Skip to sidebar Skip to main


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?


SCORE: 25/100

Assessor Explanation

Assessor Sources

Compare scores by country

Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.

Relevant comparisons

Training on corruption issues is given to commanders who are deployed abroad as part of the pre-deployment package provided by the armed forces of the countries under which command Albanian forces have been deployed (i.e Albanian forces have served under the German, US, French, Italian, Turkish commands in missions in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan Iraq, Chad, Mali, Kosovo, etc) [1]. Training on anti-corruption in operations has been done in international training courses [2].
Corruption and, more generally, ethics of the military profession are not comprehensively and methodically addressed. As far as pre-deployment training is concerned, it is focused mostly on tactical issues, sexual harassment, and PTSD. The effect of international training courses (e.g. 1-week training in Bosnia) is marginal as only one person can attend [3, 4].
Training on anti-corruption or integrity for commanders is lacking in the regular training courses [5].

There is no known training for commanders that deal with corruption issues.

The Integrated Training Service (ITS) of the United Nations Department of Peace Operations provides a mandatory pre-deployment course in peace missions regarding standards of conduct for all international civilian personnel. [1] However, it establishes that the countries that contribute quotas and police are responsible for providing mandatory pre-deployment training for military and police personnel, who must comply with the standards established by the United Nations. The specific training institute is CAECOPAZ. [2] At the moment this does not train professionals in the supervision of corruption risks in the field. The academic offer of the schools of officers of the Armed Forces, which can be seen on the website of the University of Defence, [3] does not offer specific training on corruption issues. However, the forces receive training regarding public ethics and values. [4] Major Castellanos points out that from his experience as an Instructor Officer and Chief of Subunit at the National Military College, the greatest difficulty arises in ethical training, which is also necessary for the ethical behaviour on the battlefield, where difficult situations generate a conflict of values. [5]

Training is required, but it is limited to the peacekeeping battalion.
In the case of peacekeeping missions training is facilitated by the DCAF, Armenian troops also receive training because of the NATO Partnership for Peace and Armenia’s contributions in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan. Part of the reason is practical: Armenian peacekeepers that are deployed do not just gain experience, it is also financially lucrative. Armenia gets money from the governments who cover the operational costs of the deployment [1].
In its endeavours to promote training for peacekeeping missions, Armenia cooperates with its international partners. For example, the Zar Peacekeeping Training Area in Yerevan, was designed to increase the readiness and training of the 12th Peacekeeping Brigade. A US Embassy of Armenia representative said that by renovating this facility the U.S. government is contributing to the Armenian Ministry of Defence’s efforts to boost its training readiness [2, 3].

The nature of training in corruption issues available to commanders is unclear. Defence documents allude to “mandatory and focused training” to “promote… a strong ethical culture” in the context of fraud and anti-corruption [1]. While the 2012-13 Defence Annual Report contained specific statistics of how many defence personnel undertook “ethics and fraud awareness” training and the detail that this training was mandatory at least biennially [2], these figures and detail have been omitted from more recent Annual Reports. Defence clearly expects commanders and leaders to act “ethically” [3], which is defined in a matter that encompasses non-corrupt behaviour (like acting appropriately when dealing with conflicts of interest and not seeking private benefits through official actions [4]). With key documents such as the Fraud and Ethics Awareness Training Options and Ethics Matters no longer being publicly available (their one-time existence confirmed by the to in a 2011 Transparency International report [5] and the 2015 Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index [6]), it is impossible to ascertain the quality and comprehensiveness of participation in corruption issues training. The Peace Operations Training Institute’s E-Learning for Peacekeepers in the Asia Pacific, a program funded by the Australian Defence Force offering free training to peacekeeping centre students from Australia and other Asia-Pacific countries, does include a module on “Ethics in Peacekeeping”, though it is unclear to what extent corruption issues are captured in this course [7]. One expert respondent said that, to their knowledge, modules on ethics (and anti-corruption as a component of ethics) were a very large part of training for operations, including for commanders [8].

Systematic anti-corruption training is not held in the military. According to certain information, the subject of corruption with the commanding staff is not systematically discussed, and there is no substantial strategic plan in this direction. There are no reports of anti-corruption training in the information provided by the Defence Ministry over the past three years. The findings suggest that the issue of anti-corruption is not a desirable subject for the Defence Ministry and other military structures (1). At the same time, dozens of Azerbaijani servicemen participate in various NATO events during the year. They are also involved in NATO anti-corruption training. However, no details have been provided so far (2).

There are some general training courses, but these courses are not on corruption, and corruption is not considered as a strategic issue within the Bahraini Defence Force [1, 2]. Even when they began electronic procurement, there was not any training on corruption [3]. Following a search on the websites of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Bahraini media sites and verified by interviews, there is no information on this topic that is publicly available.

There are no official or public records suggesting that Bangladesh has any known training in corruption issues for commanders [1].

There is comprehensive traning on corruption issues for commanders at all levels [1]. However, further detailed information on the training curriculum is not publicly available [2].

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) periodically organizes anti-corruption training for military personnel and civil servants, and senior level of command is in priority for training [1]. During the preparation for Peacekeeping operations training on codes of ethics and anti-corruption are organized for those who will be sent in international missions [1]. During 2017 6,185 persons attended training courses, during 2016 8,150 and 5,533 students in 2015 [1]. The data presented here is not verifiable since the data are not publicly available.
There is evidence of international courses organized within the Peace Support Operations Training Centre (PSOTC), where courses such as ACT 646.3 [2, 3] and ACT 654.3 [4, 5] were organized in 2019. Training is organized yearly, based on the training calendar of the PSOTC and open to national and international participants that meet the requirements for the specific training.

There is no publicly available evidence that training is provided for the commanders as a matter of policy [1]. DCEC, which is the institution responsible for handling corruption issues, may be requested to train commanders on an ad hoc basis [1]. No active military operations involving the BDF are going on.

As noted by one of the reviewers, the number of troops deployed abroad is very low following the end of the United Nations Stabilisation Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH). According to the Transparency Report of the Ministry of Defence [1] and a military interviewee [2] and one of the reviewers, all military officials that will command an independent unit (either a platoon/ship or a division/district/wing) receive specific training on corruption issues; not under this name, but under the name of “Intendência” training (a mix of logistics, finances and accountability). This training is also at the core of the military academies, or schools, especially for those who are from the Branch of ‘Intendência”. Decree 98.820 of 1990 [3], approves the Administrative Regulations of the Army (Regulamento Administrativo do Exército), establishing fiscal responsibilities of commanders of units. The Ministry of Defence’s [4], the Army’s [5], the Air Forces’ [6] and the Federal General Comptroller’s (CGU) websites do not advertise these training as related to corruption issues. There is one article that cites CGU’s training of military personnel in 2017, regarding internal control, which was not directed to commanders and operations [7]. Since Intendência training tackles legality and formal bureaucratic processes, but it is still not clear if they deal directly with anti-corruption.

Although they attend training sessions before deployment, these sessions are not usually meant to address corruption. The pre-deployment training sessions are for military commanders, and they focus on defence and security subjects, although they may be sensitized and informed on general field orders, including corruption. Transparency International (2016) (1) endorses this argument when it states that “10 out of the top 25 Troop Contributing Countries (TCCs) are in band ‘F’ for preparing their troops to control corruption and behave with integrity in military operations, 8 are in band ‘E’ and 5 are in band ‘D’” (1). Very little information on corruption is provided to troops before deployment. Law N° 038 (2016), does not address capacity building on non-military subjects, including corruption. There is no evidence that the existing military policy and the recent Law of Military Programming integrate capacity building opportunities on corruption either. According to Diallo (2017), the Law of Military Programming will allow the armed forces to enhance the overall capacity of the military (3), but there is no evidence that corruption is among the training that will be delivered over the next five years that the Strategic Plan of Reform (PSR) of the armed forces will cover. However, online courses are available for military commanders for free, monitored by the Peace Operations Training Institute (POTI).

The main military institutions which train officers at the middle management levels are the Joint Military School (known by the French acronym EMIA), the War College and the International School for Security Forces, which trains police and gendarmerie officers in peacekeeping techniques [1] [2]. The French Embassy in Yaounde states on their website (July 2018), “38 police trainees and gendarmes from 16 nationalities were able to acquire knowledge in the fields of democratic crowd management, police techniques, weapons knowledge and pedagogy. Police and gendarmes trained in peacekeeping at Eiforces” [3].

