- Feb 27, 2003
- 19,968
- 7,062
- 136
I call shens; there's no way the US is that low on the chart.
Okay, maybe the data should've been gathered differently because there's a little area in the US (between VA & Maryland) that should be dark red (almost black) on that map.
I call shens; there's no way the US is that low on the chart.
Okay, maybe the data should've been gathered differently because there's a little area in the US (between VA & Maryland) that should be dark red (almost black) on that map.
Corruption challenges
Financial regulation
Although the United States has an effective anti-money laundering framework, experts are concerned about various legislative and regulatory weaknesses. More specifically, there are weak requirements for customer due diligence. Furthermore, there are loopholes that allow entities and persons to use shell companies as well as trusts to hide and launder proceeds from illegal activities. Worries regarding transparency in the U.S. financial system were heightened by the 2008 financial crisis, as well as recent notorious financial fraud and insider trading scandals.
Anti-fraud legislation
In June 2010, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that limits the scope of the “honest services” statute. This was a key national anti-corruption law that – until then – was particularly effective in the prosecution of corrupt acts involving public officials. Following the Supreme Court’s decision, several federal courts have overturned honest services fraud convictions in a number of cases, many of which included public officials. The decision also has serious implications for recent high-profile fraud convictions, and may result in the overturn of other guilty verdicts.
Government and politics
Corruption among government and political figures remains a concern. From fraud and embezzlement charges to the failure to uphold ethical standards, there are multiple cases of corruption at the federal, state and local level. Recent high profile scandals have involved councilmen in California and the District of Columbia, as well as mayors in New Jersey and an Illinois governor. Money laundering convictions and ethics violations by U.S. Congress representatives have also furthered citizen distrust.
Political financing
Transparency in campaign and political financing suffered a major setback in 2010. This followed a Supreme Court decision that de facto removed all limits to political spending by corporations and unions. The decision led to the creation of “super” political action committees, or “Super PACs”, permitting unlimited financing for political campaigns – and without donor disclosure. As a result, wealthy individuals, interest groups and businesses can increase their influence on the country’s political system.
Positive developments
Whistleblowing
In response to the 2008 economic crisis, Congress aimed to reform the U.S. financial system by passing the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010. The act requires the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to reward individuals who voluntarily provide information about securities law violations that lead to the recovery of more than US$1 million. Whistleblowers may then receive between 10–30% of the sanction imposed.
Natural resources
Moreover, the Dodd-Frank Act requires oil, gas, and other natural resources companies to publicly disclose more information about payments made to governments. The act also requires the disclosure of corporate involvement in the manufacture, mining, and end-use of certain conflict minerals. Concerns by affected companies, including financial and competitive costs for the implementation of these requirements, are expected to be addressed by the implementing regulations.
Government transparency
The United States is a founding member of the Open Government Partnership. The international initiative aims to further transparency and anti-corruption efforts in participating countries. U.S. commitments under the partnership call for the implementation of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and International Aid Transparency Initiative. The United States is also committed to strengthening whistleblower protections for government employees.They also seek legislation to increase the transparency of companies and trusts incorporated in the country.
Recommendations
Legislation is needed to make more transparent the identity of individuals who ultimately benefit from companies and trusts incorporated in the United States. Gaps in know-your-customer (due diligence) requirements also need to be closed. Legislative measures in this area could help banks and other financial institutions prevent money laundering.
The Department of Justice should issue guidance to clarify important aspects of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), such as the definition of 'public officials' and the role of compliance programmes and increased transparency concerning the enforcement of the act. This would address some of the complaints leading to calls to amend the FCPA.
Legislation is needed to patch the hole created by the Supreme Court’s decision to limit the application of the “Honest Services” statute. This legislation should also provide new tools to prosecute 'undisclosed self-dealing', or the failure to disclose any conflict of interest by a public official.
