1
Regional Workshop on Anti-Corruption
Hosted by Development Cooperation Section, Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok
At the Sukosol Hotel, Bangkok
22-23 May 2013
Report
Submitted to
Development Cooperation Section, Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok
by
Somrudee Nicro, Ph.D.
30 June 2013
2
Regional Workshop on Anti-Corruption
Hosted by Development Cooperation Section, Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok
At the Sukosol Hotel, Bangkok
22-23 May 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rationale and Objectives
Combating corruption is very important to Sweden's development cooperation and has long been
an important cross-cutting issue in Sweden's international development cooperation.
This is because corruption is widespread in many of the countries with which the Development
Cooperation Section (Sida) of the Embassy of Sweden in Bangkok cooperates and poverty and
corruption often go hand-in-hand. Corruption affects the poorest the most and can make poverty
worse in many ways. Corruption poses a serious threat and is an obstacle to development. It
weakens the trust in a community and thereby risks undermining democracy; ultimately, the
entire social structure may be eroded. Corruption hampers economic growth, among other things
by inhibiting investments. Access to social services such as health and education is undermined.
The Embassy of Sweden in Bangkok therefore organized a Regional Workshop on AntiCorruption with the aim to raise the awareness of corruption risks and consequences, as well as
building the capacity of partners to better handle the risks of corruption in their work. This
Workshop was expected to help develop awareness, abilities, capacity and commitment from
partners to promote and create conditions that prevent corruption into their interventions. It was
also considered an opportunity for regionally-supported organizations representing different
sectors to build partnerships and network among themselves and across their sectors.
The two-day event was held on 22nd – 23rd of May 2013 and participated by representatives of
regional partner organizations, the staff from the Embassy and its Development Cooperation
Section (Sida), colleagues from the Norwegian and Finnish Embassies and colleagues from other
Swedish regional missions as well as representatives from the business community.
The Workshop was held at The Sukosol Hotel (formerly Siam City Hotel), Kamolthip III Room,
3rd floor, 477 Si Ayuthaya Road, Phayathai, Bangkok 10400, Thailand.
Methodology
The workshop was composed of four panels of speakers, which were immediately followed by
discussions, and three break-out group discussions. Presentations and discussions began with
concepts of corruption and anti-corruption and Sida’s policy on anti-corruption. This was
followed by presentations of anti-corruption reforms taken by the UN, i.e., the UN Convention
3
against Corruption, Philippine Ombudsman, Thailand’s National Anti-Corruption Commissioner
and Vietnam’s experiences with reforms. The workshop then moved to focusing on corruption in
natural resources sector. Potential corruption in the REDD+ Programme, corruptions in power
sector in the Philippines, illegal logging in Indonesia and fishery in Cambodia were presented.
After participants diagnosed the corruption problems from the cases presented, anti-corruption
initiatives from various stakeholder groups were presented to them. These stakeholders included
Transparency Thailand, private sector, the media, both national and regional, and a UN agency.
The workshop was highly interactive. Participants had ample opportunity and time to raise
questions, share their experiences, engaged in in-depth discussions as well as initiating new
ideas. The final session was designed to have participants express their commitments to prevent
and combat corruptions. There was also a poster exhibition in which participants reported their
anti-corruption activities on the display boards outside the meeting room as a way to share the
information with other participants and interested passers-by.
Two questionnaires were distributed to participants. Questionnaire I was circulated to
participants prior to their participation in the workshop to rapidly assess the participants, with
regard to their gender, affiliated stakeholder group, and reasons for their attendance, among
others. The results were presented at the Introduction Session on Day 1. Questionnaire II was for
the participants to evaluate the workshop and was distributed to them during the last session of
Day 2. The results were reported in the final section of this report.
Workshop agenda, participant list, all presentations (either links or attached files), the two
questionnaires, displayed posters, press release (in Thai), media coverage and photos are
included in the Annex of the report.
The content of the workshop can be summarized as follows.
Day1
Welcome and Expectation
The workshop began with a session on Welcome and Expectation where the hosts of the event,
represented by the Ambassador and Head of Development Cooperation Section, gave their
welcome remarks, one by one.
H.E. Mr. Klas Molin, the Ambassador
Ambassador Molin welcomed participants by saying that Sweden has been classified as one of
the world’s least corruption countries due to its well functioning political and legal systems.
Even though Sweden has less corruption but it cannot be implied that corruption does not exist or
4
that corruption is not a problem in Sweden. It is important that Sweden continues to be alert and
aware that the country is not spared from corruption that affects everybody else. It is then in the
interest of Sweden to contribute to the reduction of corruption internationally because of its
negative effect on many different areas of a society. Corruption distorts competition as it reduces
companies’ willingness to invest in countries or regions where corruption is widespread. It also
curbs the desire for entrepreneurship. Moreover, corruption threatens the legitimacy of the rule
of law and weakens confidence in key social institutions and market economy processes. In
addition, the risk is that corruption will simultaneously undermine the conditions for economic
development and the foundations of a functioning democratic form of government. It is fortunate
that anti-corruption and democratic governance is now high on the agenda in most international
forums, and there are an increasing number of researchers spending time to contribute to a better
understanding of corruption and establish what works to promote integrity and build democratic
governance. He believed that this workshop will also contribute to identifying new ideas and
entry points and that he personally looked very much forward to learning about the outcomes and
concrete results of the workshop.
Ms. AnnaMaria Oltorp, Head of Development Cooperation Section
Ms Oltorp welcomed participants with the following remarks. Sida contributes to the global
ambition to fight corruption and regards corruption as a critical constraint to development. The
issue is addressed globally, regionally and in Sida bilateral cooperation. She noted that
corruption and how to counter corruption are highly complex, difficult and sometimes sensitive
issues. Therefore it has to be a joint effort of all concerned -- to work together to combat it. Sida
views corruption as “the abuse of trust, power, or position for improper gain.” Corruption
includes, among other things, the offering and receiving of bribes, extortion, conflicts of interest
and nepotism. She noted that individual countries are responsible for tackling corruption in their
countries but there are also international drivers of corruption and this has to be addressed by
regional initiatives. She believed that this workshop will not only manifest the general
importance of anti-corruption but will also contribute to the knowledge on how to build integrity
and improve governance in a regional setting. She expected that each and every participant will
be able to find inspiration, new ideas and perhaps cooperation among partners which will help
contribute to the reduction of corruption in the participants’ context. She also encouraged
everyone to work closely with cooperation partners after this workshop, to support and
encourage one another in the fight against corruption.
Ms. Oltorp then invited Mr Paul Wade, Director of the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre in
Bergen, Norway, to be the next speaker.
5
Mr. Paul Wade, Director of the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre
Mr. Wade introduced the U4 as an anti-corruption research center. The U4 collaborates with
several European governments as well as with Sida. He encouraged participants to visit the U4
website, www.U4.no, as it provides many training courses which will enable visitors to have a
better understanding about corruption. The U4 has trained more than 2,000 people worldwide
and also has a network in Southeast Asia on anti-corruption. Its network of resource persons
consisted of speakers, researchers, moderators, etc. He hoped that this workshop will bring
participants from many different fields together to share experiences, ideas and build a network
for anti-corruption practitioners. He encouraged each participant to think of one thing during the
workshop that can help one move out from corruption and share it with other participants on Day
2.
Introduction: Dr. Somrudee Nicro, CEO, INTEGRITAS Co., Ltd. and the Workshop Facilitator
Dr. Nicro introduced participants by way of presenting statistics derived from participant
registration and responses received from participants on Questionnaire I, which was sent to all
participants after their participation was confirmed.
There were 127 participants altogether; twenty-two of them were speakers and moderators. 39
participants were Sida partners in the field of environment and climate change and 14 were Sida
partners working in the area of human rights and democracy. They were from roughly 30 Sida
partner organizations in the Asian region. 20 participants were from the Embassy of Sweden and
Development Cooperation Section. 6 participants were with other Embassies. Another 6 were
from Myanmar. And the rest (20) did not fall into any of the above categories.
As regards responses to questionnaire I, 58 responses were received. Of this, 53 percent is
female and 46.6 percent male. 36 percent of respondents was affiliated with CSOs, 10 percent
with international or regional financial institutions, 9 percent with UN agencies, another 9
percent was independent or having no affiliation, 7 percent with higher education institutions, 4
percent with governmental agencies, 3 percent with Embassies and 10 percent fell into ‘others’
category.
Most of the respondents (54 percent) was working at management level, 17 percent was
technical personnel, 12 percent was executive, 10 percent was support staff and 7 percent Board
members.
More than half (67 percent) of all the respondents said they had never been engaged in any anticorruption activities before attending the workshop. Only 33 percent said they had.
The reasons for attending this workshop were as follows: to learn more about anti-corruption
(91.4 percent), to cooperate with Sida (58.6 percent), to network with other participants (55.2
6
percent) and to take anti-corruption actions (31 percent). Only 19 percent said that they were
assigned to attend.
Session 1: What is corruption and anti-corruption? How is anti-corruption related to
democracy and human rights?
Moderator: Ms Antje Kraft, Justice and Human Rights specialist, Asia-Pacific Regional Centre,
UNDP
Global perspectives on costs of corruption and anti-corruption approaches
By Mr Jesper Johnsøn, Advisor, the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre
Mr Johnsøn introduced three types of corruption and their costs as follows. First kind of
corruption includes bribery, rent-seeking and leakage and has economic costs. Bribery reduces
foreign direct investment. Rent-seeking limits competition. And leakage reduces state revenue.
Second kind of corruption has political cost. Grand corruption has impact on social contract and
state-formation. Electoral corruption leads to broken accountability. The last kind of corruption
refers to petty corruption and self-serving elites which contribute to unfair social dynamics and
hurts the poor disproportionately . The speaker identified the following factors as facilitating
corruption: monopoly of power, wide discretion, lack of transparency in decision-making and
weak check & balance mechanisms. At the global level, Mr Johnsøn praised the UN Convention
against Corruption as a good example of international cooperation, useful to both governments
and civil society.
Sida’s policy on anti-corruption and approach on the relationship between anti-corruption,
democracy and human rights.
By Ms Molly Lien, Senior Policy Specialist on Anti-Corruption, Swedish International
Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)
As corruption is a serious threat to country’s development and poverty reduction, it is important
for Sweden and Sida to encourage anti-corruption in order to make sure that tax payers’ money is
used effectively and the majority of citizens benefits from the money. Corruption weakens the
rule of law and judicial system. It also leads to environmental degradation as well as a lower
standard of living for citizens. Sida has significant role in implementing anti-corruption practice
such as supporting anti-corruption efforts in partner countries as well as addressing the risk and
reducing harm of corruption. Ms Lien asserted that there is no perfect causal relationship
between democracy and anti-corruption. Democracy does not automatically lead to reduction of
corruption. However, when looking at anti-corruption and human rights, there are four basic
7
principles to take into account. They are: non-discrimination, transparency, participation and
accountability. Sida focuses on promoting independent civil society, media (freedom of
expression and watchdog function), public financial management, access to information, rule of
law, and dialogues.
At the end, the speaker concluded that when there is a case of suspicion, partners should not
accept it. Instead they should always act and inform. Likewise, Sida staff must inform manager
and Sida’s Investigation Unit. Sida has a Whistle Blowing Campaign. Anyone suspecting
corruption in connection with development assistance project can report to Sida via www.sida.se.
Q&A and Discussion