There is no known evidence of anti-corruption training in any of these military and security institutions nor evidence of any anti-corruption training prioritized in these institutions. The International School for Security Forces handles some elements of ethics for peacekeepers at diploma level [1]. However, the processes of getting into such institutions are often marred by corruption and nepotism. Furthermore, there is not a vibrant culture of ongoing military training within the defence and security architecture. Obtaining a place on a course has to be sanctioned by the Minister of Defence (for military) or the Delegate of National Security (for police). This process is often bureaucratic, which makes it easy only for those who have some kind of connections to have these opportunities [4].

The 2017 US State Department Human Rights Report states: “In the context of the fight against Boko Haram, local sources indicated that corruption-related inefficiencies and diversion of resources from their intended purposes continued to represent a fundamental national security vulnerability” [5]. This evidence indicates the absence of proper, regular and effective anti-corruption training provided to the officers.

There is not enough evidence to score this indicator. There may be very specific elements of training for those going on deployment to areas where they may face instances of corruption, but these are not widespread nor well advertised/available to the public. [1] [2]

Troops participating in peacekeeping operations in foreign countries must comply with special training at the Centre of Training for Peacekeeping Operations of Chile (Cecopac). The course is based on the Core Pre-deployment Training of the United Nations, with specific content related to the characteristics, needs, and conditions of the social, political, and economic context of the operations [1]. Although the training is broad, it makes a reference to the UN Anti-Fraud and Anti-Corruption Framework [1] and also covers related topics of values and competencies, as well as conduct and discipline, among others. Despite the lack of strong specific training in corruption issues as part of the compulsory training for commanders there have been good evaluations of peacekeeping operations abroad [2].

There is not enough information to score this indicator. Apart from anticorruption training in the MoD and PLA , as assessed in Q48, there is very limited publicly available information on specialised training for commanders during deployment.

China is involved in two main types of operations beyond its officially recognised borders: UN Peacekeeping operations (9 missions mainly on the African continent) and deployments in relation to strategic interests linked to Belt and Road Initiative projects. [1] There is only scant evidence of anticorruption training in these two types of operations.

Regarding peacekeeping, China is supposed to promote anticorruption training for local officials, [2,3] which is an indication that corruption is an issue addressed when deployed abroad.

Regarding the Belt and Road projects, China explicitly recognises corruption as an important issue in its defence policy [4] and there have been very limited reports on anticorruption training, for instance for personnel of the PLA’s Theatre Command. [5] However, there is no information referring specifically to deployed commanders. There is a complete lack of transparency on this aspect.

The Agreements concluded between the Colombian State and NATO between 2017 and 2018 aim to generate partnerships of cooperation and synergies for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security, through exchange of knowledge and learning among members who are part of NATO. This means implementating trainings for all Colombian forces and Commanders with regard to international humanitarian law, transparency, outreach to the population, etc. [1] According to Interviewees in the Ministry of Defence and the Colombian National Army, these Agreements are very important because they have allowed the various forces, Commanders and military members of lower ranks to train on issues of corruption during operations. One of the main courses is ‘Building integrity’ in partnership with the U.K. Defence Academy for military members who will be promoted as Generals. [2] It is a face-to-face course of 40 hours, and covers topics such as: the prevention of corruption in cases of military management, issues of integrity and transparency, and military best practices. For the Interviewees, this course is part of the mandatory training that must be completed prior to the promotion of Colonels and Generals. [3, 4, 5] There are also courses on integrity issues and corruption risks developed in the training schools in which the control authorities participate (the Office of the Attorney’s Office, Comptroller’s Office) that are also mandatory. In addition, there are the courses developed by DANTE within the schools, for training at all levels. [6, 7, 8] For Army Interviewees, a great achievement was the ability to link all the pedagogical and formative material on issues of transparency and integrity in military academies into the training curriculum in all Military Forces. There is no clear training for specific missions during premobilizations.

Côte d’Ivoire lacks a known training in corruption issues for commanders of the armed forces. This type of training is not provided in the pre-deployment of military personnel. As in 51A, there is no military doctrine or handbook to provide practical guidance to commanders and other high-ranking members of the military about corruption issues before or during deployment. Anti-corruption training for higher-level military ranks was provided in a very general way by the UN Operation in Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI) until its mission officially expired on June 30, 2017. According to a 2018 report by the World Peace Foundation, the training and capacity of the Ivorian military were insufficient in the aftermath of the post-election crisis of 2010-2011. UNOCI trained at least 7,000 police officers in human rights and child protection, promoted improved parliamentary oversight of the security sector and helped to draft defence legislation. It also supported a national training program for the Gendarmerie in the period 2015-2019 (1).

For example, the UN Police (UNPOL) in Côte d’Ivoire went operational on April 4, 2004, as part of UN Security Council Resolution 1528 and its mandate was amended several times subsequently. One of the key roles of UNPOL was to train members of the local police and gendarmerie in professional matters. But the training focused more on police science and judicial procedures than on corruption issues (2).

But since the end of the UNOCI mission in June 2017, training of commanders (and of the armed forces) has focused on technical skills without any mention of anti-corruption training. In the 2018 Report on Côte d’Ivoire by the Bertelsmann Foundation (BTI 2018), the soldier uprisings of January and May 2017 by powerful former rebel commanders known as COMZONES illustrates the failure to seriously reform the military apparatus at all levels (3). The BTI report states:

“The government has also failed to make any significant progress in fully restructuring and modernizing the security apparatus. The mutiny in January 2017, initiated by former rebels now integrated into the army, revealed both ongoing conflicts within the army as well as the capacity of soldiers to disrupt the political process and to question civilian supremacy… Other, more structurally oriented reforms regarding the reorganization of the security apparatus, judicial reform, or decentralization have been much less thoroughly implemented (or not even seriously initiated), both due to the technical complexity of the issues, but also to the political resistance of key actors within government” (3).

As there is no doctrine on corruption issues, there is no training of commanders at all levels. This was confirmed by a source [1]. However, research indicates that individuals who are deployed in mission positions dealing specifically with issues of corruption in Afghanistan recieve training as part of their pre-deployment training [2]. A source with experience of the NATO Transparency, Accountability and Oversight [TAO] branch of the NATO Resolute Support Security Assistance Command reported that deployment in this unit required training that involved a few lessons in counter-corruption and anti-corruption. The source also reported that Denmark deploys officers in this unit as anti-corruption specialists. These persons received comprehrensive training on corruption issues. Among other things they attended the Inspector General course which is an intensive five to six weeks training course in the United States [2]. Note that training in corruption issues is not a part of the normal pre-deployment training [1]. Thus, while there is no basic Danish training on corruption issues, officers who will deal specifically with corruption issues in NATO missions receive some training. Note that all national and international employees of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are required to take a course on anti-corruption [3].

After reviewing and surveying the platforms of the relevant training authorities in the defence sector, such as the Nasser Military Academy, and the Training Authority of the Armed Forces, as well as consulting interviewees there is no training delivered for personnel (civilian or military) at any level on issues of corruptions or questions related to corruption or anti-corruption measures (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6).

Officers receive special leadership training that covers to a certain extent ethics, morality and responsibility. [1] In addition, the Estonian Internal Security Service organises training for the leadership in the defence sector (government officials, officials and servicemen in the Defence Forces and the Defence League). This training covers corruption, treason and potential defence risks. There is also regular training on professional ethics for officials from different sectors, including from the defence sector. [2] Instructions given before military missions may somewhat involve the topic of corruption – if necessary in describing the environment. [3] However, based on experts’ assessments, training for the highest level of defence personnel is conducted irregularly and the attendance of this training is sparse. There is no well-known and deep-rooted structure of courses on corruption issues. According to the Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2013-2020, training on conflicts of interest is carried out once or twice for public officials. [4] This training includes overviewing professional standards, especially for sensitive areas.

Some training takes place but not specifically focused on corruption issues. On behalf of the chief of general staff and prepared by the legal section of the Headquarters of the Defence Forces, education for good governance was organised for the entire staff of the Defence Forces (including both soldiers and civilians) in 2019 according to a written response provided by the Headquarters of the Defence Forces. In addition, the aim is to educate systematically new personnel that comprise part of the leadership. Moreover, basic and further training of different personnel groups include educational themes that relate to good governance and criminal law. [1] Training on ethical issues is incorporated holistically in military training [2].

The word “corruption” is not mentioned in the various “operational preparation” training phases followed by troops about to be deployed in external operations (OPEX), [1] described on the Ministry of the Armed Forces deployment topic webpage. No record was found of any corruption training given to commanding officers of the French army. There is some evidence that the Operations Planning and Conduct Centre (Centre de planification et de conduite des opérations, CPCO) informs commanders of corruption risks in foreign territories, [2] however further information could not be identified in the public domain to confirm this.

