Does the country have an openly stated and effectively implemented anti-corruption policy for the defence sector?
7a. Anti-corruption policy
United States score: 25/100
There is no anti-corruption policy, or there is one but it explicitly does not apply to the defence sector.
There is an openly stated anti-corruption policy, but it is unclear if it applies to the defence sector or the government is in process of developing one that applies to the defence sector.
There is an openly stated anti-corruption policy that applies to the defence sector.
There is no anti-corruption policy in place, beyond a number of laws (such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), which applies to the government or specifically the defence sector. The FCPA is the government’s primary tool for combatting bribery of foreign officials by US companies . This, however, does not explicitly apply to the defence sector.
In 2019, Senator Warren introduced the ‘Department of Defense Ethics and Anti-corruption Act’ to the Senate, which would ‘promote ethics and prevent corruption in Department of Defense contracting and other activities, and for other purposes’. The bill was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. It has yet to progress as of early 2021 .
 Criminal Division of the US Department of Justice & the Enforcement Division of the US Securities and Exchange Commission. ‘FCPA: A Resource Guide to the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act’. Accessed at: https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/fcpa/fcpa-resource-guide.pdf
 Congress.gov Tracker. ‘S.1503 – 116th Congress (2019-2020) – Department of Defense Ethics and Anti-corruption Act of 2019’. Accessed at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/1503/text
7b. Effective implementation
United States score: NA/100
There is no action plan to implement the policy, nor have any actions been taken.
There is an action plan at the ministry level but it is superficial, and does not address the institutional weaknesses in the system, OR there efforts to implement an action plan at the national level.
There is an action plan at the ministry level that reflects the institutional weaknesses in the system, but no actions have been taken to implement it.
There is an action plan at the ministry level that reflects the institutional weaknesses in the system. While steps have been taken to implement the plan, it is either behind schedule, or implementation is not addressing the priority items in the action plan.
The action plan at the ministry level reflects the institutional weaknesses in the system, and implementation has progressed according to the estimated timeline.
This indicator is marked ‘Not Applicable’ since there is no anti-corruption policy for the government or the defence sector and therefore it cannot be implemented.
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
|Country||7a. Anti-corruption policy||7b. Effective implementation|
|Albania||75 / 100||25 / 100|
|Algeria||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Angola||0 / 100||NA|
|Argentina||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Armenia||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Australia||25 / 100||NA|
|Azerbaijan||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|Bahrain||50 / 100||NA|
|Bangladesh||0 / 100||NA|
|Belgium||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Botswana||0 / 100||NA|
|Brazil||100 / 100||50 / 100|
|Burkina Faso||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Cameroon||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Canada||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Chile||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|China||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Colombia||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Cote d'Ivoire||100 / 100||0 / 100|
|Denmark||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Egypt||0 / 100||NA|
|Estonia||75 / 100||NA|
|Finland||25 / 100||NA|
|France||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Germany||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Ghana||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|Greece||100 / 100||50 / 100|
|Hungary||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|India||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Indonesia||50 / 100||NA|
|Iran||50 / 100||NA|
|Iraq||25 / 100||0 / 100|
|Israel||50 / 100||75 / 100|
|Italy||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Japan||0 / 100||NA|
|Jordan||50 / 100||NEI|
|Kenya||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Kosovo||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Kuwait||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Latvia||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|Lebanon||50 / 100||NA|
|Lithuania||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Malaysia||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Mali||0 / 100||NA|
|Mexico||75 / 100||25 / 100|
|Montenegro||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Morocco||25 / 100||NA|
|Myanmar||0 / 100||NA|
|Netherlands||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|New Zealand||75 / 100||NEI|
|Niger||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Nigeria||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|North Macedonia||75 / 100||75 / 100|
|Norway||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Oman||0 / 100||NA|
|Palestine||0 / 100||NA|
|Philippines||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Poland||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Portugal||0 / 100||NA|
|Qatar||0 / 100||NA|
|Russia||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Saudi Arabia||25 / 100||0 / 100|
|Serbia||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Singapore||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|South Africa||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|South Korea||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|South Sudan||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Spain||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|Sudan||0 / 100||NA|
|Sweden||25 / 100||NA|
|Switzerland||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Taiwan||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Tanzania||100 / 100||50 / 100|
|Thailand||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|Tunisia||100 / 100||50 / 100|
|Turkey||0 / 100||NA|
|Uganda||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Ukraine||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|United Arab Emirates||50 / 100||NA|
|United Kingdom||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|United States||25 / 100||NA|
|Venezuela||25 / 100||0 / 100|
|Zimbabwe||100 / 100||NEI|