How Corruption is Prosecuted in the UK
The 2003 invasion of Iraq led to a complete re-work of that country’s massive oil industry. A new, pro-Western government began handing out lucrative contracts but many of these were stained with corruption.
Just this week the legal process surrounding some of those contracts came to an end as Paul Bond was convicted on two counts of conspiracy to give corrupt payments. He is the fourth Unaoil executive to be convicted after three other members were sentenced last year. In total, over $6 million of bribes were paid in return for contracts worth around $800 million.
These crimes are investigated and prosecuted by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), a non-ministerial government department that was formed as a result of the Criminal Justice Act 1987. Despite some early teething troubles and successive budget cuts the SFO has continued to take the lead on some of the most significant examples of international fraud and corruption. It might be thought that this would make the SFO immune to interference from the government but it has routinely been suggested that the department should be merged with the National Crime Agency (NCA). While such a consolidation may look sensible on paper as the number of serious fraud prosecutions has declined, a closer look shows that the reason for this is a lack of resources and it is hard to imagine that would change or become a priority if the SFO was merged into a different organisation with a broader remit.
Almost every developed country has a separate and independent body for prosecuting serious fraud, bribery and corruption. This latest success shows that the UK should be no different.