Ten years in compliance:
Reflecting on the UK Bribery Act I
n 2010 the UK Bribery Act was unveiled to a mixed reception. 1 While there was some debate at the me about whether the legislaon would have a “real” impact, the Bribery Act was recently described in a Parliamentary review as the “interna onal gold standard” of an -bribery legisla on. We thought it would be appropriate to reflect on how bribery and corruption compliance has changed over the last decade.
the OECD’s 2009 Good Practice Guidance, there was li le guidance for companies looking to establish or improve their compliance program.
Defining what ‘good’ looks like
Following the introduction of the Bribery Act, discussions about bribery and corrup on compliance programs have become more sophis cated. In late 2012, the US Department of Jusce issued its “Hallmarks of Effec ve Compliance Programs” which largely
By 2010, the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) had been in force over 30 years. Yet, aside from 1 The UK Bribery Act subsequently became effec ve from July 2011 88 europeanbusinessmagazine.com
The “Adequate Procedures” guidance released by the UK Ministry of Jusce following the UK Bribery Act contributed to a change in this dialogue by encouraging organisa ons to consider what compliance measures are appropriate given their resources and risk profile and emphasized tone and communica on.
echoed the Adequate Procedures. Others followed including SAPIN-II in France and the Clean Company Act in Brazil, which reinforced the emerging consensus around best prac ce approaches to compliance.
A broader view of compliance While there are differences in approach between countries, a shared view of some of the key building blocks of a compliance program has provided a helpful star ng point for many organisa ons. Guidance associated with the different regimes will con nue to change, but it is hard to see agreement on the need to maintain risk-based compliance programs changing any me soon.
