What procedures and standards are companies required to have – such as compliance programmes and business conduct programmes – in order to be able to bid for work for the Ministry of Defence or armed forces?
62a. Formal policies
Netherlands score: 25/100
There are no laws or procedures detailing how the government discriminates in its selection of suppliers and sub-contractors, and suppliers or sub-contractors are not required to sign anti-corruption clauses in contracts with the government.
There are no laws or procedures detailing how the government discriminates in its selection of suppliers and sub-contractors, but periodically suppliers or sub-contractors may be required to sign anti-corruption clauses in contracts with the government.
There may be laws and procedures detailing how the government discrminates in its selection of suppliers and sub-contractors. Some anti-corruption standards are included in the main contract or subcontracts throughout the supply chain.
There are laws and procedures detailing how the government discriminates in its selection of suppliers and sub-contractors on the basis of their integrity. Companies may be required to show that they have a formal and publicly declared anti-corruption programme in place, but some minimum standards are not specified. These standards are included in the main contract as well as subcontracts throughout the supply chain.
There are laws and procedures detailing how the government discriminates in its selection of suppliers and sub-contractors on the basis of their integrity. For example, suppliers and sub-contractors are required to show that they have a formal and publicly declared anti-corruption programme in place that adheres to minimum standards established and specified by the procurement authority. The substance of the programme and standards are included in the main contract as well as subcontracts throughout the supply chain.
The Ministry of Defence does not require companies to have a formal and publicly declared anti-corruption programme in place in order to bid for tenders. However, the Ministry of Defence (and the government more broadly) does discriminate in its selection process on the basis of integrity. The Procurement Act 2012 stipulates that the contracting authority (e.g. the Ministry of Defence) must take measures to effectively prevent and identify corruption and conflicts of interest during the procurement procedure . The Act additionally states that a registration to bid for a tender is inadmissible if it demonstrably involves unauthorised agreements or corruption . When doing business with the MoD, further terms and conditions apply which cover corruption activities. The General Government Purchasing Conditions 2018 (ARIV 2018), the General Government Terms and Conditions for IT Contracts 2018 (ARBIT 2018) and the General Government Terms and Conditions for Public Service Contracts 2018 (ARVODI 2018) all contain provisions banning bribery (gifts, rewards, compensation or benefits of any form) and state that this activity may constitute grounds for (partially) cancelling a contract [2,3,4].
Further, the information provided online by the Ministry of Defence for suppliers of means of transport shows that the Defence Movement and Transport Organisation always conducts an assessment and screening of a company before doing business with them . However, it is not known how widespread this practice is across the defence sector or whether corruption and integrity are issues that are screened for. The COID is currently working on a project with the MoD’s execution and policy departments to address this topic further and make procedures more explicit . This project committee is chaired by the Chief of Defence, Admiral Rob Bauer, signalling that the topic is a priority for the MoD.
 Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations. ‘[Translated] Procurement Act 2012’. Overheid.nl. April 18, 2019. https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0032203/2019-04-18
 Ministry of Defence. ‘General Government Purchasing Conditions 2018 (ARIV) 2018’. May 3, 2018. https://english.defensie.nl/downloads/publications/2018/05/03/ariv-2018
 Ministry of Defence. ‘The General Government Terms and Conditions for IT Contracts (ARBIT) 2018’. May 3, 2018. https://english.defensie.nl/downloads/publications/2018/05/03/arbit-2018
 Ministry of Defence. ‘General Government Terms and Conditions for Public Service Contracts (ARVODI) 2018’. May 3, 2018. https://english.defensie.nl/downloads/publications/2018/05/03/arvodi-2018
 Ministry of Defence. ‘Information for Suppliers of Means of Transport’. January 23, 2015. https://english.defensie.nl/topics/doing-business-with-defence/information-for-suppliers-of-means-of-transport
 Interview with Interviewee 7, COID Representative, March 13, 2021.
62b. Consistent implementation
Netherlands score: 75/100
There is evidence that these policies and laws are not implemented.
There is evidence that these policies and laws are rarely implemented.
There is evidence that these policies and laws are sometimes implemented.
There is evidence that these policies and laws are consistently implemented, but not always i.e. for strategically important suppliers.
There is evidence that these policies and laws are consistently implemented, including for strategically important suppliers.