Cultural training may address corruption as a “cultural difference” to be reckoned with, like the training given at EMSOME to soldiers ahead of OPEX. [3] [4] This training aims to raise awareness of French soldiers about cultural gaps between them and locals, how to communicate with locals, and avoiding cultural missteps. Among the “mis-steps” addressed, an interviewee said corruption issues were briefly mentioned: “backchich” money for instance, small bribes, that can be assimilated to facilitation payments. Despite this lack of formal training, no trace was found in media articles of French soldiers or commanding officers being involved in corruption scandals in the countries of deployment.

There is a variety of corruption training programmes in place. However, there is no dedicated training on corruption issues prior to deployment. According to the BMVg’s sustainability report, corruption prevention features as part of the regular training of the Armed Forces, with an increased focus during qualification training for senior staff [1]. The risks and consequences of corruption are covered as part of the regular induction training (‘Erstbelehrung’). Information material on anti-corruption issues is circulated once per year for the purpose of further and renewed awareness-raising. In addition to anti-corruption training as part of the regular staff training, specialised seminars on the issue are offered by the Armed Forces Training Center (‘Bildungszentrum der Bundeswehr’) as well as the Public Administration Academy (‘Bundesakademie für Öffentliche Verwaltung’) [1]. The anti-corruption training focusses on commanders as well as personnel in charge of corruption prevention [2].

In terms of dedicated training/preparation for deployment, corruption does not feature as a regular part of the curriculum. According to the Federal Ministry of Defence, corruption-specific modules can be added if needed [3].

Corruption is not specifically addressed in the MOD or GAF training. Officers deployed in international peacekeeping operations undergo pre-deployment training held by a KAIPTC training team. However, while the KAIPTC addresses the issue of corruption in its master degrees, it is not clear if the content of the pre-deployment training also specifically addresses corruption (1).

Some commanders, before deployment, take part in Building Integrity courses provided by the Multinational Peace Support Operations Training Centre of Greek Army [1, 2].

While some elements of the military education include training on corruption issues, pre-deployment training cover this issue only on a superficial level. This might vary for officials also participating for deployment through international training, such as Civil-military co-operation (CIMIC) and Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) officers. While most of the CIMIC handbooks that were part of the training are no longer available online, most of them (such as the one on Iraq or Baghlan for Kosovo) [1] included only general information on the level of corruption threat in the local environment [2]. Source 7 [3] confirmed that specific training for the missions did not include corruption issues. Based on the training materials prepared for deployments and the response of source 7 and earlier responses, it is clear that corruption training is not comprehensive nor general for all units prepared for deployment.

Prescribed codes of conduct as per the Acts from each branch of the military serve as the foundation for training [1]. Given that as per the Acts, corruption is a punishable offence, it is possible that there is an element of anti-corruption training before deployment. According to a retired Army colonel there is an anti-corruption element in generic training for commanders at all levels and at times, specific anti-corruption courses [2].

The Minister of Defence (MoD) has stated that, “In keeping with the need to ensure transparency, fair play, accountability and integrity, efforts are being made continuously in the Ministry of Defence for sensitization of all the stakeholders against corrupt practices” [3].

In accordance with the directives of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), the Army, Navy, Air Force, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Director General Border Roads (DGBR), Controller General of Defence Accounts (CGDA) and all departments under the MoD observe Vigilance Awareness Week on an annual basis. Activities include training workshops [4].

Anti-corruption training has been provided to military officers by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) since 2012. So far, the scope of the training has been limited to law enforcement officers, such as Military Oditur/prosecutors (Otmil) or Military Police (POM) investigators [1]. The provided training also tends to be casual and is not included in basic military training. Bureaucratic reform efforts related to transparency, in this case the Corruption-Free Integrity Zone (ZI), have taken the form of a declaration of an Integrity Zone at the Military Academy (Akmil) [2] and the Directorate of Engineering [3], as well as the signing of an integrity pact at the Naval Academy (AAL) [4]. This reform focusses on a change of mindset, accountability, monitoring and improvement of operational procedures for institutions. It was not possible to find any other specific anti-corruption training for leaders who will be deployed in operations.

The country has no known training in corruption issues for commanders. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) gives ideological and cultural education training [1], and the Basiji also receive political-ideological training [2], but, no known anti-corruption training, is given to commanders before deployment.

Despite the Iraqi government’s vocal commitment towards tackling defence corruption at its root (1), past training programmes and schemes — as the COI and NATO are concerned — focused predominantly on abating financial and administrative corruption (2), (3) and capacity building activities within Iraq’s military establishment (4). Contrary to evidence of anti-corruption training in the context of field deployment, liberation operations against the Islamic State Group since June 2014, underscore poor initial planning and the formation of an ad-hoc paramilitary apparatus, out of which A’Hashd al Shaabi, the PMF, grew. Empowered by the fight against the ISG, and prior to the group’s institutionalisation, various militias were deployed into former ISG-held areas, ahead of army personnel acting on the instructions of PMF commanders, whose plans to deploy have been announced prior to those issued by the Iraqi state — implying some level of competition between the Iraq state and the PMF. While the US continues to draw down forces, US commanders have also been actively training and advising Iraqi military personnel within battle zones (5), the focus of which, due to the prolonged precarity of the security climate (6) has been on guerilla warfare and counterinsurgency and not anti-corruption training to commanders. As compounded in the response of one Interviewee (7) “Iraq, has no official policy that informs deployment practices or the behaviour of commanders” in spite of the activities and initiatives run by Iraq’s Anti-Corruption Academy. Military appointments based on a persons political, and sectarian, affiliation has engendered a new focus as reported by NATO’s Iraq Training Mission (8) namely to “screen out potential war criminals and hardcore militia members from being instructors in the troubled country’s rebuilt army” (9).

In Israel there isn’t any known systematic, regular pre-deployment training in anti-corruption for commanders. Every commander has to get familiar with the ethics code but there is no specification for corruption. In November 2018 a senior officer wrote against the corruption in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) and said that the army ethical code must be clearer to officers (1) (2). After a review of IDF websites and the Ministry of Defense no information on anti-corruption training were found (3). Although soldiers have no specific anti-coruption trainings, they receive anti-coruption instructions before every single mission as part of the general instructions for the soldiers. For example, one officer said that they have many oral instructions that they are not allowed to receive anything from anyone (4). They are also informed that they will get punished if they won’t behave according to these instructions. Still, there have been annual workshops on the subject for officers (2008). See for example (5)

No specific course on issues concerning corruption during deployment is given by the Office for specialised training and teaching of the Ministry of Defence. [1]
Nonetheless, general training on corruption is foreseen for all the personnel of the Ministry [2]. For the sake of completeness, one should also mention that the Multinational Specialized Unit (MSU) of Carabinieri occasionally receive specific training on a range of issues, including corruption. This knowlege is then used to train local police forces in the mission country [3].

In the post-cold war period, the Self-Defence Force (SDF) has conducted various types of foreign operations. These include participation in peacekeeping operations, contribution to disaster relief, support for reconstruction in post-war Iraq and fuel supply in support of anti-terror operations. [1] Regarding international peace cooperation activities, as of March 31, 2020, Japan had four staff officers assigned to the headquarters for the UN peacekeeping operation in South Sudan and two staff officers assigned to the Multinational Force & Observers in the Sinai. However, Japan contributed more to such operations in earlier years. [2] There are two main institutions for educating and training personnel in preparation for deployment on such operations. [3] The Japan Peacekeeping Training and Research Centre of the Joint Staff College offers three courses: a Contingent Commanders’ Course (CCC), a Staff Officers’ Course (SOC) and a Basic course. Training in anti-corruption is not explicitly mentioned on the website of the centre, but the subjects that are taught include “Laws and regulations regarding international peace operations” and “Civil-military relations.” The CCC has been held once every summer since 2013, and its purpose is to give personnel the training necessary to be contingent commanders of international peace cooperation activities. Participants should be at the level of Lieutenant Colonel/Commander – Colonel/Captain. The SOC has also been held annually since 2013, conducted in January/February. Participants should have a rank corresponding to Major/Lieutenant Commander – Lieutenant Colonel/Commander. It provides training to staff officers in UN and other peacekeeping missions. The Basic Course has been held 18 times, and twice a year since 2014. Participants should have a rank equivalent to First Lieutenant/Lieutenant Junior Grade – Major/Lieutenant Commander. It provides academic knowledge and practical training needed to participate in UN Peacekeeping Operations and International Peace Cooperation Activities. [4] The second institution is the International Peace Cooperation Activities Training Unit of the Ground SDF (GSDF). It provides generic training to give personnel the necessary skills for deployment abroad and mission specific training to prepare them for imminent deployment. Courses providing generic training are to be conducted several times a year. Officers and non-commissioned officers from regional armies of the GSDF receive such generic training, and are afterwards considered to be on stand-by for deployment. Anti-corruption is not mentioned on the website of this unit either, but one of 11 categories on a page with links to relevant material is the UN Conduct and Discipline Unit. [5] Thus, the consulted websites do not have information about a self-contained course dedicated to anti-corruption. However, according to a retired higher Marine SDF (MSDF) officer who commanded an MSDF district headquarters, personnel suited for deployment abroad will be selected for such operations, and all deployed servicemen will receive the necessary training. [6] Nevertheless, according to available sources, there is no known training in corruption issues for commanders.

There is a required training course for high ranked officers that includes a whole chapter on corruption and transparency. Such training is periodical, with the help of JIACC, and some NGOs. In 2018 and 2017, more three training courses were organised in some units in the armed forces and intelligence. It has become apparent that, although anti-corruption training takes place in Jordan, it is mostly not concerned with the defence sector. Some of these training sessions are organised by the Integrity and Anti-Corruption Commission, and there is some media reporting around them but that does not extend to defence [1, 2]. Most of this training took place at the Ministry of Education and the Judicial Council or was organised by foreign embassies [3]. Despite the fact that the Integrity and Anti-Corruption Commission published on its news section that a delegate from the general security department visited the Anti-Corruption Commission to understand its work within the framework of anti-corruption training [4], there is no evidence to suggest that training in corruption issues is provided to commanders at all levels [5,6].

There is limited information on training on corruption issues for KDF commanders at all levels. In addition, although various documents. such as Grand Strategy which dicusses the national security risks possed by Corruption, are included in the National Defence College Journal as a Training Course Material for Defence Staff, it is too general and not clear whether issues disussed are core part of training. [1]

Nonetheless, incidences of corruption within the Kenya Defence Forces are indicative of gaps in training at all levels. The KDF has been associated with illegal smuggling of sugar and charcoal in Somalia, aiding the operations of the Al Shabaab questionable land acquisition deals and reports of corruption related to KDF recruitment with bribes paid during the exercise totalling to millions of shillings. [2, 3, 4]

There are comprehensive trainings on corruption-related issues that commanders of the Kosovo Security Forces (KSF) at all levels have attended. Some of these trainings have also been attended by commanders. These trainings include those organised by Defence Academy of the United Kingdom; the North-Atlantic Trade Organisation Building Integrity programme; and the Centre for Integrity in the Defence Sector of the Norwegian Ministry of Defence – which represents the bilateral support offered by the Kingdom of Norway to Kosovo in drafting Kosovo’s Integrity Plan. These trainings are not specifically related to any pre-deployment mission, but rather respond to a need of the KSF personnel to undergo trainings on anti-corruption measures in a context of bilateral relationships with the UK, Norway, NATO, etc [1].

There is a comprehensive training for at least all the heads of departments, auditors said (1, 2 and 3). But the training is superficial in nature — the lecturers simply reiterate the institution’s commitment to certain values like integrity and the need to obey the law and report suspicious behavior, auditors said. Sometimes they talk about new methods of fighting corruption in the West and how they should apply them in Kuwait.

They are not legally obliged to attend and they only do so because the security chiefs said to cooperate with auditors when it comes to training.

It is unclear how often the SAB offers lectures to the agencies but the CSC conducts at least six workshops a year and the ACA conducts about 12, the auditing sources said.

Currently, there is no specific training on anti-corruption issues for soldiers: knowledge obtained through participation in courses organised by the State Administration School (on questions of identification and prevention of corruption risks). [1] The exchange of information and experience between contingents takes place in the framework of deploying for international operations, during the transfer of office. Therefore, most training is done in the pre-deployment phase. This practice, begun by the National Armed Forces, is due to continue, whereby the previous contingent’s senior officials debrief and train the next contingent. The Ministry of Defence’s Audit and Inspection Departments General Inspectorate conducts (at least twice a year) an electronic survey for contingent personnel and other international operations, sent to the soldiers to identify possible corruption-related risks. The Audit and Inspection Department General Inspectorate collects the results of the questionnaire and transmits the information obtained to the head of the institution. The international operations questionnaires provide the opportunity to comment on relevant issues in any of its sections. Soldiers comment on several issues regarding the improvement and arrangement of the system.

Training in corruption issues is conducted for commanders at some levels or in some units, but not all. Nothing was found to suggest it is a requirement (1). The LAF, in collaboration with LTA and TI, conducted a workshop for the LAF on the relationship between security and corruption. The LTA representative stated that the organization will work on conducting more workshops to improve the LAF’s transparency (2). Furthermore, the Directorate for Human Rights Law in the Lebanese Armed Forces has conducted two training cycles for 40 officers on combating corruption (3).

The 2016-2017 report on the effectiveness of corruption prevention and control in the defence sector indicates that there are lectures on corruption prevention at General Jonas Žemaitis Military Academy [1]. All trainings are organised by a special Unit “The Board for Teaching and Doctrines” [2]; although this focuses on military trainings rather than anticorruption. Nevertheless, according to the interviewee from the Ministry of Defence, anticorruption trainings take place annually [3]. The goal of these trainings is to ensure that commanders and Ministry of Defence staff are able to recognise corruption risks. According to the government reviewer, Officers being deployed on operations receive specific training which does include anti-corruption topics. Training is delivered as part of military education e.g., at military academies, and in pre-deployment training for specific missions [6]. The Ministry of Defence has no data on how efficient these trainings are. The 2019 Report of the General Inspectorate of the Ministry of Defence refers to a series of anti-corruption trainings conducted by the General Inspectorate in co-operation with the Special Investigation Service [4]. The cycle of lectures planned for 2020 includes several general type of anti-corruption lectures for the defence sector [5].

There is a manual published on integrity which serves to guide members of the armed forces on anti-corruption, however, this manual does not provide guidelines specific to deployment. There are also regular anti-corruption and integrity building programmes such as integrity talks and discussions, however, they are also not specific to deployment. [1]

The assessor found no evidence to suggest that regular training on corruption issues takes place within the Malian army. Evidence from a number of sources indicates that there has been widespread corruption in the Malian army for at least the last decade,⁵ ⁶ ⁷ ⁸ ⁹ ¹⁰ ¹¹ indicating that any training mechanisms that are in place are highly ineffective. According to a World Bank report, corruption is commonplace among defence personnel. Indeed, a placement in the army is seen as an asset which generates “flows of illicit income”.² A NOREF report notes that the Malian army lacks “a unified national moral compass to underwrite its military operations”.³
There are two Malian training schools for international missions. The first is the Military Administration School (EMA) in Koulikoro, which provides training for officers from African contingents who carry out administrative or financial duties. The Koulikoro School of Peacekeeping offers courses on human rights and international treaties, but a specific focus on corruption issues is not in place despite the risk corruption poses to security assistance programmes.¹³
The second school is the Alioune Blondin Beye school of peacekeeping in Bamako, which trains officers from both the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Economic Community of Central African States, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development in Eastern Africa (IGAD), the Arab Maghreb Union (AMU) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). It offers some anticorruption training as part of its standard UN peacekeeping modules. The course on ethics includes teaching on the Code of Conduct, Trafficking and Discipline.¹ However, a specific focus on corruption is missing.¹³ While anticorruption is not explicitly referenced, it is included peripherally in these training courses; “integrity and not soliciting or accepting material reward, honour or gifts” are for example mentioned in training texts.¹ No evidence was found to indicate whether or how officers are examined on the training they receive however. No evidence was also found, such as course participant lists at Alioune Blondin Beye, to indicate what proportion of commanders in each rank bracket attend training, although the school does provide courses designed for senior officers.⁴
The police, gendarmerie and national guard are receiving regular anticorruption training from the EU’s EUCAP Sahel Training Mission.¹² Reforms are designed to create a more effective and transparent human resources system. Training is designed to install a citizen’s ethic into the police to discourage them from preying on the population and demanding bribes.¹²
However, a security expert in Bamako confirmed that the EU’s military training mission (EUTM) focuses overwhelmingly on military tactics and contains no anticorruption component.¹⁵ Indeed, the EUTM is operating in Mali at the request of the Malian government. Therefore, it does not have an executive or mentoring mandate. It can only deliver what the Malian authorities want.¹⁵
Transparency International’s (TI) analysis of the previous US-led and French-led training efforts in Mali deemed that these were insufficient:¹³ “US interviewees pointed out that the Defence Institute for International Legal Studies (DIILS) delivered courses on human rights and ethics to the Malian military. However, DIILS would usually focus on human rights and civil/military relations before all other issues, including corruption. While programming in some cases did involve anticorruption courses, the usual focus was on human rights issues; this was the case in Mali as well”. TI notes that IMET training incorporates human rights training but does not have an explicit focus on transparency, accountability and counter-corruption (TACC) issues. The report says that “most interviewees argued that standalone counter-corruption courses in the Malian armed forces would not have worked. What was needed was an integrated approach addressing other issues, including civil-military relations and good governance, and encompassing state and social entities apart from the army. Thus tackling corruption needed to be embedded in a comprehensive reform of institutions and processes, as robust institutional systems and better civilian oversight were important mechanisms for decreasing the risk of corruption”.¹³
TI determines that the French training courses similarly did not include a component on tackling corruption.¹³

As noted previously, Mexico’s participation in peacekeeping missions in other countries is very recent and, therefore, the training provided before these mobilisations has focused, mainly, on human rights, gender, and the work of the United Nations. To date, there has not been any record of anti-corrruption training for commanders.

The third phase of activities of the recently inaugurated CECOPAM contemplates teaching the following courses: “Course for United Nations Police (in support of the National Guard and Federal Police), Course for civilians working in unstable environments (SRE staff, from Notimex, of the Judicial Council, of the National Electoral Institute, or of other agencies of the Mexican State), Course on Civil-Military Relations in a United Nations environment, Collective Training (course for United Nations Contingents according to their specific mission).” [1] [2]

The country has no specific training in corruption issues for commanders. [1][2] The government does not provide training before deploying their troops under a foreign country’s command, but those countries do provide such training. [1]

According to the MOD reviewer, there is training concerning corruption issues that is required for commanders at all levels. Training is delivered as a part of military education in pre-deployment training, for all NATO, EU and UN-led operations, but as provided documentation shows, corruption issues are superficially addressed. Apart from in-house training, military personnel attend the NATO certified courses for Building Integrity in peace-keeping operations an BI courses for Senior Leaders, organized together with the UK Defence Academy or PSOTC (Peace Support in Operations Training Center) Sarajevo. Information could not be verified.

At the National Defence College, professors from foreign and local universities give lectures about corruption to the Commanders of the Tatmadaw. There are also military personnel who conduct theses about corruption. These lectures are mainly about the comparative study of government-sector corruption in other countries [1]. Senior officers who hold the rank of colonel or above can attend the National Defence College [1]. Although there are no training courses authorised by the command, meetings and discussions about anti-corruption have been held in respective regiments [1]. However, one lieutenant said that he had not encountered any meetings related to anti-corruption. Perhaps it is because his posting is in urban military hospitals [2]. One retired senior officer said that such training is not necessary because every military must have the cultural knowledge to avoid corruption [3]. The Corruption Prevention Unit of the Myanmar Anti-Corruption Commission conducted training for 14 ministries, but the 3 ministries that are under the control of the military were not included in this training [4].

Commanders at all levels receive integrity training upon appointment [1]. Preventative integrity training programmes are part of the education/promotion courses given to military personnel when they apply for new roles above a certain level and is thus seen as part of formal career education [1] [2]. Additionally, anti-corruption training is delivered during pre-deployment exercises and is aimed at corruption risks that personnel may encounter abroad, rather than integrity risks that are faced internally [1].

According to HQ NZDF, there is training on corruption issues relating to financial and cash management, contract management, ethics, and rule of law for commanders at all levels during pre-deployment training. The Assessor can independently verify that this occurs at advanced-levels and has attended a Law of Armed Conflict course in the presence of officers prior to their deployment to Afghanistan pre-2015. This policy has continued and, according to the Executive Officer at the NZDF Chief of Staff, all officers undergo a number of mandatory training, briefings, tests, and course as part of individual readiness [1]. NZDF commanders on operations occasionally come into contact with corrupt activities. They report these through the operational observations and lessons learned database which allows the NZDF to update training and deliver recommendations on how to manage corrupt activities [2]. Since the withdrawal of the New Zealand Provincial Reconstruction Team in Bamyan, Afghanistan, and the end of any significant overseas deployments, opportunities, or instances, to observe or experience corrupt activities haVE decreased. A keyword search for “corruption” and “bribery” of the HQ Joint Forces NZ Lessons database returned matches in Situation Reports related to other nations and activities but nothing that relates to the work of the NZDF on its missions. [3]. Such indirect reporting and references indicate an absence of direct engagement with and exposure to corruption and bribery within the missions that the NZDF participates in.

As discussed in question 48 there is a wide variety of training provided by different actors at bilateral and multilateral levels. However, the assessor did not find evidence that there is training for military commanders at all levels that address specifically corruption issues during deployment. Nevertheless, the lack of evidence does not mean that these issues may not be discussed as part of a larger curriculum.
Even though no evidence has been found that there is an explicit program directly addressing corruption as part of military or police training, officers are trained in general ethics and in line with the Military Penal Code which specifically addresses corruption. For example, Article 228 states that officers found guilty of corruption, theft or general crime can be dismissed, demoted or imprisoned. The Code provides for a judiciary military police that reports to the Ministry of Defence (Article 46). They are charged with finding and following up all infractions of the law (Article 47) at all levels of the armed forces (Article 48) (1).
Furthermore, even though there is no systematic approach to fighting corruption in the defence sector, national authorities at the higher level publically claimed their engagement to tackle the issue. For instance, principal outlines of the security and defence policy of the Presidential Renaissance Programme for 2016-2021 include fighting against corruption in the security and defence institutions as part of improving the security governance strategy (2). Therefore, the Niger government welcomes different initiatives coming from national and international institutions. In September 2016 the Abdou Moumouni University of Niger, with the support of Belgium, inaugurated the first in its kind Master in Security and Culture of Peace designed essentially for Niger military and civil officers (3). It provides in-depth training on a vast range of security and defence issues where, according to interviewees, corruption – as being directly related to the illicit circulation of drugs, arms or human trafficking – is often debated in class, even if it is not part of the curriculum as a separate subject.
The European Union also provides training to Nigerien civil and military servants. Launched in 2012, EUCAP Sahel-Niger provides advice and training to support the Nigerien authorities in strengthening their security capabilities. It contributes to the development of an “integrated, coherent, sustainable, and human rights-based approach among the various Nigerien security agencies in the fight against terrorism and organised crime” (4). The objective of EUCAP Sahel is “improving the efficiency of the regional mixed command posts to improve the response to crises and the interoperability of security forces; collecting and sharing intelligence between those forces; developing forensic science expertise; training the municipal police of the Agadez region; improving HR management systems; improving teaching capacity at the security forces’ training centers and schools; and ensuring that the armed forces act on a sound legal basis in their mission to combat terrorism and trafficking” (4). According to interviewees, training provided by CAP Sahel does not explicitly include “corruption” as a separate course either. However, invited experts regularly discuss and actively debate issues of corruption as being directly related to the illicit circulation of drugs, arms or human trafficking.
Finally, as part of bilateral cooperation with the USA, by signing the Joint Country Action Plan (JCAP) in October 2015 Niger engaged in the Security Governance Initiative. The objective of the programme is to contribute to improving decision-making processes that determine the allocation of human, material, and financial resources for the security sector as well as enhancing human resourcing procedures (5). This implies addressing corruption too. France, being engaged in the countries of the Sahel region (Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger) with the ongoing Barkhane Operation also participates in regular training of the Niger military on general ethics. Finally, the International Committee of the Red Cross which plays an important role in Niger, also regularly provides training for Nigerien military in International Humanitarian Law where issues of corruption, even if they are not addressed directly are discussed.

Although there is some training on some issues relating to corruption the training available tends to be context-specific and the subject matter far from comprehensive. For example, the implications or connection between corruption and operational efficiency and effectiveness are not demonstrated or understood (1). Furthermore, different types of corruption risks and the operational contexts or situations which may give rise to corruption risks or ethics issues are not properly understood and incorporated into training manuals and materials in a comprehensive method. Training when provided tends to lean more in favour of operational issues, rather than conflict of interest challenges and how they should be overcome. Another example is concerning due diligence training and the importance of transparency and the actions or steps necessary to meet ethical challenges. There are generalised explanations and directions, signposting, on how to trigger issues and escalation through the chain of command but information regarding institutional support or commitment to support escalation is thin (1), (3). Corruption is identified in the National Defence Policy as a generalised risk with no significant policy recommendations on how it should be tackled in the context of operations. There is some training provided for corruption risks in procurement, but this training is not extended to field commanders. “As part of the challenge facing Nigeria in recent years, and as seen in the Sudan mission is perceived corruption regarding payment of deployed Nigerian military members in support of peacekeeping operations. For instance, to incentivize African countries supporting peacekeeping operations, the UN reimburses governments supporting these missions based upon a stipend per member and piece of equipment deployed (2), (3). However, the perception within the military is that Nigerian officials seem to be skimming these payments, reducing the reimbursement to the military establishment and shortchanging the personnel participating in peacekeeping operations. The response to the perceived government corruption is beginning to grow.

In 2008, Nigerian soldiers returning from peacekeeping operations in Liberia converged on the Nigerian town of Akure, located 300 km east-northeast of Lagos, and effectively shut it down in protest over the perceived pay skimming. Instead of the almost $7,400 per soldier total for the six-month deployment in UN allowances they expected (based upon the UN advertised stipend of $1,228 per soldier per month), they received only $3,000 from the Nigerian government (HUHUADMIN, 2012). In June Nigerian soldiers on a peacekeeping operation in Darfur, Sudan lodged a protested and forwarded a petition while on deployment, arguing to be paid their allowances and to be sent home right away. This was because their original six-month mission was extended by an additional month due to lack of return transportation”(1).

Specific pre-deployment anti-corruption training for commanders does not take place. Mostly, anti-corruption training is included as part of staff military education or integrated as a portion of the various types of integrity trainings [1]. Also the selected commanders are subjected to regular but mission specific predeployment training. This training includes guidance for prevention of corruption.[3] The 2016 Ministry of Defence Integrity Plan explicitly addresses issues of corruption, including when deploying personnel on international missions or operations, which also impacts on the trainings curriculums in the Ministry of Defence and the Army [2].

Corruption issues are generally covered during military education like Basic Officer Training (Grunnleggende offiserutdanning) and Advanced Officer Training (Videregående offiserutdanning). It is not a separate subject, but forms part of training in issues relating to cultural understanding, gender etc. [1]. Regulations for education in the Norwegian Armed Forces do not explicitly highlight training in corruption issues as being an essential part of military training [2]. Corruption issues are also covered during a course on peace establishment and crisis management which form part of the mandatory pre-deployment training for deployed personnel [1]. The course covers issues such as cultural and religious understanding, gender, international law, international humanitarian law and rules of engagement and the code of conduct [3]. Although the course forms part of pre-deployment training and is compulsory for commanders, it does not amount to comprehensive training in corruption issues.

There is no evidence of training in corruption issues for commanders taking place in Oman. The armed forces have their own military colleges, in addition to training courses, the most renowned, Sultan Qaboos Military College (KSQA) and the National Defence College aim to train youth through a strategic curriculum designed to uphold Omani national security (1), (2). Neither websites refer to corruption-related training or courses. No publication or news items regarding commander level anti-corruption training courses were found on either the Ministry of Defence or Royal Armed Forces websites (3), (4). According to our sources, there have not been any training courses on corruption issues within the military in any of its units (5), (6).

There have only been a few training courses that included armed and security personals. The latest training course was on accountability and transparency, funded by the British Defence Academy, and it included senior officers and commanders from different security agencies in addition to civil bureaucrats (1). The main theme of the training is fighting corruption and transparency. In some of this training anti-economic corruption was the main theme. There is no indication from which units the participants, but usually from financial or operations units (2). The Ministry of Interior is implementing a leadership training project at three levels for officers of the security establishment (3).

As noted in 48B, anti-corruption is incorporated within human rights training that is routinely provided to military personel from the general headquarters level down to the battalion units [1]. Successful completion of this training is required to complete basic training and for induction, promotion, deployment, and schooling opportunities [2].

In 2017, a course entitled “Anti-corruption prophylaxis” – which includes a minimum of 8 hours of training – was introduced to the training programmes at military universities for candidates to become professional soldiers. The learning outcomes resulting from this subject matter are:
– knowledge on anti-corruption, necessary for the proper performance of tasks in the national and NATO / EU level;
– ability to function in an environment exposed to corruption, recognize and effectively eliminate corruption risks.
The educational curriculum content includes:
– non-punitive forms of corruption and the phenomenon of conflict of interest;
– sociological and psychological mechanisms governing the phenomenon of corruption;
– areas of corruption threats in the Polish Armed Forces;
– systemic ways to prevent and fight corruption;
– anti-corruption tools and internal defence mechanisms;
– how to deal with corruption and abuse;
– the role of a soldier in preventing corruption and abuse as well as incurred consequences.
In the vocational training system, as part of the qualifications, this course is included in the content of the training of Postgraduate Studies in Defence Policy and Postgraduate Operational and Strategic Studies. Issues regarding corruption are also included in the upgrade courses for professional staff in the area of public procurement.
Bearing in mind the implementation of task No. 14.4 of Resolution No. 37 Of e Ministry Council of 1 April 2014 on the government Anti-Corruption Program for 2014-2019, the course entitled “Anti-corruption prevention” was introduced to educational programmes at military universities based on a letter from the director of the Department of Science and Military Education (No. 2948 / DNiSW of July 14, 2017) [1].
Since the summer of 2019, anti-corruption training becomes an obligatory part of pre-deployed training for all groups, including commanders [2].

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) and branches were contacted to provide information concerning training on corruption issues, but they were not forthcoming. However, given existing documentation on risk management across branches and the joint chief of staff [1, 2, 3, 4] and depictions of procurement during deployment [5] and a lack of evidence on corruption and management risks in training courses [6, 7, 8], it is highly unlikely that commanders are trained on corruption issues.

There have been few training courses on corruption, transparency, and little training on anti-corruption issues, transparency and ethics, for commanders and mid ranks officers. Such training is irregular and is in collaboration with ACTA or/ and Rule of Law and Anti-Corruption Centre (ROLAAC). [1,2,3]

The MoD anti-corruption plan, being the Ministry’s main anti-corruption document, does not mention any anti-corruption training specifically for the commanders [1]. Neither does the federal law ‘On Military Service’ [2]. Even the Minister of Defence Decree ‘On legal training’ fails to include an anti-corruption agenda [3]. While the list of laws that are obligatory for training includes the Russian Criminal Code, it omits the chapter on anti-corrpution crimes (see Appendix ‘Suggested list of topics for studying legal acts’) [3].

However, general anti-corruption training is regularly included in the MoD anti-corruption plan [4]. While there are not any publicly available reports of any anti-corruption training in the last five years [5,6], there is information about such events in 2019. In summer 2019, more than 200 anti-corruption training events, lectures and meetings on petty bribery were organised with low- and medium-level commanders and their deputies [7]. 11 MoD civil servants took part in a course designed for personnel of anti-corruption units [8]. In addition, classes on anti-corruption obligations were included in the professional training of all military units and more than 3,500 civil servants and employees took part in classes on assets declarations and conflicts of interest in 42 command and control bodies [9].

According to a military officer in the army, there is no training on corruption issues delivered to the commanders or officers (1). Another officer confirmed that corruption training does not exist at all for personnel in the field (2). Though public funding has been allocated to various government departments for training in the field of corruption, there is no indication that this training takes place in the military (3). The 2019 training schedule for officials at the Ministry of Interior does not reflect any anti-corruption training (4).

In 2014, an ad-hoc workshop was organized for employees of the Ministry of Interior, focusing on implementing the recently ratified UN Convention Against Corruption. It was held in coordination with the United Nations Office on Drugs & Crime (5). No further evidence was found in the public domain relating specifically to anti-corruption training for members of the army or security services in Saudi Arabia.

Since 2014, as a part of the regular training for all personnel before deployment to multinational operations, the Peacekeeping Operations Center organises an anti-corruption educational module. More than 2,000 MoD and SAF members have attended this module so far [1]. The course covers the “Code of Honor and fight against corruption” and is aimed at introducing the personnel with the concept of the fight against corruption and different risks of corruption that could occur in multinational operations [2]. Furthermore, MoD and SAF members have regularly attended integrity building courses at the PSOTC Centre in Sarajevo in the past few years [3].

While it is clear that there are efforts to provide Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) personnel anti-corruption training at various stages in their career or as a requirement for specific vocations/postings [1], it is unknown if specific training has been provided to address potential corruption during deployments. There is no evidence of systematic training in corruption issues for commanders other than occasional participation in seminars (internally or by external parties such as the UN and NGOs) [2]. There is also no publicly available information on whether corruption issues have been encountered during overseas training missions and operations, and how these challenges have been handled [3].

The lack of overt or publicised doctrine regarding corruption mitigation during deployment makes assessment difficult here.

However, it is worth noting that corruption is addressed in the code of conduct, enforced through SANDF regulations, across the entire SANDF and at all levels of command. Moreover, anti-corruption training is undertaken by the Department of Defence as part of general anti-corruption measures, which, at the least, offers some measure of training to some officers, on basic risks. 

According to interviewee 4, anti-corruption training is covered in a variety of operational areas. This included budget planning courses for pre-deployment training. Senior officers are encouraged to employ anti-corruption training and expertise on their own initiative [1].

Commanders at all levels are expected to participate in anti-corruption training, according to the Code of Conduct for Personnel at the Ministry of National Defence (MND). They are required to follow training, which contains the anti-corruption Code of Conduct, amounting to two hours per year. The training is often conducted online, and the MND runs online anti-corruption training for all defence personnel. [1] A review of the content of MND’s online training suggests that it focuses on understanding the new anti-corruption legislation implemented in 2016, the Improper Solicitation and Graft (ISG) Act, and the principles of current anti-corruption policies, rather than addressing potential corruption issues during deployment. [2]

Although military commanders acknowledge that corruption is a major issue (for example as stated by the newly appointed Chief of Defence Staff regarding reforms that will produce a new breed of officers steeped in “accountability”), there are no concerted efforts that are visible that show that the Defence Ministry is treating the issue as a major concern. [1] For long time watchers of South Sudan, there have been no public-facing statements from the government that outline initiatives (workshops, training sessions, bilateral initiatives) to tackle graft. The presidential decree that appointed Gen. J J Okot as Chief of Defence Staff does not go beyond citing the legal framework for his appointment and does not mention corruption as one of the main challenges he is mandated to address. Neither does media reporting of the appointment capture corruption as an issue of concern in the decree. [2]

Military education is offered widely, and training prior to deployment in military operations abroad is frequent [1]. However, there is no public evidence of content that specifically addresses corruption. Some training is likely provided for certain people in certain units (e.g. procurement). Also, troops are said to be well aware that corruption practices are illegal and punishable offences [2]. According to a number of people who had been recently deployed on mission abroad with ranks “comandante” (major, OF-3) or below, they have not received any training related to corruption [3]. However, the recently approved Instruction 23/2020 of the Secretary of Defence, on the Ethical Code and Code of Conduct of Personnel Related to Purchasing, which affects both military and civilian staff in the purchasing areas of the Ministry of Defence, comprehensively covers aspects related to bribery, gifts and any benefit. It also covers aspects related to conflicts of interest, and provides specific guidance on how to proceed in the communication of events “that are not constitutive of fault and crime” [4]. The instruction foresees the elaboration on topics and dissemination of guidance of conduct on purchasing [4].

No evidence could be found suggesting that Sudan’s military commanders or senior police officials are required to receive training on corruption issues or that the military or police forces make such training available to them. Instead, for years, corruption has been widely sanctioned, ignored or informally institutionalised in Sudan’s defence sector (see examples cited [1,2,3]). As well documented by many research and media sources, including Sudan expert Alex de Waal, Reuters and Global Witness [1,2,3], the head of Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), who also serves as arguably the most influential of the five military leaders who are party to the transitional Sovereignty Council, has funded the RSF with the support of off-the-books financial flows issued by Sudan’s former President and resources obtained through opaque engagements with foreign governments.

There is comprehensive training in corruption issues that is required for commanders at all levels. Training is delivered as part of military education, including induction traning, promotions, and in pre-deployment training for specific missions (see also Q46, Q47, Q48) [1].

Members of the armed forces abroad are subject to the same rules, codes of conduct and compliance enforcement like other members of the armed forces which they receive at induction [1, 2]. Participants in peace promotion missions (the only operations permissible abroad) receive specific training (Article 66.2 MG) [3]. The training is delivered by the Swiss Armed Forces International Command (SWISSINT) which defines its mission as “to prepare each course participant for deployment on a professional, ethical and moral level” [4]. An explicit part of the mandate of Swiss Armed Forces in Kosovo (SWISSCOY) (the only operation of that size) is the fight against corruption in Kosovo, so at least part of the training is likely to cover the issue; however, no specific mentions were found in the course guides [5].

Ethics and integrity are major themes in Taiwan’s military education curriculum, from the college education provided by military academies to the professional military education (PME) provided by various forms of professional training [1, 2, 3]. Pre-deployment training on anti-corruption is given to commanders at all levels before they are posted to Defence Command [4, 5]. Nevertheless, cases of corruption have been investigated during the last three years [6, 7].

The National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan II (NASCAP III) mandates training in anti-corruption across the public service including the military. However there is no evidence that it is effectively rolled out, for the military or any other part of the state. Indeed, NACSAP III notes the failure to roll out training comprehensively during NACSAP II. [1] Where training is provided, there is no public evidence of specific training for commanders that it addresses the corruption risks related to potential deployments.

According to the MoD’s Strategic Plan on Corruption Prevention and Suppression Phase 2 (2013-2017), the MoD supports the organisation of research and seminars for the development of anti-corruption policy and operations, stating that the armed forces at all levels, as well as students at military academies, are required to receive anti-corruption education and attend good governance training. However, the training does not specifically include the modules and details for deployment in the field [1].

Furthermore, the implementation of the National Strategy on Corruption Prevention and Suppression Phase 3 (2018-2021) and the Strategic Plan on Corruption Prevention and Suppression of the Ministry of Defence 2018-2021, followed by the Strategic Plan on Corruption Prevention and Suppression of the Ministry of Defence Fiscal Year 2020, also involves regular training on corruption issues at all levels within the ministry and the armed forces. However, apparently, there is not any specific pre-deployment training on corruption issues [2]. According to Interviewee 3, a high-ranking military officer, training is conducted at the commander level, but the main problem is personnel morale [3].

Several anti-corruption related workshops have been held by the High Academy of War (Ecole supérieure de la Guerre) in the last two years in collaboration with the DCAF Tunisia. Trainees at this Academy attended these workshops. These workshops had four subjects: good governance of the security sector in the light of international humanitarian law (1); good governance of the defence sector and crisis communication (2)(3); good governance of the defence sector and the role of the armed forces in a democratic society (4); legal framework in the fight against corruption and the concepts of whistleblower protection and conflicts of interest (5). Additionally, there is a program of cooperation between DCAF and INLUCC to support the agency in its interactions with the Ministry of Defence and other actors in the security sector (5). According to our resources, this training is organised periodically, but mostly the participants are personnel from the offices and Headquarters, and they rarely include personnel from other rural units (6,7).

There is comprehensive training in the prevention of corruption risks for leaders at all levels. Training is provided as part of military education, in military academies and schools, as well as in training abroad as part of international cooperation and in pre-deployment training for UN missions. The Armed Forces General Inspection also conducts also sensitization sessions for military commanders at all levels on corruption issues to ensure that they are fully aware of this issue (8).

In the Turkish military, there is a two-week preparatory course just before the operational deployment of military and civilian personnel and a two-week orientation period with their predecessors. During this period, there are many courses offered to personnel on a wide range of issues, from operational issues to health-related and culture-related issues [1]. However, as emphasised by Interviewees 4, 5 and 6, anti-corruption, integrity and ethics of financial management are not considered ‘primary’ issues to be included in the preparatory and orientation periods before actual deployment [2,3,4]. Put simply, there is neither any specific training on corruption and integrity issues in the pre-deployment period, nor follow-up training in the field. However, training on ethical behaviour, military codes of conduct, rules of engagement with local populations and sexual harrassment prevention is offered in the ‘Cultural Preparatory Issues’ and ‘Local Intelligence’ modules as part of this training. Interviewee 5 suggested that there are codes of conduct published by the Army Command for Turkish troops serving in Afghanistan, the Balkans, Qatar and other parts of the world, which include parts about anti-corruption and integrity-related issues, but he emphasised that these codes of conduct are classified as ‘secret documents’ [3].

Unfortunately, there is no open-source information available about the details of the pre-deployment training offered to the military personnel to be deployed abroad or about the follow-up training they receive during their service. With the ‘Law concerning the Foundation of the Council of Ethics for the Public Service’, dated 2004 and numbered 5176, a specialised council (the Council of Ethics for the Public Service – CEPS/Kamu Görevlileri Etik Kurulu) was established to supervise the ethical conduct of public servants, the first of its kind in Turkey. The CEPS’s narrow span of authority (the law does not cover politicians, military-judicial-academic personnel or cases that have already been transferred to courts) is the factor that has drawn the most significant criticism. In Turkey, ethics training has been provided to all public officials working both at a central and local level since 2009. However, military personnel have been excluded from this training.

Apart from occassional speeches by the commanders and the government officials to the lower ranks in the army, there is no public evience to demonstrate that anti-corruption training occurs. There is training in corruption issues, but some commanders have not been trained. This is why there are reports of corruption in the army and why top leaders keep making public statements to ensure all soldiers know that the army does not tolerate corruption. According to the Daily Monitor, Uganda People’s Defence Forces acting Chief of Staff for Land Forces, Brigadier Katsigazi Tumusiime, warned army officers against engaging in corrupt deals as well as behaving in a manner that is unbecoming [1]. He noted that corruption and indiscipline, if not guarded against, would not only dent the reputation of the army but also sink it into the abyss. He was speaking during the graduation of 79 officers who completed a six-month training, called the company commanders course at Junior Command and Staff College in Jinja. Brigadier General Katsigazi advised the officers to stick to the UPDF code of conduct, saying it will keep them off trouble and corrupt temptations. While addressing the soldiers, government spokesperson, Ofwono Opondo, delivered a paper to pre-mission Battle Group XXX of the UPDF at Singo Peace support Operation Training Centre Nakaseke district, warning them against corruption. He was reported as having singled corruption as the main reason why the conflict in northern Uganda took long. On zero tolerance on corruption, Opondo said: “do you know why the war in Northern Uganda, partly, took twenty-years? It’s because there was corruption amongst some UPDF soldiers” [2]. According to Lieutenant Colonel Deo Akiiki, in any military training, corruption forms part of that training [3], although there is no written document which can be cited in this regard.

There is no requirement for anti-corruption training for commanders on all levels, although the MoD Anti-corruption Program for 2015-2017 envisaged providing training for heads and specialists of the MoD and the General Staff of the AFU structural divisions (servicemen and civil servants of categories 3-7/officers of the AFU) and training on prevention and counteraction of corruption in international peacekeeping operations [1]. There is evidence that comprehensive anti-corruption training is being regularly conducted [2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. It aims to cover as many MoD and AFU personnel as possible with educational courses on building integrity. In total, more than 800 individuals were trained in 2016 [7].
As of May 2018, there were no available resources for delivering anti-corruption training to all officers in the MoD, General Staff and the AFU. The anti-corruption unit in the MoD consists of four people with about five small subordinate units in regions. BITEC, was supposed to be expanded from three to seven persons but this decision has been postponed.
According to the MoD Anti-corruption Program for 2018-2020, there will be courses on the prevention of corruption in garrisons. At the same time, the program doesn`t say anything about courses on corruption prevention in actions. There is also no evidence for training in corruption issues for commanders, at all levels.

There are training courses conducted within the armed forces which include specific and intensive modules on anti-corruption within the armed forces. These training courses are led by foreign experts and trainers who have experience. However, these courses only target specific departments, such as the financial department, human resources, and civil servants within the armed forces (1), (2).

The UK is part of “Building Integrity”, a NATO-led capacity building programme providing practical tools to help nations strengthen integrity, transparency and accountability, and reduce the risk of corruption in the defence and security sector [1].

The programme addresses all aspects of governance in the defence and security sector, including operations. It also addresses the connection between corruption and the following topics: organisational values and standards, impact of the organisation, military effectiveness; identification and reporting of corruption, and risk management [1, 2]. Courses range from 4 Day BI for Senior Leaders to a 1-day BI for staff colleges seminar – however, the latter sessions are open to all ranks.

The curriculum covers the 5 Areas of Risk: Political-Military/Security Sector Interface & Leadership; Public Financial Management, Fraud Risk & Audit; Procurement, Acquisition & Supply Chain Logistics; Human Resource Management, Code of Conduct & Gender Specific Corruption Risks; and Corruption in Complex Security Environments (including Operations), Civil Emergencies and Disaster Relief Operations. However, most courses are delivered to overseas personnel and not routinely to UK Armed Forces/civilians [2].

In parallel, all staff working in UK-StratCom are required to complete the Civil Service Learning -Counter-fraud, Bribery and Corruption Training, or attend locally-run, HLB face-to-face training sessions [3].

The Institute of Government Ethics ‘Running an Effective Ethics Program’ outlines how ethics advisors should seek to integrate ethics training in pre-deployment training [1]. However, no further specifications are provided [1] and no further details of anti-corruption training for commanders – that is uniformly undertaken before deployment- was found from a search of media sources, NATO Building Integrity website, and other academic sources [2,3].

Despite the fact that there are no mobilisations of military units abroad in Venezuela or participation in international missions, the government’s political strategy has militarised the public sectors and in the face of situations that have been considered as threats to the stability of the internal order, the mobilisation of the FANB towards the borders and in security operations has been ordered [1].

In the framework of operations to mobilise the FANB – or some of its elements – such as Operation People’s Liberation and the activation of Plan Zamora, there has been no evidence of participation by REDI, ZODI or CEOFANB commanders in corruption-related issues. In operations such as the Zamora Plan, official announcements were made regarding technical training for different FANB units [2]. In operations such as the Zamora Plan, various official announcements were made to the different National Bolivarian Armed Forces (FANB) units about technical trainings [1]. However, other sources have criticised a lack training for personnel involved in these operations, and that operation resources have been particularly concentrated on preparing militias, given that these would have to be involved as part of the civil-military union scenario [2]. According to the Office of the Comptroller General of the National Bolivarian Armed Forces (CONGEFANB) announcements, seminars on fiscal control of public administration and on prevention of corruption have been provided as part of academic programmes offered by the FANB Institute for Strategic Operational Studies (IESOFANB) and the National Institute for Higher Studies in Security (IAESEN). However, it is unspecified whether this kind of training is given to commanders, nor whether specifics of the deployment context are taken into account [3].

The commanders are the primary proponents of military doctrine. They determine what training goes into the operational packages [1]. However, they are alleged to be at the apex of corruption, and they are seen not to even consider corruption a priority during training, nor do they commit their time to participate in the training. They are said to consider themselves to be the individuals who call the shots, not to be trained by anyone, especially on corruption [2].

Country Sort by Country 52. Sort By Subindicator
Albania 25 / 100
Angola 0 / 100
Argentina 0 / 100
Armenia 25 / 100
Australia 25 / 100
Azerbaijan 0 / 100
Bahrain 0 / 100
Bangladesh 0 / 100
Belgium 75 / 100
Bosnia and Herzegovina 75 / 100
Botswana 0 / 100
Brazil 75 / 100
Burkina Faso 0 / 100
Cameroon 0 / 100
Canada NEI
Chile 25 / 100
China NEI
Colombia 75 / 100
Cote d'Ivoire 0 / 100
Denmark 50 / 100
Egypt 0 / 100
Estonia 25 / 100
Finland 25 / 100
France 0 / 100
Germany 25 / 100
Ghana 0 / 100
Greece 50 / 100
Hungary 25 / 100
India 50 / 100
Indonesia 25 / 100
Iran 0 / 100
Iraq 0 / 100
Israel 25 / 100
Italy 25 / 100
Japan 0 / 100
Jordan 25 / 100
Kenya 0 / 100
Kosovo 75 / 100
Kuwait 25 / 100
Latvia 0 / 100
Lebanon 25 / 100
Lithuania 25 / 100
Malaysia 25 / 100
Mali 25 / 100
Mexico 0 / 100
Montenegro 25 / 100
Myanmar 25 / 100
Netherlands 75 / 100
New Zealand 100 / 100
Niger 0 / 100
Nigeria 0 / 100
North Macedonia 25 / 100
Norway 50 / 100
Oman 0 / 100
Palestine 25 / 100
Philippines 100 / 100
Poland 100 / 100
Portugal 0 / 100
Qatar 25 / 100
Russia 25 / 100
Saudi Arabia 0 / 100
Serbia 75 / 100
Singapore 25 / 100
South Africa 25 / 100
South Korea 25 / 100
South Sudan 0 / 100
Spain 0 / 100
Sudan 0 / 100
Sweden 100 / 100
Switzerland 50 / 100
Taiwan 100 / 100
Tanzania 0 / 100
Thailand 75 / 100
Tunisia 50 / 100
Turkey 0 / 100
Uganda 0 / 100
Ukraine 0 / 100
United Arab Emirates 50 / 100
United Kingdom 75 / 100
United States 25 / 100
Venezuela 0 / 100
Zimbabwe 0 / 100

With thanks for support from the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs who have contributed to the Government Defence Integrity Index.

Transparency International Defence & Security is a global programme of Transparency International based within Transparency International UK.

Privacy Policy

UK Charity Number 1112842

All rights reserved Transparency International Defence & Security 2023