Argentina
News and blog
Announcing the winners of the 2025 Anti-Corruption Collective Action Awards
Congratulations to the winners of the 2025 Anti-Corruption Collective Action Awards, presented by the Basel Institute on Governance with the support of the Siemens Integrity Initiative. The awards were announced on 4 June 2025 in a video on social media from Elizabeth Andersen, the Basel Institute’s Executive Director. Gretta Fenner Outstanding Achievement in Collective Action Award In the category of Outstanding Achievement in Collective Action 2025, the award goes to Saya Perempuan Antikorupsi – SPAK Indonesia I am a woman against corruption . Organisations and initiatives awarded in this category have made significant contributions towards fairer market conditions and the prevention of corruption through their engagement in Collective Action. SPAK Indonesia, launched in 2014, empowers women across Indonesia to become agents of change against corruption. Through engaging educational tools and community involvement, SPAK promotes anti-corruption values in various settings, including schools and public institutions. They help build anti-corruption ecosystems and advocate against corruption as a root cause of violence against women. Collective Action Inspirational Newcomer Award In the category of Inspirational Newcomer, the award goes to the Code of Ethics for Businesses in Kenya, developed by UN Global Compact Network Kenya in collaboration with the Kenya Association of Manufacturers and the Kenya Private Sector Alliance. Organisations and initiatives awarded in this category have been active in the field of Collective Action for less than two years. Launched recently, the Code of Ethics for Businesses in Kenya is a private-sector-led initiative rooted in the UN Global Compact’s Ten Principles. It unites over 800 companies in a collective stand against corruption, guiding responsible business conduct across all stakeholder groups. With digital tools like a transparency microsite enabling open reporting and compliance, the Code is transforming corporate culture across Kenya. Finalists from around the world We extend our heartfelt congratulations to the winners and all our shortlisted initiatives, who continue to be shining examples of Collective Action in the anti-corruption field. In the category of Outstanding Achievement, the finalists were: Indonesia Collective Action Coalition Against Corruption KAKI Virtuous Alliances in Argentina’s Energy Sector In the category of Inspirational Newcomer, the finalists were: Anticorruption Business Club ABC from Madagascar Collective Action Initiative on Integrity and Anti-Corruption in the Private Sector in Mexico Jury selection and public vote An expert jury reviewed all nominated initiatives and shortlisted the finalists before opening up to a public vote. The jury consisted of leading figures in the anti-corruption Collective Action community, including: Chantal Castro, Anticorruption Manager, UN Global Compact Brazil Network Lisa Miller, Integrity Compliance Officer, World Bank Group Pusetso Morapedi, Africa Coordinator, Integrity Initiatives International François Valérian, Chair, Transparency International The final decision reflected a combination of jury scores and the public vote, ensuring that the selected initiatives demonstrated both expert merit and community resonance. Learn more and see previous awards For those interested in the selection process, the public vote, and the general awards methodology, as well as previous award winners, please find our awards methodology here: award methodology. We look forward to continuing to showcase and support outstanding efforts in Collective Action against corruption.