Corruption stems from weak or lack of punishment, thus need to fix punishment systems.
Monitoring does not have to be carried out only by government. Instead, community,
students and teachers can all get involved in the monitoring of corruption.
There are successful results of corruption monitoring.
Should ask oneself how to move one’s country to a lower corruption level (low corruption
position)
Research reveals that a set of reform in a society helps reducing corruption. Sweden used to
be a country with corruptions but after several reforms in many areas, the country is now
very clean.
Need to ensure that power is executed in the way that will allow people to be treated equally.
Need to question our assumptions on corruption.
Session 2. Anti-Corruption Reforms
Moderator: Mr Jesper Johnsøn, Advisor, the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre
The United Nations Convention against Corruption
By Mr Shervin Majlessi, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Regional Anticorruption Adviser
Mr Majlessi addressed three questions in his presentation. Why do we need an international anticorruption regime? What did international community and UN do in the area of anti-corruption?
And what are the United Nations Convention against Corruption and its review mechanism?
International anti-corruption regime is needed because corruption is a threat to development.
International cooperation will assist each State Party to implement their duty in accordance with
the international norms and measurement. International community will play an important role
in creating norms, providing technical assistance, supporting advocacy and conducting research
and analysis in order to combat corruption. The UN convention against corruption has
8
accumulated 167 States Parties to fight against corruption. The review mechanism includes
national process, peer review, final report and follow up process to make sure that every Party is
on the right track to combat corruptions.
The Ombudsman of the Philippines
By Ms. Conchica Carpio Morales, the Philippine Ombudsman
The ratification of the 1987 Philippine Constitution paved the way for the restoration of the rule
of law, a vibrant democracy and the establishment of the Ombudsman which is an independent
constitutional office with full power and authority to make sure that the actions of all public
officials and employees conform to the standards of the Constitution and the statutes. The
Ombudsman is ably supported by five Deputy Ombudsmen who are respectively in charge of (i)
overall administration, (ii-iv) one each for the three geographical areas of Luzon, Visayas and
Mindanao, and (v) one for the military and other law enforcement offices (MOLEO). She shared
one success story which is the criminal conviction of a former President, Joseph Ejercito Estrada,
who served from 1998 to 2001. He faced a mounting public outcry arising from the jueteng (a
local numbers game) payoff scandal and the BW Resources stock price manipulation stories,
which eventually led to his impeachment (the first Philippine President to be impeached by the
House of Representatives).
At the end of her presentation, she noted that each story of government irregularity is neither
isolated nor peculiar. It is part of a bigger picture and ought to be configured by sending a
warning of deterrence to all public servants.
Thailand’s National Anti-Corruption Commission
By Prof Vicha Makakhun, National Anti-Corruption Commissioner
Prof. Vicha informed the audience that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) is the
first organization to work against corruption in Thailand. The NACC has significant power to
decide whether a state officer has unusual wealth due to corruption. With so many cases to
handle, the NACC has recently appointed Provincial ACCs to help lighten its workload by
gathering information to inform NACC for inspection and conduction. The NACC provides
recommendations to government when they see chances that corruption might occur. Prof.
Vicha cited an example of the government’s flood prevention project for which there was only a
small number of contractors involved in the bidding process.
9
Vietnam’s Experience with Anti-Corruption Reforms
By Mr. James Anderson, Senior Governance Specialist, the World Bank, Vietnam
Vietnam has a history of corruption prevention. In 1998, the country started to define the
Corruption Act and have general requirement for officers. During 2004-2005, Vietnam had AntiCorruption Law and had diagnostic support by Sida. Since 2012, the country completely has
anti-corruption diagnostic and anti-corruption law. The speaker noted that corruption is a serious
problem in Vietnam and the most corrupted officers are found among traffic police and land
administration. He suggested empowering the media to inform the society and introducing the
three “I’s”, i.e., implementation, independence and information, as ways to combat corruption.
Anti-corruption reforms: Academe/NGO Perspective
By Dr. Gilbert V. Sembrano, Ateneo Human Rights Center, Philippines
Dr Sembrano introduced himself as belonging to both academe and NGO. He saw the role of
academic and NGO initiatives towards anti-corruption reform to include public integration -- to
make sure that people are aware of corruption, conduct research and prepare publications, which
will bring information to the people, and develop interdisciplinary courses on corruption with
cultural, political, human rights and gender equality components. These initiatives will help in
the fight against corruption.
Q&A and discussion



International Convention is an instrument that will encourage each country to put emphasis
more on human rights and corruption issues and to raise awareness on anti-corruption and
ensuring that human rights are observed.
Provincial Anti-Corruption Commissions in Thailand will educate people, build program
linkages and find facts on any corruption case. But they do not have authority to make
decision.
In Vietnam, the World Bank will work with academics as they have data, capacity and trust.
They will also work with civil society as well as chamber of commerce to disseminate the
findings to different communities.
Session 3. Stakeholder group discussions
Moderator: Ms Molly Lein, Sida
The moderator asked participants to discuss the following within their group:
1. Based on presentations today and the participant’s owned experiences, please discuss and
share information on regional/sub-regional practices and solution to corruption.
10
2. What regional (Southeast Asia or other) mechanisms are there or would be needed to more
effectively curb corruption?
3. Be prepared to present ONE brief idea/suggestion from each table.
Inputs from the discussion groups were as follows:















Corruption must be understood from a cultural and historical context. The concepts of
corruption and nepotism are largely Western.
Historically, in the Philippines, small kingdoms were ruled by datus, who relied on friends
and family members they could trust to help run the government. This may be nepotism from
a Western standpoint, but it has a historical basis.
In Thailand, corruption has a cultural dimension. When a politician gives people money, this
creates feelings of an obligation to vote for the politician in return.
The role of the State has changed everywhere. Old social security systems have been
replaced by new systems. But when these new systems fail, people fall back on traditional
systems of support.
There is a need to strengthen new systems so there will be no need to fall back on traditional
systems. This may be done through a strategic approach to development in general, to
include anti-corruption and good governance.
There is a need to educate the public to turn individuals into citizens who understand their
rights and obligations, what they need to do and what they can expect from their
governments in return.
There are different types of corruption and dynamics within countries. Sometimes corruption
can be institutionalized. Some forms of corruption have been legalized and mature with the
system.
There must be a range of options, both to prevent and criminalize corruption.
Dealing with corruption is a comprehensive issue. It requires trust in the government,
mechanisms for accountability, a system for the rule of law and a functioning judiciary.
Comprehensive reforms are necessary; these cannot be stand-alone.
From a law enforcement perspective, one way to combat corruption is through multi-agency
initiatives. This was used to break up “crime squads” in the UK, by reassigning people after
certain periods of time to prevent groups from committing corrupt activities.
The UNODC initiative of “Patrols” uses a multi-agency approach that makes it more difficult
for people to conspire to commit corruption.
The system of reassigning people has also been used for officials in environment and
fisheries offices.
Linking corruption with human rights and networking with human right institutions would be
another way to cope with corruption.
Need to strengthen economic, political and educational institutions in order to fight
corruption.
To address corruption holistically, it has to be part of everything we do. This includes
development agencies and international agencies. We must accept that it exists and address it
in the same way, as it exists.
11










One should not assume that what works in one country will necessary work in other
countries. Success stories should be shared and learned from but need to put the specific
culture and context of the country in question into perspective.
Proposed solutions for the regional level included:
Working on a regional level can increase pressure on a higher political level to get the
necessary people and resources.
Regional dynamics can be used to exert pressure on governments for both sectoral and anticorruption efforts.
Promote regional networking so that each country will follow the same regional standard on
anti-corruption.
Promote data sharing among countries in the network so that each country will be able to
access information and laws and thus ensure transparency in policy-making process. In
addition, corrupted politicians who escaped out of a country will not be able to stay in
another country in the network
Join the Affiliated Network of Social Accountability (ANSA), which is regional NGO
network on mainstreaming social accountability by undertaking social audits, citizen report
cards, budget transparency initiatives and research and bringing evidence to government
agencies for better policy formulation.
Expanding Thailand Transparency’s program to build advocacy, provide legal advice and
initiate a business integrity program will help promote anti-corruption practice.
Make use of social networks. Facebook, Twitter and websites will play an important role in
mobilizing the society not to tolerate corruption and expose corrupt practices.
Organize more conferences on anti-corruption to raise people’s awareness on corruption.
Session 4. Review of Day 1
This session was modified in situ. Dr Nicro rendered the time allotted for this session to
discussion group representatives to report their group discussions to the plenary.
Cocktail Reception started at 17:30 hrs. Participants were greeted by the Ambassador, who took
the fifth sky-train trip that day to return to the workshop venue to mingle with the participants for
the third round.
Day 2
Session 5: Corruption in natural resources sector: forms, patterns and causes
Moderator: Mr Aled Williams, Senior Advisor, U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre
Potential for corruption in REDD+ and measure to mitigate risks
By Mr Timothy Boyle, UNDP Regional Technical Advisor for the UN-REDD Programme
12
UN-REDD Programme views corruption as the abuse of vested power for private gains. There
are many illegal activities that are made easier with corruption. UN-REDD tries to minimize the
corruption related to REDD+ by providing training and materials to create awareness and
understanding of the risks, tackling the risks, fostering partnerships between national REDD+
teams and anti-corruption agencies and sharing information on enforcement issues. Mr Boyle
also gave examples on Vietnam analysis and the six-step corruption risk assessment in the
Philippines. The Philippine assessment found corruption in the following forms: politicians
influencing the issuance of permits to accommodate friends or as owners of business, local
governmental units allowing illegal permits, contracts and plans, misuse of official resources,
fraudulent reporting, overpricing, collusion in bidding and diversion of funds.
Corruption risks in the utilization of natural wealth: the Malampaya Palawan experience
in the Philippines
By Atty. Grizelda "Gerthie" Mayo-Anda, Executive Director, Environmental Legal Assistance
Center, Inc. (ELAC)
Ms Mayo-Anda shared her experience regarding the Malampaya natural gas platform, which is
Philippines’ the only gas offshore project. It was operated as Service Contract 38, led by Shell,
Chevron, and the Philippine National Oil Company. Local Government Code provides 60-40
sharing on royalty between National Government and Local Government Units. And the 40
percent share of the local government (Palawan) must be utilized for electrification (80 percent)
and livelihood (20 percent) of local people. However, her investigation revealed that local
government did not use the money for electrification or livelihood for local communities but for
overpriced construction projects with favoritism of project contractors, resulting in an unfinished
reclamation project and poor conditioned roads. This finding has raised the concern of both the
public and private sectors. She also noted that after the findings of the investigation became
publicized, the local politicians involved in this project did not win the election. She concluded
that people do not tolerate corruption if they are aware of it and suggested civil society policy
advocacy to combat corruption.
Illegal logging in Indonesia
By Dr Yunus Husein, Member of Presidential Working Unit for Supervision and Management of
Development (UKP4) and former Head of Indonesian Financial Transaction Reports and
Analysis Center
Indonesia is one of the countries endowed with abundant natural resources. More than half of the
country’s total land area (52.4 percent) is covered with forest. 20 percent of the world’s
13
remaining rainforest exists in Indonesia and Congo Basin. Indonesia is one of the five most
species-diverse countries in the world. However, forest decreases year by year. The reasons
behind the deforestation are several. Dr Husein highlighted weakness in the legal and regulatory
framework which makes illegal activities possible. He exemplified REDD+ national strategy
making use of a special task force plus a multi-door approach (cross-agencies cooperation) and
the green bench certified judges initiative. He concluded that combating crime related to natural
resources would require: improvement of regulations to support eradication of crime in the
natural resources sector, capacity building for law enforcement officers, support of infrastructure
and adequate budget, effective coordination and cooperation between agencies and law
enforcement officials, etc. At the end of his presentation, Dr Husein asserted that fighting
corruption is not only about law enforcement or a duty of any organization alone, but it is the
duty of everyone.
Corruption in fishery sector in Cambodia
By Mr. San Chey, Cambodia National Representative of Affiliated Network for Social
Accountability-East Asia and the Pacific (ANSA)
Fishery is an important sector in Cambodia. It contributes significantly to national nutrition
security, economy and people’s livelihood. 45 percent of the population works fulltime in this
sector and related activities. The speaker told a story of irregularity regarding the bidding of
fishing lots in three provinces, Prey Veng, Takeo and Kompong Cham planned by Fishery
Administration during 2011-2012. The plan was met with protest by higher bidders and the
accusation that the Chair of Bidding Committee took a bribery of USD 20,000. The Prime
Minister ordered an investigation of the cases and favoritism was uncovered. This resulted in the
Prime Minister appointing the Anti-Corruption Unit to monitor the following bidding processes.
Despite the actions, corruption in fisheries continues. The speaker saw the absence of legal
punishment of involved officials as a main cause and recommended involving civil society
organizations and communities in the monitoring.
Q&A and discussion


It took much longer time for the Philippine government than the Cambodian government to
deal with the corrupted practice in the two presented cases because the Philippine people
were not aware of the misconduct and had limited access to official documents. However,
with the new President, it is expected that there will be more investigations. Moreover, the
available resources to prevent and combat corruption may differ from one country to another.
Culture was cited as another important factor.
A strong Constitution, people’s involvement and the ability to identify and involve anticorruption champions among governmental officials were suggested as the most important
success factors for combating corruption.
14





REDD+ supports benefit distribution and provides positive incentives to developing and not
developed countries to fight against corruption in forest sector. Developed countries can have
important role in not providing support for countries that do not have fair benefit distribution.
UN-REDD has no approach to ensure the demand side because there is other organization
that takes care of the demand side and the UN-REDD works very closely with them.
National government, civil society and communities need to work together to ensure that
local people will actually receive the benefits to which they are entitled from local revenue.
Actions, not only talks, should be seriously undertaken to prevent and combat corruption in
each country.
Civil society and the people need to advocate anti-corruption policy and institutions.
Session 6. Group discussion: diagnosing the problems
Moderator: Dr Somrudee Nicro
The moderator raised the following three questions for group discussion.
1. Based on the presentations in the previous session and your own experiences, please identify
three most critical driving forces of corruption in national resources and environmental sector.
2. Please suggest the three most strategic measures to prevent and/or combat corruptions in
natural resources sector
3. Do you think that international conventions and laws can effectively reduce corruptions?
What are required to ensure effectiveness of international conventions and laws?
The following were identified as critical driving forces of corruption:







Greed, money and power.
Natural resources products are high value commodities and driven by demand thus some
involved officials giving least priority to the required policies and procedures for
management of these resources.
With money and power, one can have access to natural resources, including pristine areas,
that one wouldn’t have access to otherwise. Sometimes, one looks to neighbouring countries
to expand areas of extraction.
Lack of information and transparency due in part to the lack of free and fair media, leading to
limited awareness of the affected community and hampering their participation.
Political and economic motivations and relationship between politics and business (including
political cost incurred from contesting elections - motives for gaining back)
Loopholes and overlapping provisions (absence of punishment, thus private sector keeps
seeking opportunity, and grey area of ethical and criminal laws)
Natural resources are not seen as public goods, rather as state owned. Everyone thinks that
someone else is taking care of them. This lack of ownership opens space for corruption.
15








Absence of an established system of property rights (particularly related to land, which is
also relevant to forests and mining)
Lack of data of the resources available e.g. forests, mining – making it difficult to monitor
and hence more susceptible to corruption.
Lack of respect for the rule of law
Governance and enforcement in natural resource sector is still weak, especially when
compared to trafficking or terrorism. No one is paying attention to the issue. The forestry
department is often among the most corrupt, for instance, in the issuance of licenses for sale
of chainsaws.
No or weak parliamentary supervision and court system
Limited awareness of local government on community forest
Absence of political will or leadership
Internalization of corruption
The most strategic measures to prevent and/or combat corruptions in natural resources sector
were identified as follows:
Law and institutions












Creation of National Anti-Corruption units with strength, independence and integrity
Promote freedom of information law
Sectoral legal empowerment - socialize about the law to the impacted people, making
paralegals (i.e., in Cambodia, village community regularly defends the forest voluntarily)
The multi-institutional approach, such as a multi-agency national wildlife control bureau in
India and various border patrols, can be a strategic measure, because departments working by
themselves can easily be corrupted.
(Benefits of multi-institutional approach can include expanding jurisdiction and breaking
down responsibilities. There is no need for new laws for each department; multiple agencies
can instead work together.)
Develop a Social Welfare Act, social audit, public finance management
Strong laws and enforcement
Strengthen oversight bodies at the national and/or local level as per the context of the
country.
Develop a Parliamentary Commission for making the multinational organizations
accountable
Ensure accountability at the local government level by disclosing information on revenue
generation and allocation.
Strengthen institutions such as local government units
Clear procedure on procurement and contraction
16


Enforce money spending cap for government
Increase salary of government officials
Access to information

Increase access to information and transparency by encouraging demand side on requesting
information on budget and audited reports, document and disseminate information, and
provide protection for freedom of information defenders
CSOs and the media






Strengthen independent media and NGOs
Empower civil society and NGOs and mobilize them as watchdogs. However, note that this
can be dangerous for civil society, particularly individuals. At the same time, civil society
can also be co-opted to support particular agendas.
Whistleblowers, NGOs as well as private individuals, should be protected and rewarded.
Cooperate with the press to drive public opinion
Develop measures/tools to facilitate corruption reporting such as a corruption hotline
Make use of social media
Genuine engagement of stakeholders, create ownership

Give local community access and control of resources – when the community has the
ownership of the resources, there is transparency and accountability. There is a very good
example from the Community Forestry Movement in Nepal which has helped tremendously
in the preservation and regeneration of the forest resources.
Education, awareness raising and capacity building of the demand side





Raise awareness at the local community level for their ownership of the natural resources
Strengthen the demand side by raising awareness and capacity of stakeholders to request
information on budget, audited reports, etc.
Build public awareness for not accepting illegal products, e.g. wood products from illegal
logging
Cultivate anti-corruption practice from the grassroots to the top
Teach children about danger of corruption since kindergarten level
Private sector

Influence private sector’s policy regarding anti-corruption
17
Regional and international opportunities







Anti-Corruption needs to be higher on the regional political agenda
The inclusion of environmental crime as one of ASEAN’s 8 priority crime areas will lead to
law enforcement focusing on these areas instead of denying that these are not within their
mandate
The ASEAN economic blue print includes sections on combating illegal forestry and fishing.
If this can be spelled out, it will get very high on the political agenda and build political
pressure that goes above the sectoral department.
Regional cooperation of Anti-Corruption Commissions
Initiate
a
regional
independent
watchdog
initiative
against
corruption
(www.ipaythebribes.com)
Promote international collaboration such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
(mining, oil and gas)
Remove trade privilege from the national governments of the countries which have high
corruption level
All the discussion groups agreed that an international Convention could help reduce corruption
as it will put anti-corruption higher on the political agenda. Likewise, it will add international
peer pressure and internationally agreed upon standards. Although an international Convention
is required, it is not sufficient. In order to make it effective, the following enabling factors are
needed:







Country needs to ratify the Convention.
National laws are to be developed to implement the Convention. Functioning national laws
and effective enforcement are needed. So are political will and mechanisms to implement
the laws.
Monitoring mechanisms (such as ASEAN monitoring mechanism) and sanctions such as
‘name and shame’ at the international level are required. Possibly a regional body should be
set up to inspect implementation and in-country monitoring to ensure that the Convention is
put in practice.
This regional body needs to have strength. For instance, CITES can inspect and study alleged
violations, but they are only given limited access and they do not get to see the full picture.
Country capacity on monitoring needs to be built.
Need to set aside resources for implementation.
Active societal engagement and people’s participation through documentation, dissemination
and confrontation of policy makers.
18








CSO can provide balancing perspective to what government provide, such as Individual
Reporting Mechanism.
Freedom of information law and freedom of press exist and enforced at national level to
support open access to info and transparency.
Secrecy of financial institutions is unveiled.
Concrete tools for disclosure of info, e.g. Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (PRTR),
are in place and used
Good educational system. Local support and knowledge on the international Convention
strengthened.
Simplify the language while doing demand-side socialization
Commitment needed at individual, organizational and policy levels
Regional Convention on Corruption like the ones in Latin American and Europe will help
curb issues of corruption that happens at the trans-boundary level.
Session 7: Anti-Corruption Initiatives by Different Stakeholders
Moderator: Mr Sören Davidsen, Senior Governance Specialist, the World Bank, Vietnam
Transparency Thailand
By Dr Juree Vichit-Vadakan, Secretary-General of Transparency Thailand
Although the Transparency Thailand (TT) is a chapter of Transparency International (TI), it is
independent from Transparency International. This is because TT does not want to import every
TI’s rule as it might not fit the Thai culture and wants to maintain independence and autonomy.
In Thailand, corruption, both ‘petty’ and ‘grand,’ cross cuts and permeates throughout the
society. When looking at legal and institutional framework, Thailand is ahead of many ASEAN
countries. Since 1997, Thailand has many institutional mechanisms to curb and combat
corruption. However, this does not mean Thailand has more transparency and less corruption
than other countries. Recently the private sector has also led a coalition against corruption. The
fact that despite these mechanisms and initiatives, corruption continues to expand has led TT to
focus its work on changing people’s value. TT has initiated several awareness raising and
educational activities targeting school children. One of its ongoing activities is an anticorruption campaign which TT cooperates with Bangkok Metropolitan Administration.
Anti-Corruption Organization of Thailand
By Mr Dhep Vongvanich, Vice Chairman of Anti-Corruption Organization of Thailand
19
Corruption is rampant especially in the political system and found particularly in governmental
procurement, construction and investment projects. Estimate of bribery ranges from 25-30
percent of governmental budget and is more than 2.5 percent of Thailand’s GDP. AntiCorruption Organization of Thailand (ACT) was firstly established as a network in June 2011 by
the business sector. It now has 47 members including professional associations, educational
institutes and social groups. ACT’s strategy is to disclose information, prevent corruption and
promote anti-corruption attitudes. Their ongoing activities include, for instance, hosting public
debates on government’s Flood Rehabilitation Project and disclosure of information about
government’s rice pledging scheme and farm storage loan.
Thai PBS: Participation, ownership, public media and anti-corruption
By Mr Somchai Suwanban, Director General, Thai Public Broadcasting Service (ThaiPBS)
Thai PBS is the first public broadcasting service in Thailand. Most of the programs (70 percent)
are news and edutainment, entertainment programs account for only 30 percent. Its vision is to
promote social justice in the country, monitor and reveal corruptions. Corruption monitoring
programs include People’s Station, Public Forum, Citizen Reporters, Know Your Rights, and
Changing Thailand. The public can engage in the programs by contributing to the agenda
setting, sharing information and monitoring corruption. TPBS’ strategies on corruption include
news on government public policy (rice pledging scheme), corruption in local government
(budgeting, public utilities, elections, corrupt politicians) and abuse of authority and
embezzlement. TPBS received several awards for their corruption coverage, including 3
Sangchai Soonthonwat Prizes (awarded by Journalists Association of Thailand), 3 AntiCorruption Prizes (by Thailand National Anti-Corruption Commission), Child Right Prize (by
UNICEF), Amnesty International Award (by Amnesty Thailand), Constructive Crime News
Award (by Thai Crime News Association). This year, TPBS cooperates with the Anti-Corruption
Organization, independent organizations, universities, and civil society to support the audience to
monitor corruption.
Role of media in fighting corruption: Advocacy role of Southeast Asia Press Alliance
(SEAPA)
By Ms Gayathry Venkiteswaran, Executive Director, Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA)
SEAPA is the only regional organization with the specific mandate of promoting and protecting
press freedom in Southeast Asia. Its members include media associations in the Philippines,
Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia.
20
It is clear that the media has an important role on combating corruption. However, in most
countries in this region, there is low observance and practice of press freedom. Many media
ownership is linked to politics-censorship. Moreover, there is a threat to life for those attempting
to expose stories on corruption. Few countries have adequate whistleblowers and witness
protection laws/programs.
SEAPA members’ initiatives included developing investigative journalism among journalists,
promoting national freedom of information (FoI) legislations and capacity building in the use of
FoI laws. The speaker suggested that there should be a global campaign to end impunity in the
killings of journalists.
Asia-Pacific Integrity in Action Network (AP-INTACT) — How a moderated email list
facilitates knowledge sharing and information exchange among anti-corruption
practitioners in the Asia-Pacific region
By Mr Jose Ibarra A. Angeles, Lead Facilitator, Asia-Pacific Integrity in Action Network (APINTACT) and Consultant for Anti-Corruption Communication, UNDP Asia-Pacific Resource
Centre
AP-INTACT is an email network under UNDP which sends information to members on a daily
basis. The AP-INTACT now has almost 500 members in 50 countries with 150 active
contributors. In 2012 alone, over 1,000 messages were sent to members. Members from anticorruption agencies, UNDP, NGOs, and ODA top the membership list. A survey conducted by
the AP-INTACT found all respondents benefit from the network, 66 percent found the info
influence their day-to-day work. As many as 80 percent of them read half to all daily messages
and 68 percent wanted the same number of messages daily. Members found news stories, event
announcement and news on judicial cases very useful. Their preferred e-discussion topics in
2013 are corruption in political parties and elections, anti-corruption and private sector and
corruption in the judiciary. Mr Angeles concluded that information exchange is one of the ways
to combat corruption.
Q&A and discussion


