to personnel in sensitive positions, i.e., individuals with significant autonomy over personnel, resources, and the policies/plans that determine them. This includes decision-making power in procurement, recruitment, contracting, financial and commercial management.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
37b. Selection process
Score
SCORE: 50/100
Rubric
Canada score: 50/100
Score: 0/100
Significant discretion is employed in the recruitment and selection of personnel in sensitive positions. Open recruitment is not the standard operating procedure, and conflict of interest policies are absent.
Score: 50/100
There are have specific but weak procedures in place which limits conflicts of interest for these sensitive positions. Alternatively, these position-specific procedures are stringent but not regularly followed. Regardless, standard appointment/recruitment processes are followed for particular technical competencies.
Score: 100/100
There are specific procedures in place which limits conflicts of interest for these sensitive positions. This includes revolving door limitations and stringent vetting. Standard appointment/recruitment processes are followed for particular technical competencies.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
37c. Oversight
Score
SCORE: 50/100
Rubric
Canada score: 50/100
Score: 0/100
There is no special scrutiny of personnel in sensitive positions.
Score: 50/100
There is internal oversight in the ministry of defence to scrutinise appointment and promotion decisions of personnel in sensitive positions. However, there is no external scrutiny of higher-risk sensitive positions.
Score: 100/100
There is internal oversight in the ministry of defence to scrutinise appointment and promotion decisions of personnel in sensitive positions. Higher risk and sensitive positions are also subject to external scrutiny.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
Country | 37a. Coverage of sensitive (higher-risk) positions | 37b. Selection process | 37c. Oversight |
---|---|---|---|
Albania | 50 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Algeria | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Angola | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Argentina | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Armenia | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Australia | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Azerbaijan | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Bahrain | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Bangladesh | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Belgium | 50 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Bosnia and Herzegovina | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Botswana | NEI | NEI | NEI |
Brazil | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Burkina Faso | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Cameroon | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Canada | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Chile | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
China | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Colombia | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Cote d'Ivoire | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Denmark | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Egypt | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Estonia | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Finland | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | NEI |
France | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Germany | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Ghana | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Greece | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Hungary | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
India | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Indonesia | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Iran | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Iraq | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Israel | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Italy | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Japan | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Jordan | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Kenya | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Kosovo | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Kuwait | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Latvia | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Lebanon | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Lithuania | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Malaysia | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Mali | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Mexico | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Montenegro | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Morocco | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Myanmar | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Netherlands | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
New Zealand | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Niger | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Nigeria | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
North Macedonia | 50 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Norway | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Oman | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Palestine | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Philippines | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Poland | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Portugal | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Qatar | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Russia | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Saudi Arabia | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Serbia | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Singapore | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
South Africa | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
South Korea | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
South Sudan | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Spain | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Sudan | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Sweden | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Switzerland | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Taiwan | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Tanzania | NEI | NEI | NEI |
Thailand | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Tunisia | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Turkey | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Uganda | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Ukraine | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
United Arab Emirates | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
United Kingdom | 75 / 100 | 75 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
United States | 100 / 100 | NEI | 50 / 100 |
Venezuela | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Zimbabwe | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |