General
Corruption is a broad term that, depending on the jurisdiction, encompasses various matters all related in one way or another to:
· Abuse of power or position of authority by public officials;
· Bribe-giving;
· Bribe-taking;
· Engaging in commercial bribery; or
· Other unlawful use of authority by a public official in violation of the interests of society or the state, with the purpose of obtaining an improper benefit.
Many international and Russian companies develop anti-corruption policies with a dual purpose: on the one hand, to prevent abuses against the company itself, and on the other, to reduce corruption risks in interactions with partners and government agencies.
For businesses, beyond direct legal requirements and prohibitions, the key drivers are the threat of financial and reputational losses, as well as the loss of control over internal processes.
In Russia, there is no consolidated regulation specifically dedicated to combating corruption and its manifestations. At the same time, when developing anti-corruption policies in Russia, companies use the following regulatory acts as a reference point:
· The Criminal Code;
· The Code on Administrative Offences;
· The Civil Code;
· The Law on Counteraction of Corruption;
· The Law on the State Civil Service;
· The Resolution of the Plenum of the Russian Supreme Court No. 24 dated 9 July 2013 “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption offenses”;
· The Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development dated 21 November 1997;
· The UN Criminal Law Convention on Corruption dated 27 October 1999; and
· The UN Convention against Corruption dated 31 October 2003.
Depending on the company's field of activity, its global policies, and the most relevant risks, the company may structure its anti-corruption policy differently, placing emphasis on various business processes.
Consequently, when preparing a policy, the result is a kind of “building-block document” consisting of policies addressing different aspects of the company's and its employees' work. Such a toolkit typically includes (either as a separate document or as part of a single consolidated document):
· Introductory information (in particular, who the policy applies to, which company activities may involve corruption risks, what regulations establish this and what liability may arise, how the policy is communicated to employees and updated, who is responsible for monitoring compliance, and how audits may be conducted);
· The procedure for inspecting and selecting counterparties;
· The procedure for giving and receiving gifts;
· The procedure for organising events (including meals and informal meetings) and rules for inviting guests to events;
· The procedure for attending third-party events;
· The procedure for agreeing on anti-corruption provisions with counterparties in contracts.
However, even the most detailed set of documents and procedures is merely a foundation. The main challenge in drafting an anti-corruption policy is to turn this toolkit into a working tool that employees will not perceive as a hostile bureaucratic barrier.
To this end, in addition to formal rules, the policy must incorporate three cross-cutting principles:
· The principle of “reasonable sufficiency”. The rules must not paralyse business. If purchasing office supplies requires the same package of documents as selecting a contractor for a RUB 100m project, the policy will either be ignored or generate significant resentment. Therefore, the policy should provide for a gradation of risks (high-risk / low-risk) and simplified procedures for low-value transactions.
· The principle of “whistleblowing”. One of the weak elements of a policy is employees’ fear of reporting violations. To address this issue, the policy should include an anonymous and harassment-protected mechanism for providing bottom-up feedback.
· The principle of “ethics over the letter”. No instruction manual can cover all real-life situations. Therefore, the key section of the policy should not be prohibitions, but a decision-making algorithm (an escalation matrix: whom to contact and how to clear “gray areas” before they become violations).
An anti-corruption policy is valuable insofar as it is embedded in everyday business processes. Consequently, when developing the policy, it is important to work out in advance the options for its implementation within the company and to take into account the company’s existing processes and specific features that may either facilitate or complicate such implementation.
