Crackdown on corruption culture must not be neglected in rush for African riches
Bribery is rife in Africa and has been for some time. But with many African countries experiencing strong growth and regional organisations becoming increasingly ambitious, this situation may be changing. Happily, the change is not just being driven by outside pressure. Individual African countries are beginning to develop their own anti-corruption laws and the continent's burgeoning middle class is increasingly questioning, and indeed shunning, the bribery culture that has prevailed for so long. That said, bribery still exists. It is still very much a feature of daily life for consumers and, for now at least, should remain an important consideration for any organisation thinking about doing business on the continent.
July 11, 2013 at 07:03 PM
5 minute read
Collective action between businesses and Government will help tackle Africa's widespread bribery issues
Bribery is rife in Africa and has been for some time. But with many African countries experiencing strong growth and regional organisations becoming increasingly ambitious, this situation may be changing. Happily, the change is not just being driven by outside pressure. Individual African countries are beginning to develop their own anti-corruption laws and the continent's burgeoning middle class is increasingly questioning, and indeed shunning, the bribery culture that has prevailed for so long.
That said, bribery still exists. It is still very much a feature of daily life for consumers and, for now at least, should remain an important consideration for any organisation thinking about doing business on the continent.
Even though it is possible to do business in Africa without paying bribes, organisations need to make important choices about how they deal with corruption and address the issue in their business planning. First off, operational costs can be higher if bribes are not paid and timelines may extend without facilitation payments to speed up Government processes. As such, profit can at times end up being lower than would have been the case if bribes had been offered. This can lead to some difficult scenarios where companies have to walk away from deals that could have been good for their business simply because the corruption risk was too great.
Another important area of risk lies in the retention of third parties and, in particular, making sure you have safeguards against the risk of corruption when using agents. To deal with this, effective due diligence of third parties is essential alongside robust anti-corruption policies that set out strict standards to be followed by those representing the business in each jurisdiction. Particular care also needs to be taken when dealing with Government representatives of any type.
Anti-corruption policies are also paramount when briefing the workforce because those employees who have been brought up in Africa may not consider facilitation payments as wrong. The same is true when dealing with hospitality or 'travel' expenses, where notions of what is reasonable and proportionate need to be emphasised.
The entire workforce should be trained in how to identify corruption concerns ('red flags') and be told the importance of creating a documentary record of the issues they considered and the conclusions reached. This training is particularly important for those employees who may have responsibility for reviewing and/or sanctioning items of expenditure where difficult considerations arise. Retention of the documentary record could be crucial if it becomes necessary to justify a particular decision at a later date.
Level playing field
With the heavy inflow into Africa of investment from China and India, an additional concern for western companies is the danger of losing out on business to other countries. These jurisdictions do not have the same anti-corruption culture that exists in the West and this can leave businesses based in the UK and US at a disadvantage. Despite some notable efforts to level the playing field for all participants, this is unlikely to happen any time soon.
Regardless of the risks of additional costs, or even losing out on business, a hard-line stance on avoiding corruption is the only sustainable way of doing business in Africa. Furthermore, it is an approach that will probably pay dividends as the bribery landscape in Africa continues to change.
Quite apart from local reputational factors, businesses are rightly more conscious of their increased exposure under statutes such as the UK Bribery Act and the longer-established US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, both of which have extra-territorial application.
Such regulation is causing multinationals to be more diligent about their business operations to make sure that they mitigate their exposure to corruption risk, particularly so given the robust track record of enforcement by the US. The recent introduction of the UK Bribery Act has undoubtedly raised the stakes in the UK over accountability on corruption. But there are still concerns about when its enforcement will begin, while the absence of case law makes it more difficult to establish the parameters of the new legal framework.
Looking to the future, there are great hopes about the potential for collective action as a valuable tool for further tackling the problem. Businesses attempting to reduce corruption risk are joining forces with other organisations and Government institutions to raise corruption awareness and establish appropriate levels of ethical conduct. It will take time to see whether this approach can ever truly become embedded and effective in Africa.
Ultimately, corruption is an ingrained and sensitive issue, resulting from a myriad of socioeconomic and cultural practices that are likely to change over the years. Now that more of the global commercial fraternity is willing to see Africa as a profitable business opportunity, it is important that the issue of corruption is discussed openly to make sure market participants minimise the associated risks and continue to flourish in this continent of opportunity.
Andrew Legg is the senior litigation partner and Emma Gordon is a litigation partner in the fraud and investigations group at Eversheds.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHong Kong IPO Market Shows Signs of Slow but Steady Recovery
Can AI Beat the Billable Hour? Legal Tech Firms Say Selling AI Products to Law Firms Still a Challenge
More Young Lawyers Are Entering Big Law With Mental Health Issues. Are Firms Ready to Accommodate Them?
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
- 5Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250