Transparency Thailand often had to cope with pressure, such as criticisms, from both the
public and government alike. The problem can be solved by cooperating with other
organizations.
Although some media have relationship with or are owned by politicians or corrupted parties,
the concerted efforts from all other media to expose corruption will inhibit politicians to
apply pressure on any particular media. Awareness among the media community and civil
society monitoring will be important to overcome the problem.
21




Social media such as Facebook and Twitter would be a great help to combat this issue.
Corruption is more cultural than institutional. Culture is decided and shaped by the people.
For instance, one can bribe a traffic police of 100 Baht for a short cut or pay a fine of 400
Baht to abide by the law. Even though the traffic police is willing to take the bribe, which
signifies an institutional failure, but if the person decides not to bribe the police, i.e., being
honest, the bribery will not take place.
ThaiPBS supports indigenous people through a program called “Pan Rung Sang (Thousands
of Rainbows)” which served as their voices.
Music and art can be creative means to fight against corruption. More need to be learned and
done on how to make use of music and art for anti-corruption causes.
Session 8. Self-Commitment of participants: Group discussion
Moderator: by Dr Somrudee Nicro
The moderator raised the final question to all participants: “As an individual and on behalf of
your organization, what will you do to curb corruption?”
Session 9. Making Commitments---Finding anti-corruption champions
Moderators: Mr Stuart Ward, Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok
The commitments which each group reported to the plenary can be summed up as follows.
At the individual level:






Commit not to act in the way that leads to corruption, i.e., “Stop paying” and “Don't pay.”
Will pay fine rather than bribe.
Check one’s own stock and see how to better reduce corruption
Deliver message on cost of corruption to others
Take training courses provided by the U4 to learn more about corruption
Persuade people to attend anti-corruption events
Find effective ways to communicate corruption issues to raise public’s understanding on the
matter
At the organizational level:


Try to be clean and not corrupt
Formulate an anti-corruption strategy/policy for the organization’s staff to work with
partners.
22



















