There are no guidelines for addressing corruption risks in contracting with specific and detailed explanations. However, staff are trained to manage the risks of corruption in procurement for deployed operations or peacekeeping missions [1][2][3].

Before being deployed, Staff are trained on the types of corruption risks in procurement that prevail during peacekeeping operations or missions. This training is part of a pre-deployment training program that typically lasts three days, but they do receive general corruption training. This training covers risks like asset disposals, local power brokers, contract delivery monitoring, security of equipment and personnel [1][2][3].

There are no relevant guidelines for the risks of corruption in contracting, which are specific to the army. Within the army, they refer more to the public procurement code, which is general for all Burundian state services. [1] [2]

No training is planned for the Burundian army on the risks of corruption in contracting as part of operations or peacekeeping missions [1] [2]. The few officers who are trained in this area receive training either through the African Union or the UN as a prelude to deployment on peacekeeping missions [2].

There are no guidelines or staff training on managing corruption risks in contracts during the deployment of operations. Cameroon has troops participating in peacekeeping efforts in the Central African Republic and on all fronts, including within the Multinational joint task forces against Boko Haram, where its peace and stability are threatened. Despite this, there is no training, guidelines, or monitoring before deploying troops. However, it has happened that non-governemental organisations or intergovernmental organisations organise training for dozens of army officers on how to combat corruption risks. It should be remembered that even those trainings focus on the importance of ethics during operations, but not solely on the fight against corruption.[1][2]

There is a lack of transparency regarding corruption risks linked to tenders or during operations. Partly due to this, there is no systematic training on corruption provided at a central level for unit commanders, either before or during deployments. In Cameroon, the Inter-Army Military School (EMIA) and the National School of Gendarmerie do not include specific training related to supplies in their programmes. They offer basic training on corruption and human rights violations. However, courses concerning the fight against corruption are more developed in higher military and police schools such as the General Staff School or the International Security Forces School (EIFORCES) and École supérieure internationale de guerre de Simbock (Ecole de guerre).[1][2]

There is not enough evidence to score this indicator. Key informants maintain that when it comes to contracts, Ivorian soldiers on overseas operations are bound by the regulations of international organisations. These take into account corruption and various other problems [1, 2]. However, they could not point to specific guidelines, their contract-related corruption contents, or the extent of their completeness. There is also no publicly available information on this.

Although this is not covered in a module, it is a cross-cutting issue. Training in public procurement rules involves risks related to corruption [1, 2].

According to the UN Blue Helmet’s Code of Conduct for all personnel under the UN Peacekeeping Mission, rule number 3 prohibits personnel from soliciting or accepting gifts or honours in any form while performing their duties. Rule number 6 instructs personnel to take good care of the UN’s properties and refrain from trading with them. There are also internal Command Policy guidelines for the mission that are issued on behalf of the CDS by the Commanding officer of the mission. However, these guidelines do not comprehensively address corruption-related issues in contracting. (1) (2) (3) (4)

The KAIPTC primarily conducts pre-deployment training for personnel before peacekeeping missions. The KAIPTC, though initially established as a Training school, now has strong departments on Research and a Faculty of Academic Affairs providing MA and PhD studies. While some KAIPTC courses touch generally on some aspects of corruption, there is no deployment training specifically committed to corruption risks in procurement or any general deployment corruption risk training that addresses the types of corruption risks in contracting that are prevalent during operations or peacekeeping missions (1) (2) (3).

Kenya utilises the UN Peace Support Operations guidelines on deployment. Kenya has been part of the UN peace keeping processes and this has meant, KDF uses the UN doctrine which includes corruption prevention in their guidelines. However they are not explicit on contracting [1, 2]. These guidelines do not address operational contracting risks: asset disposals, local power brokers, contract delivery monitoring, and security of equipment and personnel.
Equally, officers on deployment are guided by their oath of office, the international law that Kenya has acceded through treaties, conventions, and charters. They are also guided by the Defence Service Delivery Charter, the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the National Ethics and Anti-Corruption Policy (Sessional Paper No. 2 of 2018), Public Finance Management Act 2012, Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act 2015, Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act 2003, Public Officer Ethics Act 2003, Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2011, Leadership and Integrity Act 2012, and Bribery Act 2016.

Kenya adopts the UN Departmental Guidelines that provides Staff training on the types of corruption risks in contracting that are prevalent during operations or peacekeeping missions. These risks include asset disposals, local power brokers, contract delivery monitoring, security of equipment and personnel [1]. Similarly, Section 55(3a), 62, and 66 of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act 2015 address the risks of conflict of interest, corruption, coercion, obstruction, collusion, and fraudulent practices. This law includes a declaration to abstain from corruption [2]. The Humanitarian Peace Support School (HPSS) and the Peace Support Training Centre offer tailored courses targeting military personnel before deployment. Some of these courses touch on corruption, but they are not in-depth, it remains unclear to what extent guidelines on corruption risks in procurement are included in the curriculum [3].

The National Defense Act establishes “that the Ministry shall establish a recognised and credible system of auditing and accountability for all public property, including real property and funds in the charge of the AFL.”.[1] Much of this provision is reinforced in the standard operating procedure (SOP) that is adopted for every deployment or peacekeeping operation. Prior to every mission, whether peacekeeping or operational deployment, personnel undergo detailed briefing/training on the risk of corruption, fraud, and equipment, among others. However, there is little evidence of reporting on the risk of corruption during operations. Prior to and during peacekeeping operations, there are procurement-related transaction. There is little or no reports on how the process unfolds. Likewise, reports on asset disposal and the security of equipment are not reported either.[2]

Trainings sessions are conducted only on general themes of corruption.[1] A more specific training on risk, reflecting on earlier procurement processes or particular field operations is not often reflected. Moreso, the trainings are held irregularly.[2]

In terms of corruption risks associated with procurement during operations or missions carried out by elements of the defense forces, no relevant guidance is given. With regard to public procurement, it is always the Public Procurement Code which is applied [1].

No training is provided on the risks of corruption associated with procurement during deployment or peacekeeping operations. The Public Procurement Code is the only one applicable [1] [2].

Corruption risks associated with procurement are not the subject of specific guidance for the defence and security sector, neither during military operations nor otherwise. Existing guidelines are general and apply across all sectors. They are contained in laws and regulations of general application.[1][2][3][4] Moreover, the security and defence sector has been excluded from the scope of public procuremen, which is likely to make information on the award of procurement opaque and increase risks of corruption in this area.[5]

There is no specific training programme regarding corruption risks associated with procurement, or corruption risks in general during deployed operations or peacekeeping missions.[1][2]

There are no specific and relevant guidelines for corruption risks in contracting. However, there are general guidelines in the Law on the Prevention and Combating of Corruption [1], the Strategy for the Prevention and Combating of Corruption in Public Administration – EPCCAP (2023-2032) [2] and legislation on military crimes, approved by Law No. 17/87, of December 21.

The staff are trained on general aspects related by corruption during training in different military education institutions: in the Practical Schools of the Armed Forces (Army, Navy and Air Force), in the Sergeants’ School, in the Military Academy and in the Higher Institute of Defence Studies [1], lectures given [2] or interventions by Armed Forces Commanders [3]. In the Province of Nampula, on December 7, 2022, training took place for Officers, aimed at the Permanent Staff of the Armed Forces for the Defence of Mozambique (FADM) on combating corruption [4].

There is no evidence that guidelines on addressing corruption risks in contracting whilst on deployed operations or peacekeeping missions exist in Niger [1][2]. The lack of readily available information is also noteworthy in terms of transparency and oversight.

The consulted sources do not provide any indication that personnel receive training specifically aimed at addressing corruption risks in contracting during deployed operations or peacekeeping missions [1][2]. According to the UNODC [3], while eliminating corrupt officials and stakeholders is essential, it is equally critical to provide anti-corruption training to those involved in peacebuilding processes. However, in practice, peacekeeping mandates rarely reference corruption, and anti-corruption training is often absent from peacekeeping training curricula. This broader pattern, combined with the absence of documented evidence in the national context, suggests that such training is not systematically provided, if at all.

There is a deeply entrenched view both within and outside of Nigeria that corruption represents an intrinsic feature of Nigerian society [1]. Amidst accusation of corruption in peacekeeping deployment process of the Nigerian Army [2], military authorities were compelled to refute the claim: “over the years, the NA has been very firm with the criteria for selection of those to serve in the PSOs, which include, that personnel must have participated in the ongoing counter-terrorism counter-insurgency operations in the North East for at least 2 years, among other criteria” [3]. Currently in Nigeria, there is no specific evidence of corruption risk guidelines specifically for contracting. The existing guidelines are broadly applicable and may reference corruption, but they are not detailed enough to consider corruption risks in contracting a central focus. The Peacekeeping Support Operations doctrine has been in place since 2007, and army-issued guidelines indicate that military personnel on peacekeeping missions must follow Nigerian law. While on these missions, they are expected to comply with army conduct rules and national anti-corruption laws.

There is no evidence of specific corruption risk training related to contracting or procurement during troop deployments. However, there is evidence of more general corruption training in the training package for personnel selected for Peace Support Operations (PSOs) mission who undergo Pre-Deployment Training (PDT) at Martin Luther Agwai International Leadership and Peacekeeping Centre (MLAILPKC) Jaji, Kaduna [1]. Instructions during PDT cover broad issues that pose a significant threat to peace, governance, security and development in the host states. The troops are often charged to conduct themselves professionally in accordance with the guidelines of the mission and to uphold the highest standards of conduct and integrity of the military profession [2].