Corruption challenges
Political and campaign financing
Denmark lacks transparency in private contributions to political parties and parliamentary candidates. The opaque environment thrives from inadequate legislation that enables weak public disclosure. Private donations above 20,000 DKR (US$3,609) must disclose the donor’s name – however, not the amount given. In addition, individuals can remain anonymous if they donate through affiliated foundations. This loophole also exists if private donations are given in increments of less than 20,000 DKR.
Political donations and gifts also lack strong regulations. The grey area surrounding the receiving of gifts has yet to be adequately defined. The Danish media have accused top officials and Members of Parliament (MPs) of attending undisclosed trips, concerts and dinners, paid for by private contractors.
Access to information
Denmark’s access to information law is outdated. The wide range of ‘exceptional case’ provisions enables public bodies to deny access to information or to delay legitimate enquiries. At the same time, several studies show that current right to information legislation is not respected in practice. Deadlines for applicants’ requests for information are only met in half of the cases and only 30% of requests for information to the Prime Minister’s Office and Ministry of Justice are completed in the required 10-day deadline.
Public and private sector executives’ limited understanding of their obligation to disclose information to the public leads to major weaknesses in accountability.
Whistleblower protection
Denmark does not have a dedicated whistleblower protection law or regulation. There is also no dedicated whistleblowing body to advise and protect whistleblowers. Instead, the Danish labour market has been regulated by voluntary agreements on pay and working conditions between employees and their organisations, otherwise known as the Danish Labour Market Model.
The laws on citizens’ freedom of speech and employees’ right and duty to inform the public on irregularities are fragmented. These laws are scarce and the case law is limited. And although public employees’ freedom of speech is generally considered to be better protected legally than their counterparts in the private sector, whistleblowing bodies and support are more advanced in the private sector.
Positive developments
Transparency in politics
In 2009 Parliament introduced the Openness Scheme, which aims to improve the transparency of MPs’ expenses and activities. It provides an agreement between a broad range of political parties that MPs must publish information on their monthly spending, activities in entertainment, travel expenses, received gifts, official representations, and prospective official activities.
Together with the Code of Good Practice in the Public Service, the new transparency mechanism aims to ensure effective monitoring of MPs’ conduct and use of public resources.
Open government
Denmark is a participating country in the Open Government Partnership. The initiative’s aim is to promote good governance and to strengthen democracy. As a participant, Denmark commits itself to modernising the public sector and improving the management of public resources. This is done by increasing, among others: transparency in public decision processes, anti-corruption and accountability mechanisms, citizen participation, and dialogue with civil society.
A key driver is the utilisation of new technologies and media so that government information and technology is available to citizens and businesses. In effect, the government aims to address citizens’ needs and concerns.
Corporate responsibility
A new mediation and complaints institution for corporate responsibility was adopted by Danish parliament. This independent body has the mandate to investigate corruption allegations and make recommendations to ensure compliance. The OECD also notably welcomed the creation of the institution.
The formation of the institution was part of the government’s 2012-2015 Action Plan for Corporate Social Responsibility. In it, the government recognises the need for increased efforts to promote Danish companies' global accountability to labor and human rights, international environmental standards and the fight against corruption.
Recommendations
Precise rules need to be established to increase transparency in political party financing. This should include the requirement to publish records on any financial contribution to individual candidates as well as political parties.
Guidelines are also needed to calculate the monetary value of donations made in the form of goods and services, and should appear in political parties’ financial accounts.
The access to information law should be modernised so that ‘exceptional case’ provisions to access documents are reduced. The requirements for ensuring access to information should be extended to cover government special advisors. The scope of right to information legislation should also include the courts and parliament. Current and future regulations, such as required processing time, also need to be rigorously enforced.
An advisory institution should be created for both public and private employees to obtain advice and counseling on whistleblowing. Adequate whistleblower protection mechanisms are also necessary.
where are the red dots for chicago and new york? I bet the rest of the US would be yellow...
It'd be interesting to see some control for population size and diversity.