Though public procurement in the Netherlands draws significant public scrutiny, media reports do not suggest that there is a widespread problem with corruption amongst suppliers to the Dutch defence force. However, one example shows how rules and guidelines on integrity can occasionally be bypassed for strategically important suppliers. In 2013, the Dutch Ministry of Defence (MoD) knowingly continued contracts with companies known to be corrupt. During the Iraq mission, food catering was handled by a company called Supreme, despite the fact that the company pleaded guilty to deliberate fraud during the American Public Prosecution Service’s case against it and that a report was made to the COID stating that the company was defrauding the Dutch MoD .
 Waaijers, Charlotte. ‘[Translated] The Commercialisation of Military Missions: Capitalising on Battles’. De Groene Amsterdammer. February 22, 2017. https://www.groene.nl/artikel/een-slaatje-slaan-uit-veldslagen
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
|Country||62a. Formal policies||62b. Consistent implementation|
|Albania||0 / 100||NA|
|Algeria||0 / 100||NA|
|Angola||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Argentina||0 / 100||NA|
|Armenia||50 / 100||75 / 100|
|Australia||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Azerbaijan||0 / 100||NA|
|Bahrain||0 / 100||NA|
|Bangladesh||0 / 100||NA|
|Belgium||75 / 100||NEI|
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||25 / 100||50 / 100|
|Botswana||0 / 100||NA|
|Brazil||25 / 100||75 / 100|
|Burkina Faso||0 / 100||NA|
|Cameroon||0 / 100||NA|
|Canada||0 / 100||NA|
|Chile||0 / 100||NA|
|China||0 / 100||50 / 100|
|Colombia||0 / 100||NA|
|Cote d'Ivoire||50 / 100||50 / 100|
|Denmark||50 / 100||75 / 100|
|Egypt||0 / 100||NA|
|Estonia||25 / 100||50 / 100|
|Finland||25 / 100||NEI|
|France||25 / 100||50 / 100|
|Germany||50 / 100||50 / 100|
|Ghana||25 / 100||25 / 100|
|Greece||50 / 100||75 / 100|
|Hungary||0 / 100||NA|
|India||50 / 100||50 / 100|
|Indonesia||75 / 100||75 / 100|
|Iran||0 / 100||NA|
|Iraq||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Israel||50 / 100||NEI|
|Italy||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Japan||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Jordan||0 / 100||NA|
|Kenya||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|Kosovo||25 / 100||50 / 100|
|Kuwait||0 / 100||NA|
|Latvia||50 / 100||75 / 100|
|Lebanon||50 / 100||50 / 100|
|Lithuania||25 / 100||25 / 100|
|Malaysia||25 / 100||NA|
|Mali||0 / 100||25 / 100|
|Mexico||0 / 100||NA|
|Montenegro||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Morocco||0 / 100||NA|
|Myanmar||0 / 100||NA|
|Netherlands||25 / 100||75 / 100|
|New Zealand||50 / 100||100 / 100|
|Niger||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Nigeria||0 / 100||NA|
|North Macedonia||50 / 100||100 / 100|
|Norway||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Oman||0 / 100||NA|
|Palestine||0 / 100||NA|
|Philippines||25 / 100||50 / 100|
|Poland||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|Portugal||0 / 100||NA|
|Qatar||0 / 100||NA|
|Russia||0 / 100||NA|
|Saudi Arabia||0 / 100||NA|
|Serbia||0 / 100||NA|
|Singapore||50 / 100||75 / 100|
|South Africa||50 / 100||NEI|
|South Korea||100 / 100||50 / 100|
|South Sudan||0 / 100||NA|
|Spain||25 / 100||25 / 100|
|Sudan||0 / 100||NA|
|Sweden||25 / 100||75 / 100|
|Switzerland||75 / 100||NEI|
|Taiwan||50 / 100||50 / 100|
|Tanzania||50 / 100||NEI|
|Thailand||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Tunisia||25 / 100||100 / 100|
|Turkey||0 / 100||NA|
|Uganda||0 / 100||NA|
|Ukraine||50 / 100||75 / 100|
|United Arab Emirates||25 / 100||NA|
|United Kingdom||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|United States||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Venezuela||0 / 100||NA|
|Zimbabwe||25 / 100||NEI|