New GAFILAT guide: Why asset recovery laws need to align with human rights and other international standards
A new guide to non-conviction based forfeiture published by GAFILAT, the Latin American body of the Financial Action Task Force FATF sets out good practices for this powerful but under-used form of asset recovery legislation. It also emphasises the need for laws to align with both domestic constitutions and international human rights standards. The GAFILAT guide was drafted by Oscar Solórzano in collaboration with the region’s Asset Recovery Network RRAG . Oscar is Head of Latin America at the Basel Institute on Governance and a Senior Asset Recovery Specialist with many years of experience supporting government partners across Latin America in high-profile, complex cases of corruption and asset recovery. In this Q&A, he explains the approach, relevance and impact of the Guía de Buenas Prácticas sobre Extinción de Dominio y Decomiso no Basado en Condena , which was published by GAFILAT in 2024 and financed by EU member states through the COPOLAD III cooperation programme. COPOLAD III is a consortium led by the Italo-Latin American Association IILA and FIIAPP of the Spanish Cooperation. 1\. What is the guide about and who is it for? This is a guide to good practices in non-conviction based forfeiture for Latin America. It analyses the existence and implementation of non-conviction based forfeiture mechanisms in the 18 GAFILAT countries, which provided useful data during the drafting process and very detailed comments during the review. The guide contains an analysis of economic criminality in Latin America and the public policy response. It also addresses the essential concepts and standards applicable to non-conviction based forfeiture, presents case studies and explores available data from GAFILAT countries. Policymakers, legislators, law enforcement and judicial practitioners, law students and civil society – including journalists who report on these complex topics – will benefit from the guidance. 2\. Why is there a need for guidance? The expansion of non-conviction based forfeiture legislation has accelerated in Latin America in recent years, and not necessarily in the most coordinated or harmonised way. In line with the updated FATF standards relating to asset recovery, it is expected that it will continue to expand in the region. In effect, the FATF’s updated Recommendations 4 and 38 make the adoption of non-conviction based forfeiture laws mandatory and seek to ensure that decisions based on these laws can be enforced internationally. The guide therefore appears at an ideal time. It proposes a way to harmonise this type of law while respecting the legislative diversity that exists in the region. 3\. The idea is that non-conviction based forfeiture can reduce economic and organised crime – even without the threat of criminal convictions. Can you justify that? Economic crimes are perpetrated for the purpose of obtaining illicit economic advantages. Laws that reduce such economic advantages are a concrete step forward. And jurisdictions with more powerful and varied legal tools are more likely to see their crime rates decrease, simply because there is a concrete societal response to the criminal phenomenon. Without comprehensive asset recovery laws and an effective judicial apparatus to implement them, various incentives for engaging in profitable criminal activity arise. Some studies show that the lack of effective legal mechanisms targeting criminal assets has, among other things, allowed an explosion of organised and economic crime in Latin America in all its manifestations. The same goes for the growth of public-sector corruption. Assets stolen through corruption have rarely been confiscated in the past, when asset recovery was only possible in the context of criminal proceedings. It is naïve to think that a legislative instrument alone can change the reality of crime in Latin America, where the most fearsome drug cartels operate and, according to all international indices, corruption is rampant from north to south. However, the empirical experience I have gathered while working for almost 15 years in this part of the world indicates that there is a positive difference in the criminal situation of countries that effectively implement asset recovery mechanisms. A robust legal toolkit for asset recovery also alters the behaviour of criminal organisations, which have to bear higher costs to develop more sophistication in their criminal activities or simply relocate their activity to jurisdictions less equipped with legal tools and the ability to wield them. In Peru, to take a positive example, non-conviction based forfeiture is proving a powerful way to get at numerous politicians who have been accused of corruption, but where criminal proceedings seem to be never-ending. The independence of Peru’s non-conviction based forfeiture law from criminal procedures allows prosecutors to target assets even if their owners inevitably slip through the nets of justice. 4\. What does the guide show about the prevalence and success of different forms of non-conviction based forfeiture in the region? On paper, there has been a lot of progress in the adoption of non-conviction based forfeiture in Latin America. Only two countries in the region do not have any form of non-conviction based forfeiture law. The most predominant form is arguably Extinción de dominio, which has existed for 13 years. Ten out of the 18 countries have incorporated it into their legal arsenals and apply it in various forms and degrees. Extinción de dominio is a flexible law that can operate in civil, criminal or administrative matters, or even completely independently. It has developed specific concepts that make it possible to broaden the grounds for asset forfeiture. It lists an extensive catalogue of rights of the defence which, as stated in the Guide, seem to go far beyond the internationally established standard. In practice, however, recovery rates remain modest in relation to the volume of criminal assets generated in and flowing through the region. The best practices guide argues that a lack of effective implementation of existing laws partially explains the poor performance. The quality of implementation is influenced by political, economic and social interests. These are not necessarily addressed in the guide, which limits itself to technical and legal issues. However, the guide proposes some concepts and comparative practices that have the modest objective of guiding national authorities in applying this indispensable tool. 5\. What are success factors and challenges? In many Latin American countries, non-conviction based forfeiture is only taking its first baby steps. But from a Darwinian perspective of law – i.e. survival of the fittest – I observe that the laws that thrive are those that align with international standards and the constitutional rights of the countries that adopt them. In other words, those laws that develop around recognised global standards and practices but that are also designed to work in specific local contexts. Since 2020, together with my colleagues and many passionate and competent local partners, I have implemented programmes promoting non-conviction based forfeiture laws in the region. That experience has helped me to see that there is a group of countries that have what we can call a “European” approach to the issue, and whose laws apply only in a narrow set of scenarios. Others have more hard-hitting practices that evoke the laws used in countries such as the United States, and have transposed common law practices and principles into civil law frameworks without further reflection. Despite an increase in asset recovery rates, in many cases this has led to distortions and challenges, which are partially explored in the guide. 6\. What does the guide tell us about non-conviction based forfeiture in international cases? International asset recovery is a very different animal from domestic asset recovery and has political implications. That said, since 2014 several Latin American countries have tried to pierce the once impenetrable veil of the European financial system with non-conviction based forfeiture procedures. Switzerland and then Luxembourg were the first European countries to accept these laws as valid, in particular in relation to decisions based on Extinción de dominio. Today, almost all countries accept provisional measures based on these laws and some can directly enforce the resulting decisions. Even if the practice of enforcing non-conviction based forfeiture judgments is not abundant, we hope that the new standards adopted by the FATF on this matter will help to accelerate international asset recovery. 7\. The guide emphasises the need to align laws with international human rights standards. Why? In my opinion, this is fundamental. It is inconceivable that the ideals of justice can be achieved to the detriment of human rights. Rather than a random matter left to the discretion of states, respecting human rights in the adoption of non-conviction based forfeiture laws is an international treaty obligation. Most countries adhere to the so-called control of conventionality doctrine, i.e. the obligation to align any domestic legal instrument or practice with binding rules arising from international treaties such as the American Convention of Human Rights. This presupposes that the adoption of any domestic rule and practice on non-conviction based forfeiture must respect human rights and the practice of human rights courts. This is a condition sine qua non of any asset recovery law. The guide cites two examples of setbacks to the use of non-conviction based forfeiture laws in the region on the basis of human rights deficits. We can agree or disagree with the premises used by the countries’ High Courts to reach their conclusions. But what is clear is that a lack of consideration for human rights can also play a paralysing role. This challenge is vividly illustrated in Peru right now, where the Ombudsman has filed a claim against the use of non-conviction based forfeiture with the Constitutional Tribunal on the grounds that it could violate the right to property and the principle of the presumption of innocence. On a more positive note, a human rights lens can enhance the application of this type of law, especially in the context of international cooperation. On the one hand, more attention to human rights brings more legitimacy and acceptance to laws and therefore better recovery rates. On the other hand, a human rights lens also offers national legislators the ability to adopt more incisive standards when there are, for example, elements of organised crime or other exceptional conditions that make the application of some human rights more flexible. 8\. How does the guide help navigate the human rights topic in practice? As the guide explains through a study of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the issue is constantly evolving. The guide provides Latin American legislators and practitioners with examples of how to develop the human rights approach in a clearer way and enables them to critically review concrete non-conviction based forfeiture cases in various parts of the world. It emphasises two human rights that are central to non-conviction based forfeiture: the right to property and the right to a fair trial. This will be enormously beneficial in ensuring that new or revised non-conviction based forfeiture laws in Latin America are in line with the updated FATF Recommendations. The guide advocates for the adoption of laws that are in harmony with human rights principles and specifies that their international enforcement is a recognised standard. Similarly, the interpretative notes to the revised FATF Recommendations 4 and 38 – and the very coherence of the FATF system – indicate that the respect for human rights is fundamental to the adoption and application of these laws. The human rights perspective is likely to be an important element in the forthcoming fifth round of FATF Mutual Evaluations in GAFILAT countries, where the technical compliance and effectiveness of these laws with FATF standards will be under the microscope. Learn more See the Guía de Buenas Prácticas sobre Extinción de Dominio y Decomiso no Basado en Condena . Read a related blog by Oscar Solórzano: FATF seeks to change the landscape of international asset recovery: what this means for Latin America.
Fighting corruption in Latin America: Can Collective Action help close the gaps?
As we expand our efforts to support Collective Action against corruption in Latin America, Private Sector Specialist Andrea Prieto takes stock of existing initiatives in the region. She and representatives from some of the initiatives discussed the Collective Action approach to fighting corruption in Lima, Peru at the Eighth Integrity Week organised by Alliance for Integrity. También disponible en español. Changing the status quo Covid-19, inflation and social unrest have sent Latin America into economic stagnation. Corruption exacerbates the region’s economic woes. It is estimated to cost the region’s economies a staggering USD 220 billion annually and is responsible for about 50% of the total effect of the economic slowdown. Nobody but the corrupt benefits from corruption. It inhibits economic development, discourages investment, hinders innovation, distorts markets and increases the cost of doing business. But there is good news. There is a growing understanding that action on corruption is a collective responsibility that requires the cooperation of the public, private and also civil society sectors. This shift has led to: New regulations for the private sector; a greater emphasis on corporate accountability; demand for corruption prevention programmes and strategies at the corporate level. In parallel, businesses in Latin America are increasingly developing sustainable business strategies. These look beyond short-term profits towards sustainable long-term growth that not only benefits the company, but strengthens economic stability and competitive markets. As a result, the private sector in Latin America has become more engaged in the fight against corruption. Building trust through Collective Action A lack of trust between private-sector actors and other stakeholders is a critical hurdle to advancing the anti-corruption agenda. Collective Action offers a tried-and-tested methodology to build trust and develop collaborative approaches across stakeholder divides. These collaborative approaches support the design and implementation of corruption prevention measures and initiatives that are effective even in challenging contexts. The B20 Collective Action Hub by the Basel Institute on Governance has mapped more than 60 Collective Action initiatives operating across a range of sectors in 12 countries in Central and South America. These initiatives range from joint declarations to anti-corruption certification schemes. We also see tools to safeguard public procurement, like Integrity Pacts and High Level Reporting Mechanisms. The following initiatives give a taster of different types of initiatives and their impact: Collective Action leading to regulatory reform One successful example of how Collective Action can lead to legal or regulatory reform is the Maritime Anti-Corruption Network MACN . The MACN is a global business-led network that aims for a maritime industry free of corruption. In Argentina in 2014, the MACN detected, through its anonymous incident reporting system, reports of irregular demands for money for routine inspections in bulk carriers in Argentina. The bribery was estimated at approximately USD 30 million a year. It affected not only those forced to pay bribes to get the paperwork they needed, but also the overall international trade of Argentine agricultural products. The higher costs and the increased legal risk had begun to discourage foreign companies from continuing to trade in the country. The MACN worked with trade unions and chambers of commerce to identify corruption risks, gather relevant actors, build trust and find ways to solve the issue. Thanks to this action and by collective agreement, the Servicio Nacional de Sanidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria National Agri-food Health and Quality Service reformed the regulatory framework in November 2017. This resulted in the adoption of a modern control system that digitises the management of inspections and establishes a system of cross controls. The Collective Action process was expanded to include the training and monitoring of all public and private actors in the new system. It is estimated that bribes decreased by more than 90 percent, significantly reducing the cost per ship of entering Argentina harbours. Integrity as aspirational: Collective Action to recognise companies Companies increasingly see the value of publicly demonstrating their integrity credentials. In 2010, the Instituto Ethos of Brazil a civil society organisation