Develop and implement a clear code of conduct in each organization.
Share knowledge and info within one’s organization and with partners.
Build a network to combat corruption. Cooperate with partners to develop systematic ways to
reduce corruption and to build peer pressures. Launch national campaigns on combating
corruption.
Continue activities and initiatives that have already been started
Learn from experts how to combat corruption
Use all available resources to combat corruption
Introduce auditor report for each organization
Educate people on cost of corruption and engage media and youth
Arrange anti-corruption workshops to raise awareness
Provide research grant on anti-corruption
Raise awareness (demand side) by encouraging public to report corruption and misconduct
and by banning of product of bribers/ suspected companies involved in corruption
Drawing links between corruption and human rights
Research on impact of previous efforts and share success stories
Encourage good practices, including such as separation of duties, propriety audits (in
addition to financial audits)
Define corruption better to lead to more effective responses (because corruption as a crime is
treated differently from as a misdemeanor.)
Promote regional cooperation, support access to information, support stakeholders including
the NGOs, CSOs to be in a stronger position to influence policy and development decision
making processes
Explore opportunities for piloting anti-corruption efforts, particularly in Myanmar, where
things are just getting started. Integrate anti-corruption into good governance will provide
space for anti-corruption promotion in Myanmar.
Within organizations, particularly the UN, be able to speak about corruption more throughout
its project. (The ADB has stringent anti-corruption guidelines.)
The Access Initiative (TAI) partners can work with other organizations to promote anticorruption
Closing remarks by Ms. AnnaMaria Oltorp
It had been two intense days that the participants and the Embassy’s Development Cooperation
Section (Sida) had been working on the issue together but it was enjoyable and there was high
energy on contribution. The role of stakeholders, especially civil society and the media, in
preventing corruption was discussed. Several levels of corruption from per diem to international
organized crimes were identified. Sida defines corruption as “the abuse of trust, power, or
position for improper gain.” By this definition, corruption is not the same as being illegal.
23
Several important issues, such as the role of ASEAN, how impunity issue not to be neglected,
the use of social media, e.g. Facebook, were all covered in the two days. Ms Oltorp asserted that
the ‘right based approach’ is one way to address corruption. Sida planned a similar workshop
next year on “Environment and Right Perspective”, for which Ms Camilla Ottosson and Ms
Ulrika Åkesson will be responsible.
As regards next steps, the report of this workshop and photos will be posted on the Embassy’s
website. She expected participants to bring knowledge gained from the workshop to their
colleagues and expand their networking on anti-corruption. Sida would like to follow up on
partners’ commitments on anti-corruption and to see participants report what they have done
with regard to their anti-corruption commitments in their reports or emails to Sida.
Finally, Ms Oltorp thanked everyone including the workshop’s responsible organizers, Ms Renee
Ankarfjard and Mr Stuart Ward, the workshop facilitator, the organizing team, all Sida officials,
speakers, moderators and participants.
Responses to Questionnaires
Responses to Questionnaires 1
No. of Responses: 58
GENDER
Frequency
Percent
Male
27
46.6
Female
31
53.4
Total
58
100.0
24
GENDER
Female
53%
Male
47%
ORGANIZATION
Frequency
Percent
CSO
21
36.2
Higher education
4
6.9
Governmental agency
2
3.4
Embassy
2
3.4
Private sector
1
1.7
UN agency
5
8.6
International/Regional financial institution
6
10.3
Independent/ No affiliation
5
8.6
NGO
6
10.3
Others
6
10.3
Total
58
100.0
25
ORGANIZATION
Series1;
Independent/ No
affiliation; 5; 9%
Series1;
Others; 6;
10%
Series1;
NGO; 6;
10%
Series1; CSO; 21;
36%
Series1; UN
agency; 5; 9%
Series1;
International/Regi
onal financial
institution; 6; 10%
Series1; Private
sector; 1; 2%
Series1;
Embassy; 2;
3%
Series1; Higher
education;
4; 7%
Series1;
Governmental
agency; 2; 4%
Others:
- International Research Organization
- Non-profit – multi-sector stakeholder convening body
-Research Granting Program
-Regional business association/network
-Inter-Governmental Organization
-Foundation
WORK AREA
Natural resources and environment
Frequency
Percent
23
39.7
Human rights and democracy
9
15.5
Anti-corruption and governance
6
10.3
All of Above
2
3.4
26
Missing
Natural resources and environment & Human rights and democracy
2
3.4
Human rights and democracy & Anti-corruption and governance
2
3.4
Natural resources and environment & Anti-corruption and governance
1
1.9
Others
11
19.0
System
2
3.4
58
100.0
Total
Series1; Missing;
WORK
2; 3% AREA
Series1; N & A; 1;
2%
Series1
;H&
A; 2;
3%
Series1; Others;
11; 19%
Series1
;N&
H; 2;
3% All of
Series1;
Series1; Natural
resources and
environment; 23;
40%
Series1; Human
rights and
democracy; 9;
16%
Series1;
Above;
2; 4%Anticorruption and
governance; 6;
10%
Others:
- Economic and public policy
- Capacity Building
- Media/PR/Advertising-Social Issue Marketing
- Cofinancing Operations
- Cooperate Social Responsibility (CSR)
- Administrative and Management
27
- Livestock and Agriculture Development
- Relief and development
- Law enforcement and criminal justice
- Infrastructure development
- Gender-based violence prevention
- HR, Finance and Administration
*Remarks: Some respondents have a variety of work areas
JOB POSITION
Frequency
Board member
Percent
4
6.9
7
12.1
Management (Program manager, Project manager, etc.)
31
53.4
Technical personnel
officer, etc.)
10
17.2
6
10.3
58
100.0
Executive (Secretary
President, CEO, etc.)
General,
(Specialist,
Executive
Technician,
Director,
Project
Support staff (Admin, Financial, etc.)
Total
Series1; JOB POSITION
Support
staff ;
Series1;
6;
10%
Technical
personnel ;
10; 17%
Series1; Board
member ; 4;
7%
Series1;
Management ;
31; 54%
Series1;
Executive ; 7;
12%
28
HAVE YOU ENGAGED IN ANY ANTICORRUPTION ACTIVITIES BEFORE
ATTENDING THIS WORKSHOP?
Frequency
Percent
Yes
19
32.8
No
39
67.2
Total
58
100.0
HAVE YOU ENGAGED IN ANY ANTI-CORRUPTION
ACTIVITIES BEFORE ATTENDING THIS WORKSHOP?
Yes
33%
No
67%
If yes, please specify…
- Public awareness/communication on anti-corruption for World Bank
- Save KPK movement in Indonesia
- Capacity building (trainings) on, e.g., forest governance, as well as conducting research (related
to forest conflicts, which includes corruption)
- Have made corruption investigations in CSOs
- Managing 3 programs which aim to promote integrity, transparency and reduce corruption in
Cambodia
- Limited activities in supporting Burmese civil society organizations to research and campaign
for revenue transparency in Burma
29
- Bids and awards
-When I was working in an NGO in Indonesia, my organization called “the Institute for the
Studies on Press and Information (LeSPI), in collaboration with Transparency International
Indonesia (TII) conducted workshop entitled “The Businessman Rejecting Corruption.” The
workshop got good responses and feedback from many businessmen who participated in. In
addition, our organization also continuously campaigns for media workers to avoid bribery.
- Anti-corruption Workshop, Hanoi ~2010
- Reviewing application of anti-corruption guidelines for our operations and strategic planning
- Corruption Risk Assessment for REDD-plus in the Philippines (under the UN-REDD
Programme)
- Through my work as the Contracts and Compliance Manager of the programme/ organization.
I'm involved in this strategy throughout the contractual process and prior to entering a contract.
- Advising the government on anticorruption measures, anticorruption legislation; help
government to conduct research and surveys to find out evidence for policy making
- Study on corruption risks in relation to forestry and REDD-Plus; investigation and legal actions
on corruption cases in relation to natural gas and mining.
- I am the deputy director general for directorate of administration and security at the AntiCorruption Unit of the Royal Government of Cambodia (ACU)
- Research of corruption on local election in Indonesia, Research on political party finance
Reasons for attending this workshop
Frequency
Percent
(Can select more than one choice)
(for each reason)
(for each reason)
Reason 1: To learn more about anti-corruption
53
91.4
Reason 2: To network with other participants
32
55.2
Reason 3: To cooperate with the Swedish Embassy's
Development Cooperation Section
34
58.6
Reason 4: Was assigned to attend
11
19.0
Reason 5: To take anti-corruption actions
18
31.0
30
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Reason 1
Reason 2
Reason 3
Reason 4
Reason 5
Additional comment:
“… I hope to capture the spirit of how to employ - inspire people here in Myanmar to get into the
‘good governance frame of mind’. Ideas, good practices, lessons learned, etc.”
Evaluation
Responses to Questionnaire 2.
Number of responses: 66
1.How was your understanding of anti-corruption before attending this workshop?
Frequency
Percent
1
4
6.1
2
16
24.2
3
30
45.5
4
13
19.7
5
3
4.5
66
100.0
Total
31
2.How was your understanding of anti-corruption after attending this workshop?
Frequency
Percent
3
11
16.7
4
43
65.1
5
12
18.2
Total
66
100.0
70,00%
65,10%
60,00%
50,00%
45,50%
40,00%
30,00%
24,20%
16,70%
20,00%
10,00%
0,00%
19,70%
6,10%
18,20%
4,50%
0%
1(Poor)
0%
2
3
Before
After
4
5 (Excellent)
32
3.How did the workshop meet your expectations?
Frequency
Percent
2
1
1.5
3
12
18.2
4
41
62.1
5
11
16.7
1
1.5
66
100.0
No answer
Total
How did the workshop meet your
expectations?
2% 1% 0%
17%
18%
1(Poor)
2
3
4
62%
5(Excellent)
No answer
Please explain:
Understanding the inter-linking and complex dimension of corruption and at the same time
enabled to think through on the ‘ways forward’ to combat corruption.
There are some notable speaker who much inspiring. The sharing session & networking
opportunity provides enough chance to extensify & broaden our work. The materials are
interesting.
33
Understanding of corruption, anti-corruption, the way to avoid. Anti-corruption: how to do, to
go. Cost of corruption is big.
I learnt from experiences and best practices of other countries. I can also join a wider anticorruption network as a result of this workshop.
This workshop not only improve my knowledge of anti-corruption but also challenge me to do
more the anti-corruption act individually and institutionally.
4. The presentations in the meeting were
Frequency
Percent
2
3
4.5
3
16
24.2
4
35
53.0
5
12
18.2
Total
66
100.0
The presentations in the meeting were
0% 5%
18%
24%
1 (Poor)
2
3
53%
4
5 (Excellent)
34
5.Will you take any anti-corruption actions after returning to your country/office?
Frequency
Yes
Percent
54
81.8
Not Sure
8
12.1
No
0
0.0
62
93.9
4
6.1
66
100.0
Total
No answer
Total
Will you take any anti-corruption actions after returning
to your country/office?
0%
12%
6%
Yes
Not sure
82%
No
No answer
If yes, what will you do?
-
Join anti-corruption network in ASEAN
Increase public awareness on anti-corruption through young journalist training
I will read again the anti-corruption policy of my organization and encourage colleagues
to read and follow
Share the result of the workshop to everybody at office and partner organization
Follow up with anti-corruption policy
Ensure strong preventive policies and procedures for combating corruption
I will ask my friends to join me to do some practical actions
Spread the messages in our organization
35
-
Will not tolerate any kind of corruption
Increase awareness of code of conduct
Hold a corruption session at APF Senior Executive Office Network (SEO)
Review of own standard operating procedures/review options for advocacy on corruption
and infrastructure
I will try to be more alert on issues related to corruption act appropriately and try to
advocacy the matter
Continue with research, monitoring, IEC and advocacy activities
Introduce code of conduct and other related policy on anti-corruption to partners
Promote information access sharing among partners
Monitor corruption norm
I will not pay the bribe to police
Improve financial management
Involve media in our work more
Review our organization’s anti-corruption policy and implementation
If not sure, please explain why:
-
Not directly applicable to my work
Individually hard to intervene
I hope to use it in local governance related activities
Not in a position officially but will personally
The only thing that possible is to help provide/share information about corruption through
social network. Unless, people are willing to do something it is difficult because it is the
government that is the major corrupt in all subtle and explicit forms of corruption
mentioned in this workshop
6.How do you like the workshop venue, hotel room, and food?
Frequency
3
7
10.6
4
31
46.9
5
26
39.4
2
3.0
66
100.0
No answer
Total
Percent
36
How do you like the workshop venue, hotel
room, and food?
3%
0% 0%
1 (Poor)
11%
2
39%
3
47%
4
5 (Excellent)
No answer
7.How are you satisfied with the logistical arrangements?
Frequency
2
2
3.0
3
9
13.6
4
26
39.4
5
24
36.4
5
7.6
66
100.0
No answer
Total
Percent
37
How are you satisfied with the logistical
arrangements?
0% 3%
8%
1 (Poor)
14%
2
36%
3
39%
4
5 (Excellent)
No answer
8.What are the 3 most important things you will take with you from this workshop?
-
Anti-corruption initiatives, Ideas for improving our activities (internal + external
in focus)
Network, potential partners
The need to strength the network among CSOs to combat corruption
So many excuses for why corruption exists/thrives
Anti-corruption movement can be very difficult/challenging, but we shall at least
try the best we can from our part rather than giving up
Internally we can do better in terms of clarifying our stands on anti-corruption
Externally we can do better in communicating the negative effects of corruption
There are a lot of other passionate about corruption. We are not alone.
Understanding of multi-stakeholder approaches
Decentralization has also decentralized corruption to lower level.
The issue of social accountability
Enhanced understanding of the concept of corruption
Development in Thailand to influence attitude and cultural change and its
younger generation
Concept of social contract as a mean to try to change attitude
Example of Thailand “ Growing up not cheating”
Corruption causes not only the costs but also it is a crime
Sanction/Punishment shall be taken to prevent corruption
Information transparency
Monitoring mechanism
38
-
Awareness raising to fight corruption (public participation)
Knowledge of anti-corruption that can be shared with others
How to be part of anti-corruption organizations
Suggested strategies to be used in daily practice for promoting anti-corruption
activities
Corruption is challenging and needs comprehensive solutions
Sida policy on anti-corruption
Risk associated with corruption
Different concerns regarding corruption in the natural resources sector
The importance of law enforcement to combat corruption
Action plan – particularly short-term agenda, the one we developed for our
country
More focused approach to corruption, especially in transparency area by using
available sources and methodology gained in this workshop
Introduce the anti-corruption curriculum to the ministry of education
Conduct training on young professional journalist
39
List of Annexes
Annex A
Regional Workshop on ‘Anti-Corruption’ Agenda
Annex B
List of Participants
Annex C
Questionnaires 1
Annex D
Questionnaires 2, Evaluation Form
Annex E
Photos
Annex F
Speakers' presentations
Annex G
Speech of Ombudsman of the Philippines
Annex H
Press release (in Thai)
Annex I
Press Coverage
Annex J
Anti-Corruption Initiatives Posters
40
ANNEX A
Regional Workshop on ‘Anti-Corruption’ Agenda
22-23 May 2013
Kamolthip III Room, 3rd floor, The Sukosol Hotel (formerly Siam City Hotel),
477 Sri Ayuthaya Road, Phayathai, Bangkok, Thailand
DAY 1
Wednesday, 22 May 2013
8.30 – 9.00
Registration
9.00 – 9.40
Welcome and Expectations
 H.E. Mr. Klas Molin, Ambassador of Sweden to Thailand

