Managing Conflict of Interest - Organisation for Economic Co ...

Managing Conflict of Interest - Organisation for Economic Co ... Managing Conflict of Interest - Organisation for Economic Co ...

bezkorupce.cz
from bezkorupce.cz More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

124 Managing Conflict of Interestinterest, which the employee reasonably should have knownwas actually pending under his or her official responsibilitywithin one year before leaving government service.• Section 207(b) – One-Year Bar: A covered person may notknowingly “represent, aid, or advise” any other person concerninga treaty or treaty negotiation in which the coveredperson participated on the basis of designated informationto which he or she had access and which he or she shouldhave known was so designated. 3• Section 207(c)-(f) – One-Year Restrictions on High-LevelOfficials: Commonly referred to as the “one-year cooling offperiod,” this section provides a series of one-year restrictionson post-employment representations by specified formerhigh-level officers and employees, which apply withoutregard to whether the matter involved in the representationwas actually pending—or even existed—during the periodof government service.Acts Affecting a Personal Financial Interest, Section 208Section 208 indicates that a public official may not personallyand substantially participate as an official in a particular matter inwhich, to the official’s knowledge, the official, his or her spouse,or other specified persons or entities—including businesses withwhich the official is negotiating for employment—has a financialinterest. 4 This statute is a mainstay of conflict-of-interest statutes. Itprohibits financial self-dealing, and is closely allied to Section 201on bribery. It was designed to prohibit public officials from advancingor appearing to advance their financial interests at the expenseof public interests.Salary of Government Officials Payable Only by the UnitedStates, Section 209A government official may not receive a salary from any sourceother than the United States as compensation for his or her services3Section 207(b)(2)(A) defines “trade negotiation” and Section 207 (b)(2)(B)defines “treaty.”4Section 208(b) provides a written-waiver provision for certain fact-specific circumstances.ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific

Implementation and Enforcement Tools 125as an official. This statute prevents the official from receiving largemonetary gifts from private sources for a job well done. The aim ofthe statute is to prohibit two payrolls and two paymasters for thesame job. It presumes that there is a natural tendency to favor anoutside donor even absent direct pressure to perform in a certainway. The statute alleviates even the appearance of impropriety. 5Enforcement in Practice: The Challenge to Determine IntentThe Public Integrity Section (PIN) of the US Department ofJustice was established in the 1970s—another outgrowth of theWatergate scandal. The unit was created to provide uniformity, standardization,and objectivity in handling all public corruption casesto include those brought under COI statutes.As outlined earlier, standards of enforcement are contingentupon how much evidence of corrupt intent can be established. Severalexamples of cases handled by PIN illustrate this principle.“Now let’s go out and buy us some votes” – Ben Reyes, Houston,TexasBen Reyes was the head of the City Council, in Houston, Texas, theUS’ fourth-largest city, for dozens of years spanning the decades ofthe 1970s through the 1990s. Throughout this time, the local FBI officereceived numerous allegations that Reyes demanded large sums ofmoney from anyone who wanted to do business with the city. Havingfailed to make a bribery case on him over the years, the FBI gotpermission to begin an “undercover operation.” Creating a fictitiouscompany, they bid on a city contract, and then sat back and waited.True to form, Reyes approached the FBI’s make-believe companyand demanded a bribe. Once he was paid for his vote, hedemanded more money to bribe the other members of the Councilfor their votes. The above quote was his precise words as recordedduring the investigation. It leaves little room for interpretation; itshows unequivocally that Reyes intended to receive money forvotes. Given this clear statement of corrupt intent, PIN prosecutedhim under the corruption statutes and asked for the maximum sentenceonce he was convicted.5Sections 209(b)–(e) provide certain exceptions.ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific

Implementation and En<strong>for</strong>cement Tools 125as an <strong>of</strong>ficial. This statute prevents the <strong>of</strong>ficial from receiving largemonetary gifts from private sources <strong>for</strong> a job well done. The aim <strong>of</strong>the statute is to prohibit two payrolls and two paymasters <strong>for</strong> thesame job. It presumes that there is a natural tendency to favor anoutside donor even absent direct pressure to per<strong>for</strong>m in a certainway. The statute alleviates even the appearance <strong>of</strong> impropriety. 5En<strong>for</strong>cement in Practice: The Challenge to Determine IntentThe Public Integrity Section (PIN) <strong>of</strong> the US Department <strong>of</strong>Justice was established in the 1970s—another outgrowth <strong>of</strong> theWatergate scandal. The unit was created to provide uni<strong>for</strong>mity, standardization,and objectivity in handling all public corruption casesto include those brought under COI statutes.As outlined earlier, standards <strong>of</strong> en<strong>for</strong>cement are contingentupon how much evidence <strong>of</strong> corrupt intent can be established. Severalexamples <strong>of</strong> cases handled by PIN illustrate this principle.“Now let’s go out and buy us some votes” – Ben Reyes, Houston,TexasBen Reyes was the head <strong>of</strong> the City <strong>Co</strong>uncil, in Houston, Texas, theUS’ fourth-largest city, <strong>for</strong> dozens <strong>of</strong> years spanning the decades <strong>of</strong>the 1970s through the 1990s. Throughout this time, the local FBI <strong>of</strong>ficereceived numerous allegations that Reyes demanded large sums <strong>of</strong>money from anyone who wanted to do business with the city. Havingfailed to make a bribery case on him over the years, the FBI gotpermission to begin an “undercover operation.” Creating a fictitiouscompany, they bid on a city contract, and then sat back and waited.True to <strong>for</strong>m, Reyes approached the FBI’s make-believe companyand demanded a bribe. Once he was paid <strong>for</strong> his vote, hedemanded more money to bribe the other members <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Co</strong>uncil<strong>for</strong> their votes. The above quote was his precise words as recordedduring the investigation. It leaves little room <strong>for</strong> interpretation; itshows unequivocally that Reyes intended to receive money <strong>for</strong>votes. Given this clear statement <strong>of</strong> corrupt intent, PIN prosecutedhim under the corruption statutes and asked <strong>for</strong> the maximum sentenceonce he was convicted.5Sections 209(b)–(e) provide certain exceptions.ADB/OECD Anti-<strong>Co</strong>rruption Initiative <strong>for</strong> Asia and the Pacific

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!