collaborated with the country’s Comptroller General to develop the Pro-Ética “Pro-Ethics seal Pro-Ethics Seal. This is a system to publicly recognise companies that implement effective integrity and compliance programmes and that are committed to the integrity agenda. The concept was later adopted by the Brazilian Ministry of Infrastructure. It gained even more prominence in the wake of the Lava Jato scandal, which forced both the government and businesses to recognise the importance of corruption prevention measures. The mechanism continues to have impact. In 2020–21, more than 327 companies applied for recognition. Of these, 195 met the eligibility requirements and were evaluated, and 67 were approved. In 2022-23, 84 companies gained approval. The tool has been recognised as a good example of Collective Action since the deliberations on the approval of the companies are carried out by the Pro-Ethics Committee. This is made up of institutions from the public and private sectors, with national representation and committed to the promotion of corporate integrity. The success led Paraguay to implement a similar "Integrity Seal" programme Integrity Seal, demonstrating the potential for replication of such initiatives. In 2023, Paraguay’s government publicly recognised 30 companies, of which 17 were large companies and 13 small/mid-sized enterprises SMEs . Collective Action for cross-sector learning Collective Action can bring people together to learn how to improve business integrity. One example is the Red para la Formación Etica y Ciudadana Network for Ethics and Citizenship Education in Colombia, which provides spaces for reflection and training on ethics in business environments. Through its flagship programme “The Integrity Chair” Colombian Chair on Citizenship, Integrity and Anti-Corruption, implemented with the National University of Colombia, the network has brought together more than 15 partner organisations from the public sector, civil society, academia, business and professional sectors in ethics trainings. Since its creation, the Chair has trained more than 5,500 students and more than 1,600 citizens. The network also runs mentoring programmes for the design and implementation of anti-corruption Collective Action initiatives. Collective Action to level the playing field Collective Action initiatives can also help to level the playing field for businesses, including SMEs. One example is the Empresarios por la Integridad Entrepreneurs for Integrity initiative in Peru. This business-led network provides anti-bribery certification as well as integrity training for SMEs. At the time of writing, 49 companies had achieved certification and a project to promote integrity among SMEs in the construction sector is underway in several regions of the country. Fertile ground for new initiatives – we are here to help The growth and impact of Collective Action initiatives in Latin America show that the region is fertile ground for multi-stakeholder collaboration against corruption. In the context of growing awareness of corruption, and where corruption scandals are frequent, Collective Action has an opportunity to gain greater legitimacy as an effective way to promote integrity. And importantly for Latin America’s current economic situation – to build a more competitive and transparent playing field for doing business. As shown in the examples above, Collective Action initiatives can influence the way business is done, either at the sectoral level, extending their impact to new actors such as SMEs in the Peruvian case, or broadening initiatives to expand at the regional level as in the case of the "Sello de Integridad" Integrity Seal . At the Basel Institute, we are actively supporting this approach and the next generation of Collective Action initiatives. Our Collective Action mentoring programme provides tailored and context-specific support to organisations that promote business-led and multi-stakeholder initiatives for anti-corruption. We also contribute to ongoing efforts to build a regional community of practice that allows the exchange of good practices and the potential for cross-regional collaboration.
La lucha contra la corrupción en América Latina: ¿Puede la Acción Colectiva ayudar a cerrar las brechas?