Ms AnnaMaria Oltorp, Head of Development Cooperation Section,
Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok
 Mr Paul Wade, Director, the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre
(U4), Bergen, Norway
9.40 – 10.00
Introduction of participants
Workshop agenda overview and participants’ expectations
Dr. Somrudee Nicro, Workshop Facilitator
10.00 – 10.10
Photo session
10.10 – 10.30
Refreshment break
10.30 – 11.30
1. What is corruption and anti-corruption? How is anti-corruption
related to democracy and human rights?
Moderator: Ms Antje Kraft, Justice and Human Rights specialist, AsiaPacific Regional Centre, UNDP
41
 Global perspectives on costs of corruption and anti-corruption
approaches
Mr Jesper Johnsøn, Advisor, the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource
Centre
 Sida’s policy on anti-corruption and approach on the relationship
between anti-corruption, democracy and human rights
Ms Molly Lien, Senior Policy Specialist, Anti-Corruption
Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)
11.30 – 12.00
Discussion
12.00 – 13.00
Lunch at Kornkamol Room
13.00 – 15.00
2. Anti-Corruption Reforms
Moderator: Mr Jesper Johnsøn, Advisor, the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource
Centre
15.00 – 15.20

The United Nations Convention against Corruption
Mr Shervin Majlessi, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODC) Regional Anti-corruption Adviser

Philippines
Ms Conchita Carpio Morales, Ombudsman

Thailand
Prof Vicha Makakhun, National Anti-Corruption Commissioner

Vietnam’s experience with anti-corruptiลon reforms
James Anderson, Senior Governance Specialist, the World Bank,
Vietnam

Anti Corruption Reforms: Academe/NGO Perspective
Mr Gilbert V. Sembrano, Ateneo Human Rights Center, Philippines

Discussion
Refreshment break
Participants’ previous experience (strengths and weaknesses), with
anti-corruption
All participating organisations
42
Posters
Walk-around exhibition
15.20 – 16.40
3. Stakeholder group discussions
Moderator: Ms Molly Lein, Sida

16.40 – 17.00
Group reporting by participants
4. Review of day 1 and expectations for Day 2
Moderator: Dr. Somrudee Nicro
18.00
Cocktail reception
Venue: Kamolporn I Room, The Sukosol Hotel
DAY 2
Thursday, 23 May 2013
8.30 – 10.00
5. Corruption in natural resources sector: forms, patterns, and causes
Moderator: Mr Aled Williams, Senior Advisor, U4 Anti-Corruption
Resource Centre

Potential for corruption in REDD+, and Measure to Mitigate Risks
Mr Timothy Boyle, UNDP Regional Technical Advisor for the UNREDD Programme

Corruption risks in the utilisation of natural wealth: The Malampaya,
Palawan experience in the Philippines
Atty. Grizelda "Gerthie" Mayo-Anda, Executive Director,
Environmental Legal Assistance Center, Inc. (ELAC)

Illegal logging in Indonesia
Mr Yunus Husein, Member of Presidential Working Unit for
Supervision and Management of Development (UKP4) and former
Head of Indonesian Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis
43
Center

Corruption in fishery sector in Cambodia
Mr SAN Chey, Cambodia National Representative of Affiliated
Network for Social Accountability-East Asia and the Pacific (ANSA)
10.00 – 10.30 Discussion
10.30 – 10.45 Refreshment break
10.45 – 11.30 6. Group discussion: diagnosing the problems
Moderator: Dr. Somrudee Nicro
11.30 – 12.00 Group reporting by participants
12.00 – 13.00 Lunch at Rattana Kosin Room
13.00 – 15.00 7. Anti-corruption initiatives by different stakeholders
Moderator: Mr Sören Davidsen, Senior Governance Specialist, the World
Bank, Vietnam

