Operational Risk:

Critical

Score:

10/100

Next Risk Category Right Arrow
Left Arrow Back to Lebanon 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
The LAF is aware of corruption as a strategic issue at the operational level, but there is no explicit doctrine for specifying that. The…
Explore
Transparency Score: NA / 100
This sub-indicator has been marked Not Applicable, as Lebanon does not have a military doctine addressing corruption. Furthermore, Lebanon does not have a clear…
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
Training in corruption issues is conducted for commanders at some levels or in some units, but not all. Nothing was found to suggest it…
Explore
Q53 0/100

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: 0 / 100
The LAF’s DoO indicated that the Lebanese Army does not have specific corruption training, thus corruption issues are not taken seriously in forward planning…
Explore
Application Score: 0 / 100
There is no evidence of corruption considerations for procurement or related aspects linked to operations’ execution (1). This also applied during LAF exercises with…
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
The LAF does not deploy trained personnel for corruption monitoring. It informally monitors corruption through the Military Police that controls and monitors violations committed…
Explore
M&E policy Score: 0 / 100
The LAF does not have M&E guidelines that specify how to monitor corruption (1). According to the LAF, the military operates under the laws…
Explore
Transparency Score: NA / 100
This sub-indicator has been marked Not Applicable, as there are no corruption monitoring reports; the LAF does not have personnel specifically focused on M&E…
Explore

Contracting

Expand
Q55 0/100

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
No corruption guidelines in contracting adopted at the LAF level (risks in contracting in operations of asset disposals, local power brokers, contract delivery monitoring,…
Explore
Training Score: 0 / 100
The LAF indicated that it does not conduct specific training concerning corruption risks in contracting while deployed on operations (1). Furthermore, the LAF does…
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. Lebanon is not a signatory of the Montreaux Document (1). Furthermore, research has not…
Explore
Scrutiny Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. No evidence was found for the provision of scrutinizing PMCs. The “Department of Control…
Explore
Enforcement Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. There are no laws or policies related to PMCs in Lebanon (1).
Explore