Originally posted on Transparency International
As is clear from the latest EU System for Enabling Environment for Civil Society (EUSEE) data, anti-corruption campaigners often face attacks and reprisals. The conditions needed for civil society to participate in anti-corruption efforts, including those defined in the six principles identified by EUSEE, are not present in many countries who are parties to the UN Convention against Corruption. Despite this, as highlighted in this new report, the process of reviewing the implementation of this Convention is failing to consider crucial questions over the enabling environment for anti-corruption civil society.
Civil society actors in many countries face attacks and significant restrictions in retaliation for exposing and fighting against corruption. They suffer prosecution, detention, violence and intimidation, as well as legal constraints on the establishment, operation and funding of their organisations. This undermines efforts to achieve the objectives of the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), which explicitly recognises the important role of civil society in fighting corruption.
The UNCAC Implementation Review Mechanism (IRM) has a key role to play. Through the mechanism, UNCAC States Parties review countries’ implementation of the convention, including their obligations to foster the active participation of civil society. However, the IRM is failing to promote their participation effectively.
Forty-three per cent of 115 countries that were reviewed by the IRM did not receive a single recommendation on their implementation of article 13, the section that reflects the right of civil society actors to participate in anti-corruption efforts. In some of these countries, the civic space is effectively closed, such as Afghanistan, Cuba, Russia and Venezuela.
When recommendations are made, they are in most cases a mere repetition of what the convention says. Only 27 per cent of recommendations are specific and tailored to the context of the country reviewed, for example recommending a specific reform. The remaining 73 per cent are vague and generic and do not provide meaningful guidance for the implementation of article 13.
The IRM paints a picture of a world with very few challenges to civil society’s participation and an abundance of good practices, which does not match reality. The real issues that affect civil society participation – attacks, impunity for attacks, and enforcement of laws that restrict civic space, freedom of association, assembly and expression – are absent from the reviews.
The inadequacy of the results is evident when reading the findings of United Nations (UN) human rights bodies for the same countries. In 86 per cent of the cases reviewed for this report, we identified clear differences between what the IRM says on civil society participation and what is documented by UN human rights bodies.
To ensure that the UNCAC implementation review process promotes an enabling environment for civil society participation in anti-corruption efforts, Transparency International outlines in this report how the reviews of States’ implementation of article 13 should be strengthened:
- The reviews should assess whether the necessary conditions are present for civil society actors to contribute to anti-corruption efforts, including respect for the core freedoms of association, assembly and expression.
- They should draw upon the findings and recommendations of UN human rights mechanisms, which are a legitimate source of information for the UNCAC review process.
- Technical guidance and documents for reviewers should be amended to ensure clarity on these points.
- Transparency and meaningful participation of civil society in the review process should be strengthened.