A medida que ampliamos nuestros esfuerzos para apoyar la Acción Colectiva contra la corrupción en América Latina, Andrea Prieto, especialista en el sector privado, hace un balance de las iniciativas existentes en la región. Ella y representantes de algunas de las iniciativas discutieron el enfoque de Acción Colectiva para combatir la corrupción en Lima, Perú, en la Octava Semana de la Integridad organizada por Alliance for Integrity. View English version. Cambiar el statu quo La pandemia de Covid-19, la inflación y el malestar social han sumido a América Latina en un estancamiento económico. Al mismo tiempo la corrupción sigue agravando los problemas económicos de la región. Se calcula que le cuesta a las economías de la región la asombrosa cifra de 220.000 millones de dólares anuales y se le atribuye alrededor del 50% del efecto total de la desaceleración económica. Sólo los corruptos se benefician de la corrupción. Inhibe el desarrollo económico, desalienta la inversión, obstaculiza la innovación, distorsiona los mercados y aumenta el coste de los negocios. Pero hay buenas noticias. Cada vez se comprende mejor que la lucha contra la corrupción es una responsabilidad colectiva que requiere la cooperación de los sectores público, privado y también de la sociedad civil. Este cambio ha dado lugar a: Nueva normativa para el sector privado; un mayor énfasis en la responsabilidad de las empresas y; la demanda de programas y estrategias de prevención de la corrupción a nivel empresarial. Paralelamente, las empresas de América Latina desarrollan cada vez más estrategias empresariales de carácter sostenible. Éstas miran más allá de los beneficios a corto plazo, hacia un crecimiento sostenible a largo plazo que no sólo beneficia a la empresa, sino que refuerza la estabilidad económica y la competitividad de los mercados. En consecuencia, el sector privado de América Latina se ha comprometido más en la lucha contra la corrupción. Generar confianza mediante la acción colectiva La falta de confianza entre los actores del sector privado y otras partes interesadas es un obstáculo crítico para avanzar en la agenda anticorrupción. La Acción Colectiva ofrece una metodología de probada eficacia para generar confianza y desarrollar enfoques de colaboración entre las partes. Estos enfoques colaborativos apoyan el diseño y la implementación de medidas e iniciativas de prevención de la corrupción que son eficaces incluso en contextos difíciles. El B20 Collective Action Hub del Basel Institute on Governance ha identificado más de 60 iniciativas de Acción Colectiva que operan en diversos sectores en 12 países de América Central y del Sur. Estas iniciativas van desde declaraciones conjuntas hasta sistemas de certificación anticorrupción. También vemos herramientas para salvaguardar la contratación pública, como los Pactos de Integridad y los Mecanismos de Denuncia de Alto Nivel. Las siguientes iniciativas ofrecen una muestra de los distintos tipos de iniciativas y su impacto: Acción colectiva para reformar la normatividad Un ejemplo de éxito de cómo la Acción Colectiva puede conducir a una reforma legal o normativa es la Red Marítima Anticorrupción MACN . La MACN es una red mundial dirigida por empresas que aspira a una industria marítima libre de corrupción. En Argentina, en 2014, la MACN detectó, a través de su sistema anónimo de notificación de incidentes, denuncias de exigencias irregulares de dinero por inspecciones rutinarias en buques graneleros en Argentina. El soborno se estimó en aproximadamente 30 millones de USD al año. Afectaba no sólo a quienes se veían obligados a pagar sobornos para obtener la documentación que necesitaban, sino también al comercio internacional global de productos agrícolas argentinos. Los costes más elevados y el mayor riesgo legal habían empezado a disuadir a las empresas extranjeras de seguir comerciando en el país. La MACN trabajó con gremios y cámaras de comercio para identificar los riesgos de corrupción, reunir a los actores relevantes, generar confianza y encontrar formas de resolver el problema. Gracias a esta acción y por convenio colectivo, el Servicio Nacional de Sanidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria reformó el marco normativo en noviembre de 2017. El resultado fue la adopción de un moderno sistema de control que digitaliza la gestión de las inspecciones y establece un sistema de controles cruzados. El proceso de Acción Colectiva se amplió para incluir la formación y el seguimiento de todos los agentes públicos y privados del nuevo sistema. Se calcula que los sobornos disminuyeron en más de un 90%, lo que redujo significativamente el coste por barco de entrar en los puertos argentinos. La integridad como aspiración: Acción colectiva para reconocer a las empresas Las empresas ven cada vez más el valor de demostrar públicamente sus credenciales de integridad. En 2010, el Instituto Ethos de