Sanctions are provided for in the event of non-compliance with regulatory provisions but they are not specific to the defence and security forces. Moreover, existing policies and sanctions are general and do not provide targeted guidance for operational contexts. [1] Public procurement in Senegal is monitored by anti-corruption bodies. There is no guidelines for corruption risks in contracting only while on military operations Corruption in public procurement. “The Senegalese are very good at procedures, they know how to respect them. [2]

All staff are not specifically trained on the types of corruption risks in contracting that are prevalent during operations or peacekeeping missions, but they do receive general corruption training. [1] . Few years ago, a report from the Office nationale de lutte contre la corruption (Ofnac) reveals that 90% of Senegalese police officers are corrupt. The Director General of the Police “urges” police officers to “pull themselves together” and limit themselves to their salaries. So it became necessary to train the police and other seciurity forces. [2] . OFNAC had the privilege of being welcomed by this illustrious military body, the Gendarmerie, at the Mame Bounama FALL barracks, home to the National Gendarmerie Officer Training School, to hold an awareness-raising workshop on corruption for cadets on the training course. The aim of the workshop was to raise awareness among Gendarmerie officer cadets, the institution’s future executives, of the damaging effects of corruption and the need to step up measures to combat this scourge in the defence and security sector, and particularly in the National Gendarmerie.[3]

South Africa does not have defence-specific guidelines explicitly outlining corruption risk management in contracting provisions such as integrity pacts or probity audits deployed during contract development. Instead, existing frameworks derive from general public procurement legislation:
– The Public Procurement Bill passed in 2023 establishes a Public Procurement Office (PPO) tasked with setting professional standards and ethical codes for all procurement officials. [1]
– The Department of Defence hosts supplier days sessions emphasising anti-corruption and procurement integrity awareness, but these are not linked to formal contracting guidelines. [2][3]

There is no evidence of structured, defence-specific corruption-risk guidelines for contracting. [4]

General ethics training includes procurement-related subjects but is mandatory for broader public service, not tailored for high-risk defence contracting roles [1].
The Minister of Defence confirmed that the DoD signed an agreement with the National School of Government to deliver procurement training, but this is not specific to corruption risk in procurement, and covers general skills rather than scenario-based risk training. [2]
There is no publicly available proof of specialised corruption-risk training modules for contracting officers or deployment teams, such as workshops on collusion patterns, supplier oversight, or integrity-based procurement case studies [3].

The existing governance frameworks and publicly available documents do not reference any such guidelines [1][2]. In analogous cases across Africa, where no guidelines or training are found, it typically signals a broader lack of policy and procedural clarity in high-risk contracting environments. There are other general guidelines that address the issue of risk to corruption, but these are not specific to either the defence forces or peacekeeping missions [3].
In addition, as host to UNMISS, South Sudan’s operational contracting for the UN mission follows UN rules rather than SSPDF-issued theatre guidance; there is no public evidence of SSPDF issuing such measures [4]. Broader UN human-rights reporting and anti-corruption assessments point to weak implementation environments, reinforcing the absence of defence-specific, operations-level contracting guidance or staff training [5].

There is no evidence that the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF) or South Sudanese army have implemented formal guidelines or training programs to address corruption risks in contracting while deployed or participating in peacekeeping missions [1]. South Sudan, as no such curricula, policies, or documented efforts found on public [2] or official defence ministry platforms [3].
As the host country of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMSS), the SSPDF is not a troop-contributing contingent and therefore does not issue or apply its own contracting guidelines within peacekeeping operations.[4]
As a result, contracting processes during operations remain particularly vulnerable to misuse, lacking the governance, oversight, or preventive framework needed to manage corruption.

There are guidelines and training about addressing corruption risks that can jeopardise the operations and peacekeeping missions [1]. On the one hand, the UPDF Procurement Manual outlines procedures for transparent and accountable procurement practices, including contracting procedures. On the other hand, there is pre-deployment training which aims at introducing the trainees to modules on anti-corruption measures, contracting procedures, and ethical conduct. The Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF) Act provides for the code of conduct of all officers to guide and discipline members of the UPDF in Article 118 [3]. However, the UPDF Act does not specifically address contracting. The UPDF Act does not mention corruption risks in contracting during deployment [2] [3].

The UPDF’s Professional Development Department conducts integrity training focusing on values, ethics, and responsible behaviour [1]. Uganda’s troops deployed on UN peacekeeping missions receive general training on anti-corruption, ethics and integrity. These trainings equip UPDF personnel with the knowledge and skills to prevent, detect, and address corruption within the force and in their operations. [2]

There are no guidelines on staff training on addressing corruption risk in contracting while deployed on operation or peacekeeping missions [1]. However, commanders do highlight issues of corruption in their pre-deployment and deployment briefs and standing orders [2].

No training exists for troops or any of their commanders before and even during deployment [3]. This is the same even for those in the Quartermaster, and procurement, there is no specific training for them on anti-corruption [1]. However, military deployments are characterised by a high supply of army rations, and other expendables to cater for the soldiers deployed [2]. But it is important to note that the deployments provide an opportunity to loot especially for those manning the Quartermaster and the commanders in the deployment with troops [3].