The UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) is the world’s only comprehensive, global anti-corruption treaty. It creates obligations for States across the anti-corruption spectrum.
It is a fundamental tool to advance the fight against corruption worldwide.
The Implementation Review Mechanism (IRM) is the mechanism used by States to track and improve their implementation of the UNCAC’s provisions. It seeks to advance UNCAC implementation by means of periodic reviews.
On 18 June 2024, the UNCAC Coalition held a workshop on “Strengthening the UNCAC’s Review Mechanism” in the context of this year’s International Anti-Corruption Conference (IACC).
The workshop aimed to highlight the weaknesses of the current UNCAC review mechanism and the ways in which it fails to hold States accountable for their UNCAC commitments.
The following experts participated in the workshop:
- Corinna Gilfillan, Senior Analyst, UNCAC Coalition
- Tetiana Khutor, Chairwoman, Institute of Legislative Ideas (Ukraine)
- Nikhita Godbole, Foreign Affairs Officer, US Department of State
- Umar Yakubu, Executive Director, Center for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity (Nigeria)
Panelists at our workshop on “Strengthening the UNCAC’s review mechanism.” From left to right: Nikhita Godbole, Foreign Affairs Officer at the US Department of State, Umar Yakubu, Executive Director at the Center for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity (CeFTPI), Danella Newman, Project Manager at the UNCAC Coalition, Tetiana Khutor, Chairwoman at the Institute of Legislative Ideas (ILI), and Corinna Gilfillan, Senior Analyst at the UNCAC Coalition.
Weaknesses of the UNCAC review mechanism
The ways in which the UNCAC review mechanism fails to guarantee accountability for States were a central part of the workshop’s discussions.
Panelists focussed on the following five elements:
What would a more effective review mechanism look like?
Experiences from other review mechanisms and best practices at the national level shed light on how a strengthened UNCAC review mechanism could look.
Two key elements were highlighted in the workshop:
1. The importance of civil society participation
MESICIC
The review mechanism for the Inter-American Convention against Corruption emphasizes the importance of civil society participation. Civil society organizations can complete questionnaires relating to country review processes, and are permitted to participate in country review meetings.
The Istanbul Anti-Corruption Plan
This subregional peer review program, focussing on several countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, also prioritizes civil society input during country reviews. Civil society organizations can participate in plenary meetings for country reviews, and are also encouraged to hold meetings during country review visits without the presence of the host State.
Nigeria & Ukraine
Civil society has been substantively involved in the UNCAC review process in Nigeria, resulting in civil society organizations being co-partners in the development and monitoring of the country’s anti-corruption strategy.
In Ukraine, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) – which leads on UNCAC implementation in the country – recently provided information to the Institute of Legislative Ideas (ILI) for a civil society parallel report on UNCAC implementation.
2. The need for a follow-up process and a greater focus on anti-corruption impact
Other anti-corruption review mechanisms, such as GRECO, the review mechanism for the OECD anti-bribery convention, FATF and MESICIC, have structured follow-up processes to promote the implementation of recommendations.
They also focus more closely on the outcomes of anti-corruption legislation and other legal measures, rather than merely noting their existence.
Civil society organizations in Nigeria and Ukraine have developed UNCAC monitoring tools to track implementation of the Convention. In the case of Ukraine, the monitoring portal is operated jointly between the government and the Institute for Legislative Ideas to provide both government and civil society perspectives.
These monitoring tools also emphasize the importance of implementation in practice and anti-corruption impact, rather than relying solely on the existence of relevant legal provisions.
These national-level examples and review process best practices chart a potential path forward for strengthening the UNCAC’s review mechanism. With a greater focus on civil society participation, follow-up on country reviews, and evaluation of anti-corruption impact, the UNCAC review process could be a genuine tool to hold States to account on their UNCAC implementation.
What’s next?
The UNCAC Coalition calls on UNCAC States Parties to put in place a review mechanism that is #FitForPurpose.
A strong UNCAC review mechanism that promotes genuine accountability for States is a cornerstone for the success of the global fight against corruption.
States must take a historic step at the next Conference of States Parties (CoSP) in Qatar in late 2025 and establish an UNCAC review process that genuinely serves to combat corruption.
If you’re interested in joining our campaign to make the UNCAC review mechanism #FitForPurpose, sign up to the campaign mailing list today.