Brasil una organización de la sociedad civil colaboró con la Contraloría General del país para desarrollar el sello Pro-Ética. Se trata de un sistema para reconocer públicamente a las empresas que implementan programas eficaces de integridad y cumplimiento y que están comprometidas con la agenda de la integridad. El concepto fue adoptado posteriormente por el Ministerio de Infraestructuras brasileño. Ganó aún más importancia a raíz del escándalo Lava Jato , que obligó tanto al gobierno como a las empresas a reconocer la importancia de las medidas de prevención de la corrupción. El mecanismo sigue teniendo impacto. En 2020-21, más de 327 empresas solicitaron el reconocimiento. De ellas, 195 cumplían los requisitos de elegibilidad y fueron evaluadas, y 67 fueron aprobadas. En 2022-23, 84 empresas obtuvieron la aprobación. La herramienta ha sido reconocida como una buena experiencia de Acción Colectiva, ya que las deliberaciones sobre la aprobación de las empresas son llevadas a cabo por el Comité Pro Ética, conformado por instituciones de los sectores público y privado, con representación nacional y comprometidas con la promoción de la integridad corporativa. El éxito llevó a Paraguay a implantar un programa similar de "Sello de Integridad" Integrity Seal, lo que demuestra el potencial de reproducción de este tipo de iniciativas. En 2023, el gobierno de Paraguay reconoció públicamente a 30 empresas, de las cuales 17 eran grandes empresas y 13 pequeñas y medianas empresas PYME . Acción colectiva para el aprendizaje intersectorial La Acción Colectiva puede reunir a las personas para que aprendan a mejorar la integridad empresarial. Un ejemplo es la Red para la Formación Ética y Ciudadana de Colombia, que ofrece espacios de reflexión y formación sobre la ética en los entornos empresariales. A través de su programa insignia "La Cátedra de Integridad" Cátedra Colombiana de Ciudadanía, Integridad y Anticorrupción, ejecutado por la Universidad Nacional de Colombia, la red ha reunido a más de 15 organizaciones asociadas del sector público, la sociedad civil, el mundo académico, las empresas y sectores profesionales en formaciones sobre ética. Desde su creación, la Cátedra ha formado a más de 5.500 estudiantes y a más de 1.600 ciudadanos. La red también dirige programas de tutoría para el diseño y la aplicación de iniciativas de Acción Colectiva contra la corrupción. Acción colectiva para igualar las condiciones Las iniciativas de Acción Colectiva también pueden contribuir a nivelar el terreno de juego para las empresas, incluidas las PYME. Un ejemplo es la iniciativa Empresarios por la Integridad en Perú. Esta red dirigida por empresas ofrece certificación contra el soborno, así como formación en integridad para PYME. En el momento de redactar este informe, 49 empresas habían obtenido la certificación y en varias regiones de país está en marcha un proyecto para promover la integridad entre las PYME del sector de la construcción. Terreno fértil para nuevas iniciativas: estamos aquí para ayudar El crecimiento y el impacto de las iniciativas de Acción Colectiva en América Latina demuestran que la región es un terreno fértil para la colaboración de múltiples partes interesadas contra la corrupción. En un contexto de creciente concienciación sobre la corrupción, y en el que los escándalos de corrupción son frecuentes, la Acción Colectiva tiene la oportunidad de ganar mayor legitimidad como forma eficaz de promover la integridad. Y, lo que es más importante para la situación económica actual de América Latina, de crear unas condiciones más competitivas y transparentes para hacer negocios. Como se muestra en los ejemplos anteriores, las iniciativas de Acción Colectiva pueden influir en la forma de hacer negocios, ya sea a nivel sectorial, ampliando su impacto a nuevos actores como las PYME en el caso peruano, o ampliando las iniciativas para expandirse a nivel regional como en el caso del "Sello de Integridad". En el Instituto de Basilea apoyamos activamente este enfoque y la próxima generación de iniciativas de Acción Colectiva. Nuestro programa de tutoría de Acción Colectiva ofrece apoyo adaptado y específico al contexto a organizaciones que promueven iniciativas de lucha contra la corrupción lideradas por empresas y múltiples partes interesadas. También contribuimos a los esfuerzos en curso para construir una comunidad regional de prácticas que permita el intercambio de buenas prácticas y el potencial de colaboración interregional.
Latin America’s model law on non-conviction based forfeiture of illicit assets turns 10 – what now?
