A stark example of transnational corruption

Corruption is one of the most pervasive and corrosive challenges to governance, economic growth, and human rights worldwide. It diverts public funds from essential services, deepens inequality, and erodes trust in institutions.

Nowhere is this more evident than in cases of grand corruption, where high-level officials manipulate state resources for personal gain with impunity. Recent data from Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) reveals that 47 out of 180 countries have received their lowest scores in over a decade, indicating an alarming rise in public sector corruption.

This article tries to analyse in a few words the potential advantages of having an International Anti-Corruption Court (IACCourt).

The urgency of having such a court has increased with recent policy shifts in the United States, particularly the freeze on much foreign aid and the potential dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

These changes threaten to undermine anti-corruption programmes worldwide by reducing financial and technical support for transparency initiatives in developing countries; by weakening civil society and independent media, which play a critical role in exposing corruption; and by limiting enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), which has historically been a powerful tool against corporate bribery and transnational corruption.

For decades, USAID has funded anti-corruption bodies, judicial reforms, and financial crime investigations across Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. If dismantled, local institutions may struggle to maintain their work, increasing impunity for corrupt officials, especially in poorly governed countries such as Madagascar. Similarly, a freeze on FCPA enforcement could embolden multinational corporations to engage in bribery without fear of legal consequences, reversing the progress made over the past 50 years. We live in dark times and finding a global remedy is crucial.

At its core, corruption weakens state institutions, particularly in fragile democracies and authoritarian regimes where power is consolidated. Judicial systems are often compromised, leaving little recourse for victims of corruption. Bribery in state procurement processes diverts public resources into private hands, inflating costs and reducing the quality of essential infrastructure, such as roads, schools, and hospitals.

South Africa’s state capture scandal demonstrates how systemic corruption infiltrates state-owned enterprises, costing billions in misappropriated funds. Despite evidence of high-level wrongdoing, prosecutions have been slow and largely ineffective, underscoring the need for an international mechanism like the IACCourt to intervene in such cases.

Corruption is not just a national problem; it is deeply intertwined with the global financial system. Illicit financial flows, facilitated by weak regulatory oversight and offshore tax havens, allow corrupt officials to hide stolen wealth in foreign banks, luxury real estate, and shell companies.

The extractive industries provide a particularly stark example of transnational corruption. In Nigeria, the Malabu oil scandal involved an oil block deal done in 1998, in which $1.1 billion was allegedly funnelled through secret accounts, benefiting political elites rather than the Nigerian people. Sadly, some of the politically exposed people involved in this case were discharged last year. Had an IACCourt existed, it could have pursued prosecution, frozen illicit assets, and returned funds to the rightful owners: the citizens of Nigeria.

Comparably, corruption fuels organised crime networks, including human trafficking. Bribery of law enforcement and immigration officials enables traffickers to operate with impunity, undermining efforts to combat modern slavery. Without a coordinated global response, these crimes will remain difficult to dismantle.

As Transparency International highlights, 85% of the world’s population, or 6.5 billion people, live in countries with a Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) below 50. During crises, such as wars, pandemics, and natural disasters, corruption thrives due to the urgent need for relief and the lack of oversight. COVID-19 pandemic corruption saw billions lost through fraudulent contracts, counterfeit medical supplies, and political favouritism in vaccine distribution. Similarly, humanitarian aid meant for conflict zones like Sudan or Syria has been siphoned off by corrupt networks, depriving vulnerable populations of lifesaving assistance.

Climate change funds are also at risk. Billions of dollars allocated to environmental protection and climate adaptation projects are potentially vulnerable to misappropriation without strong accountability mechanisms. Transparency International’s database of climate-related corruption cases, the Climate Atlas, has uncovered and documented many climate projects ruined by corruption in all parts of the world. In the US, for instance, in a case that went to trial in 2023, a major energy company orchestrated a $60 million bribery scheme to unduly influence public policy in its favour and slow a transition to renewable energy.

While institutional responses to corruption remain inadequate, civil society organisations, campaigners, journalists, and whistleblowers play a critical role in exposing and combating corruption. However, whistleblowers face significant risks, including retaliation, imprisonment, and even assassination. Land and environmental defenders who are frequently at the forefront of the fight against the climate crisis suffer the same fate.

This is most common in countries with serious corruption problems. In fact, cross-referencing Global Witness and Transparency International data shows that almost all 1,013 murders of environmental defenders since 2019 took place in countries with CPI scores below 50. Corruption kills and fosters impunity, helping perpetrators avoid justice.

There is clearly a need to strengthen legal protections for whistleblowers and to provide an international legal framework for their testimonies. An IACCourt would complement these efforts by ensuring that whistleblower testimonies lead to concrete legal action rather than mere political scandals.

The fight against corruption is facing an inflection point. With the US stepping back from global anti-corruption enforcement, new mechanisms to fill the gap are urgently needed, and the IACCourt offers a promising solution.

Proposed as a global tribunal with the authority to prosecute grand corruption when national systems fail, the IACCourt represents a landmark step toward achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), because corruption erodes all sectoral efforts, from energy development to food security. The creation of this court could particularly strengthen SDG 16 related to peace, justice, and strong institutions. By holding corrupt elites accountable and facilitating the recovery of stolen assets, the court would fill a critical gap in the global governance framework, ensuring that corruption is no longer a low-risk, high-reward crime.

However, the IACCourt cannot operate alone, and it will not perform miracles. The fight against corruption requires a multi-pronged approach, involving governments, civil society, journalists, businesses, and ordinary citizens. All stakeholders have a role to play in this “revolution”.

Policymakers should not only support the IACCourt initiative and advocate for its adoption in multilateral forums but also strengthen national systems and protect them against state or corporate capture. Civil society organisations must continue mobilising grassroots movements to demand stronger anti-corruption enforcement; and the global private sector should adopt transparent practices and systematically reject complicity in corrupt deals.

Corruption is not an inevitable reality; it is a systemic failure that can be fixed. The IACCourt represents a bold, necessary step toward ending impunity and restoring public trust in governance. But it will remain an empty shell if the whole world does not make anti-corruption efforts a priority.