Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Notes on Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Commentary
- Article 1 The Offence of Bribery of Foreign Public Officials
- Article 2 The Responsibility of Legal Persons
- Article 3 Sanctions
- Article 3(3) Seizure and Confiscation
- Article 4 Jurisdiction
- Article 5 Enforcement
- Article 6 Statute of Limitations
- Article 7 Money Laundering
- Article 8 Accounting
- Articles 9–11 International Co-operation
- Article 12 Monitoring and Follow-up
- Articles 13–17 Final Provisions
- Part III The Convention in Practice
- Annex OECD Documents
- Consolidated Bibliography
- Index
- References
Article 5 - Enforcement
from Part II - Commentary
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 March 2015
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Notes on Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Commentary
- Article 1 The Offence of Bribery of Foreign Public Officials
- Article 2 The Responsibility of Legal Persons
- Article 3 Sanctions
- Article 3(3) Seizure and Confiscation
- Article 4 Jurisdiction
- Article 5 Enforcement
- Article 6 Statute of Limitations
- Article 7 Money Laundering
- Article 8 Accounting
- Articles 9–11 International Co-operation
- Article 12 Monitoring and Follow-up
- Articles 13–17 Final Provisions
- Part III The Convention in Practice
- Annex OECD Documents
- Consolidated Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
Enforcement
Investigation and prosecution of the bribery of a foreign public official shall be subject to the applicable rules and principles of each Party. They shall not be influenced by considerations of national economic interest, the potential effect upon relations with another State or the identity of the natural or legal persons involved.
Official Commentaries
Article 5 – Enforcement
Article 5 recognises the fundamental nature of national regimes of prosecutorial discretion. It recognises as well that, in order to protect the independence of prosecution, such discretion is to be exercised on the basis of professional motives and is not to be subject to improper influence by concerns of a political nature. Article 5 is complemented by paragraph 6 of the Annex to the 1997 OECD Revised Recommendation on Combating Bribery in International Business Transactions, C(97)123/FINAL (hereinafter, ‘1997 OECD Recommendation’), which recommends, inter alia, that complaints of bribery of foreign public officials should be seriously investigated by competent authorities and that adequate resources should be provided by national governments to permit effective prosecution of such bribery. Parties will have accepted this Recommendation, including its monitoring and follow-up arrangements.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The OECD Convention on BriberyA Commentary, pp. 349 - 396Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2013
References
(2004), ‘Guilty Pleas, Diversion and Consensual Disposition: England and Wales’ in and (eds.), Strafjustiz im Spannungsfeld von Effizienz und Fairness, Berlin, 381Google Scholar
(2001), ‘Discretion and Decision Making in Money Laundering Prosecutions’, 5(1) Journal of Money Laundering Control42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2002), ‘Private Parties: The Rights of the Defendant and the Victim’ in and (eds.), European Criminal Procedures, Cambridge, 541Google Scholar
(2002), ‘Corruption in the Official Arms Trade’ in (ed.), Policy Research Paper 001, Sutton, available at Google Scholar
(2005), ‘The Schengen Acquis in Police Cooperation: Implementation in an Enlarged Europe’, 3 ERA-Forum, Trier, 415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2009), ‘Congressional Legislation: The Next Step for Corporate Deferred Prosecution Agreements’, 93 Marquette Law Review875Google Scholar
and (eds.) (2000), The Implementation of Corpus Juris in the Member States, Antwerp/Groningen/Oxford, Vol. 1Google Scholar
(2003), Sicherheit in Freiheit: Die Schutzfunktion des demokratischen Staates und die Freiheit der Bürger, OpladenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2005), ‘Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters in Ireland and the Proposed European Evidence Warrant’, ERA-Forum Special Issue, Trier, 53
(2003), Turning a Blind Eye: Corruption and the UK Export Credits Guarantee Department, Sturminster NewtonGoogle Scholar
(1986), ‘Legalität oder Opportunität im Strafverfahren?’ in (ed.), Recht und Gesetz im Dialog III, Köln, 55Google Scholar
(2004), ‘Towards Universal International Anticorruption Standards: The United Nations Convention Against Corruption and Other International Anticorruption Treaties: Too Much of a Good Thing?’, presentation at the second Annual Conference of the IBA, ICC, and OECD, ‘The Awakening Giant of Anti-Corruption Enforcement in Paris’, 22–23 April 2004
(2004), ‘Investigation and Prosecution: Prosecution Authorities’ in (ed.), Enlarging the Fight Against Fraud in the European Union, Academy of European Law Trier Series of Publications, vol. 36, Cologne, 139Google Scholar
(2003), Money Laundering Counter-Measures in the European Union: A New Paradigm of Security Governance versus Fundamental Legal Principles, The Hague/London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
(2011), ‘Corporate Criminal Liability in the United States: Is a New Approach Warranted?’ in and (eds.), Corporate Criminal Liability, Emergence, Convergence, and Risk, Dordrecht/Heidelberg/London/New York, 63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2002) [cited Perrodet 2002a], ‘The Italian System’ in and (eds.), European Criminal Procedures, Cambridge, 348Google Scholar
(2002) [cited Perrodet 2002b], ‘The Public Prosecutor’ in and (eds.), European Criminal Procedures, Cambridge, 415Google Scholar
(2002), ‘The Belgian System’ in and (eds.), European Criminal Procedures, Cambridge, 81Google Scholar
and (2011), ‘Emergence and Convergence: Corporate Criminal Liability Principles in Overview’ in and (eds.), Corporate Criminal Liability, Emergence, Convergence, and Risk, Dordrecht/Heidelberg/London/New York, 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2008), ‘Treaties and National Security’, 40 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics437Google Scholar
(1999), ‘Das OECD-Übereinkommen 1997 über die Bekämpfung der Bestechung ausländischer Amtsträger im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr’ in and (eds.), Korruption im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr: Bestandesaufnahme, Bekämpfung, Prävention, Neuwied/Kriftel/Basel/Frankfurt a. M., 212Google Scholar
(2002), ‘The Role of the Judge’ in and (eds.), European Criminal Procedures, Cambridge, 488Google Scholar
(1999), ‘Korruption in Deutschland – Das Ende der Tabuisierung’ in and (eds.), Korruption im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr: Bestandesaufnahme, Bekämpfung, Prävention, Neuwied/Kriftel/Basel/Frankfurt a. M., 131Google Scholar
(2005), ‘An Academic Critique of the EU Acquis in relation to Trans-Border Evidence Gathering’, ERA-Forum Special Issue, Trier, 28
(2002), ‘Negotiated Justice’ in and (eds.), European Criminal Procedures, Cambridge, 641Google Scholar
(1993), ‘Belgium’ in (ed.), Criminal Procedure Systems in the European Community, London, 1Google Scholar
(2004), ‘Communication over Confrontation: Modern Criminal Procedure in Transformation’ in and (eds.), Strafjustiz im Spannungsfeld von Effizienz und Fairness, Berlin, 367Google Scholar