A model law on non-conviction based forfeiture NCBF , drafted 10 years ago by UNODC to support countries in Latin America in their efforts to recover stolen assets, will be updated following four days of intense discussions among practitioners and asset recovery experts from across the continent. Specialists from our International Centre for Asset Recovery ICAR team in Latin America were among those contributing to the discussions of the NCBF Model Law Ley Modelo de Extinción de Dominio . Extinción de Dominio is the dominant form of NCBF mechanism in Latin America, including in Peru, where ICAR is assisting the authorities in rolling out a national system for NCBF and has seen some encouraging successes. A model for NCBF laws across Latin America Central to the participatory review process of the NCBF Model Law, the meetings sought to illuminate its contribution to efforts to recover stolen assets in countries that have implemented such an NCBF mechanism. Speakers highlighted that the Model Law has served as a reference document for many countries in drafting NCBF legislation that fits their domestic legal systems and contexts. These laws have since helped to recover assets arising from organised crime and corruption. The discussions also highlighted good practices and aspects that require updating in line with the fast-evolving field of asset recovery, such as how to recover assets held in the form of cryptocurrencies, and evolutions in international judicial cooperation. Other key points included issues the possibility of extending international instruments, such as the Inter-American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, to specifically include forms of NBCF. Participants called for more guidance on developing suitable mechanisms to manage seized and confiscated assets, as well as on procedural aspects specific to this type of law. These are areas in which countries that are further ahead in the implementation of Extinción de Dominio mechanisms can usefully take the lead. Sharing on-the-ground experiences with NCBF laws Oscar Solórzano, the Basel Institute’s Head of Latin America and Senior Asset Recovery Specialist, presented some practical case studies that demonstrate the challenges of international judicial cooperation in asset recovery. On the other hand, he pointed to encouraging experiences of such international cooperation from Peru, which has succeeded in recovering assets from abroad using its 2019 Extinción de Domino law see case links below . Oscar also remarked positively on the progress made by some European jurisdictions in recognising the validity of this model of NCBF legislation. Dennis Cheng, Senior Asset Recovery Specialist, moderated a panel reflecting on the significant advances made in Latin America in respect of NCBF over the last 10 years and participated in the closing session. Promoting innovation in asset recovery Participants in the four-day meeting included prosecutors, judges, academics and policymakers from Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay and Peru. Many of these are leading voices in the asset recovery field who are also involved in the Asset Recovery Knowledge Community established by ICAR earlier this year. It is hoped that the reflections and knowledge products emerging from the Asset Recovery Knowledge Community will support the legal foundations of the NCBF Model Law as it is revised over the coming months, as well as its application in practice. Learn more See the UNODC press release: UNODC conmemora los diez años de la Ley de Modelo de Extinción de Dominio. Encouraging cases based on Peru’s 2019 Extinción de Dominio law include the Ibárcena case involving a deceased Navy General, the Russian arms dealer case, the military aircraft case of Moshe Rothschild Chassin, and the recent terrorist financing case of The Nun La Monja . A comprehensive description of all cases can be found in the 1,100-page Compendium of Jurisprudence on Extinción de Dominio published in July by Peru’s Procuraduría General del Estado.
Publications
Tackling Bribe Solicitation Using the High-Level Reporting Mechanism for Preventing Bribery
This study by the OECD focuses on the ingredients for a successful High-Level Reporting Mechanism (HLRM) to tackle bribery solicitation and other reports of unfair business practices in public tenders.
It covers the methodology and scope of HLRMs, explores its use cases and looks at case studies in Colombia, Argentina, Ukraine and Peru. It then covers 9 key ingredients to the successful implementation of a HLRM.
Roundtable on the pilot High Level Reporting Mechanism in Argentina
The Basel Institute on Governance and the Centre for Anti-Corruption Studies (CEA) of the University of San Andrés, Argentina convened a private-sector roundtable in Buenos Aires on 4 October 2018.
The purpose was to hear feedback and exchange on the recent implementation of the pilot High Level Reporting Mechanism (HLRM), in the tender carried out by the Argentine National Roads Authority within the framework of the Secure Roads and Routes Network Project using the new Public-Private Participation (PPP) legal framework adopted by the Argentine Republic.
Working Paper 25: High Level Reporting Mechanisms: A comparative analysis
This report discusses the different contexts and processes through which a High Level Reporting Mechanism (HLRM) has been designed and implemented in Colombia, Ukraine, Panama and Argentina, as well as initial interest in the HLRM model in Peru.
Its aim is to understand the specificities of each case and draw lessons applicable to future projects in other countries, whilst respecting the commitment to develop an HLRM that takes account of the specific country’s context.
About this Working Paper
This paper is part of the Basel Institute on Governance Working Paper Series, ISSN: 2624-9650.