Transparency International - Thailand
Dr Juree Vichit-Vadakan, Secretary-General

Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand
Mr Dhep Vongvanich, Vice Chairman of Anti-Corruption Organization
of Thailand
 ThaiPBS : Participation,ownership, public Media and anti-corruption
Mr Somchai Suwanban, Director General , Thai Public Broadcasting
Service (ThaiPBS)
 Role of the media in fighting corruption: Advocacy role of Southeast
Asia Press Alliance (SEAPA)
Ms Gayathry Venkiteswaran, Executive Director, Southeast Asian Press
Alliance (SEAPA)
 Asia-Pacific Integrity in Action Network (AP-INTACT) — How a
Moderated Email List Facilitates Knowledge Sharing and Information
Exchange among Anti-Corruption Practitioners in the Asia-Pacific
44
Region
Mr Jose Ibarra A. Angele, Lead Facilitator, Asia-Pacific Integrity in
Action Network (AP-INTACT) and Consultant for Anti-Corruption
Communication, UNDP Asia-Pacific Resource Centre
15.00 – 15.20 Refreshment break
15.20-16.00
8. Self-commitment of participants: group discussion
(This session is for participating organisations to discuss and plan their own
or joint commitments.)
16.00 – 17.00 9. Making Commitments---Finding anti-corruption champions
(Panel comprising of spokepersons for the group discussions under session
8)
Moderators: Mr Stuart Ward, Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok and Ms Molly
Lien, Sida
17:00-17:15
Closing remarks
Ms AnnaMaria Oltorp, Head of Development Cooperation Section,
Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok
45
ANNEX B
List of Participants
Name
Position
Organization
Email
Environment and Climate Change
1
Amelia Esteban
Project Implementation
Specialist
GMS Environment
Center
Operations
2
Borin Khieu
Director and Focal Point
of MEKARN
Centre
for
Livestock
Agriculture Development
and
ahesteban.consultant@adb.o
rg
khieu_borin@celagrid.org
( Cambodia )
3
Chuthatip Maneepong
Program Manager
Thailand Environment Institute
chuthatip@tei.or.th
4
David Gritten
Program Officer
RECOFTC
david.gritten@recoftc.org
Forest
Policy
Governance
&
5
Dr.
Chayanis
Krittasudthacheewa
Centre Deputy Director
Stockholm Environment Institute
–Asia ( SEI Asia )
chayanis.k@seiinternational.org
6
Dr. Eric Kemp-Benedict
Centre Director
Stockholm Environment Institute
–Asia ( SEI Asia )
eric.kemp-benedict@seiinternational.org
7
Dr. Herminia
Director
Economy
&
Environment
Program for Southeast Asia
(EEPSEA), WorldFish
h.francisco@cgiar.org
Francisco
8
Dr. Magnus Torell
Senoir Advisor
Southeast
Asian
Fisheries
Development Center (SEAFDEC)
magnus@seafdec.org
9
Dr.
Uratchwee
Unhalekhaka
Researcher
Thailand Environment Institute
uratchwee@tei.or.th
10
Heeyoung Hong
Senior
Financing
Partnerships Specialist
Asian Development Bank
hyhong@adb.org
11
Joris Van Etten
Deputy
Coordinator
Cities Development Initiative for
Asia
joris.van-etten@giz.de
Program
46
12
Name
Position
Organization
Justin Gosling
Senior Advisor
UNEP
gosling@un.org
Ateneo School of Gevernment
jnvtorres@gmail.com
UNDP
keiko.nomura@undp.org
Law Enforcement
Criminal Justice
Email
and
( Consultation)
13
Justine Nicole Torres
Legal Specialist
14
Keiko Nomura
15
Khang Duong Nguyen
Coordinator of MEKARN
Project
Nong Lam University
duongnguyenkhang@gmail.
com
16
Letchumi Achanah
Project Manager
Asia-Pacific Media Alliance
letchumi.achanah@mediaall
iance.asia
for Social Awareness
17
Liiklai Felfina
Programme Associate
Raoul Wallenberg Institute
liiklai.felfina@rwi.lu.se
18
Margaretha Quina
Researcher
Indonesia Center for Environment
Law
margaretha.quina@gmail.co
m
19
NgorPeng Bun
MRC-Fish Programme
pengbun@mrcmekong.org
20
Orapan Nabangchang
Professor , Ph.D.
Economy
&
Environment
Program for Southeast Asia
(EEPSEA)
orapann@gmail.com
21
Papassara Kunjara
Office
and
Manager
Stockholm Environment Institute
–Asia ( SEI Asia )
papassara.kunjara@seiinternational.org
UNEP
pengbun@mrcmekong.org
Finance
Na Ayudhya
22
Ngor Peng Bun
Capture
Specialist
Fiesheries
23
Parttaratjit
Kaewnuratchadasorn
Project Manager
Southeast
Asian
Development Center
Fisheries
pattaratjit@seafdec.org
(SEAFDEC)
24
PriyaShyamsundar
Program Director
SANDEE
priyas@sandeeonline.org
25
Qiaohong Li
Researcher
ICRAF
qiaohong@mail.kib.ac.cn
47
Name
26
Rangsima Chidthongpan
27
Sanath Ranawana
Position
Organization
Senior Natural
Resources
Specialist
Email
UNEP
chidthongpan@un.org
Asian Development Bank
sranawana@adb.org
RECOFTC
sanjiv@recoftc.org
Management
28
Sanjiv Ray
Manager
Services
,
Corporate
29
Shanya Attasillekha
Contracts and Compliance
Manager
Mangroves for the Future
shanya.attasillekha@iucn.or
g
30
Shekhar Ghimire
Director
Administration
Finance
International Centre for integrated
Mountain
Development
(
ICIMOD)
sghimire@icimod.org
31
Sinthay Neb
Director
Advicacy and Policy Institute
sinthayneb@apiinstitute.org
32
Sompongse
Finance
and
Administration Head
GMS Environment
Center
Sompongse@gms-eoc.org
of
and
Operation
Somsookh
33
Vanthong Phengvichith
Deputy Director General
National Agriculture and Forestry
Research Institute (NAFRI)
vanthong.p@gmail.com
34
Wanhua Yang
Program Officer
SJD&LLM
Division
Environmental
Law
Conventions , UNEP
wanhua.yang@unep.org
35
Yage Yuan
Project Officer
Eco-Watch
yuanyage@sina.cn
Executive Director
Asian Human Rights Commission
/ Asian Legal Resource Centre ,
Hongkong
bijo.francis@ahrc.asia
Program
ASEAN
Human Rights Working Group (
HRWG) Indonesia
awigra@gmail.com
of
&
Human Rights and Democracy
36
Bijo Francis
37
Manager
Daniel Awigra
38
Ade Irawan
Deputy Coordinator
Indonesia Corruption Watch
adeirawan@antikorupsi.org
39
Annette Lyth
UNAIP Regional Project
Manager
UNAIP
annette.lyth@undp.org
48
40
Name
Position
Organization
Email
Atina Gangmei
Program Coordinator
Asia Indigenous People Pact
atina@aippnet.org
( AIPP)
41
Chidapha Sangsom
Regional Administrator
Diakonia
chidapha.sangsom@diakoni
a.se
42
Jens Rosback
Deputy Regional Manager
Diakonia
jens.rosback@diakonia.se
43
Kamonaphan Saelee
Admin Manager
Asia Indigenous People Pact
ale@aippnet.org
( AIPP)
44
KhamsavathChanthavys
ouk
Capacity
Analyst
45
Liiklai Felfina
46
Development
Partners for Prevention ( P4P )
khamsavath.chanthavysouk
@one.un.org
Programme Offer
Raoul Wallenberg Institute
liiklai.felfina@rwi.lu.se
Pip Dargan
Deputy Director
Asia Pacific Forum of National
Human Rights Institutions
pipdargan@asiapacificforu
m.net
47
Pisey Pech
Director of Programs
Transparency
Cambodia
piseypech@ticambodia.org
48
Sue Anne Teo
Programme Officer
Raoul Wallenberg Institute
sue_anne.koh@rwi.lu.se
49
Wisnu Hanggoro
Program Manager
Southeast Asia Press Alliance
wisnu@seapa.org
International
,
Myanmar
50
Htet Min Lwin
Research Assistant
Myanmar Egress
htetmin.lwin@myanmaregre
ss.org
51
Lahsay Sawwah
Field Coordinator
The Border Consortium , Mae
Hong Son
lahsay@theborderconsortiu
m.org
52
Nan TheingMyint
Program Manager
Myanmar Egress
Nantheingi.myint@myanma
regress.org
53
Peter Halford
Program Coordinator
Burma Relief
brcentrecm@gmail.com
54
Sook de Jonge
Program
Local
Training
Vahu (Bangkok
(Yangon)
Coordinator
Governance
)
&
CESD
sook.cesd@gmail.com
49
Name
Position
Organization
Umakon Sithong
Field Coordinator
The Border Consortium , Mae
Hong Son
toi@theborderconsortium.or
g
56
Anodat Pornpawit
Finance Manager
Alfa Laval Thailand Company
Limited
Anodat.pornpawit@alfalava
l.com
57
Apichai Sunchindah
Freelance
Consultant
58
Douglas Varchol
Film Director / Producer
DZAP
dzap@aol.com
59
Dr. Antonette
Angeles
Vice-President
Ateneo de Manila University
aangeles@ateneo.edu
55
Email
Other
Palma-
Independent
apichai_sun@yahoo.com
( Philippines)
60
Dr. Jingjai
The Thai- EU Business Council
jingjai@loxley.co.th
Associate
President’s Delivery Unit of
Development Monitoring and
Oversight
harimuddin@ukp.go.id
Governance Specialist
World Bank ( Vietnam )
htran5@worldbank.org
Asean CSR Network
jerry@asean-csrnetwork.org
Anti-Corruption
Unit
Royal
Government of Cambodia
khoylimhong@gmail.com
Hanchanlash
61
Harimuddin
Uddin
62
HuongThiLan
Tran
63
Jerry Bernas
64
Limhong Khoy
65
Monrutai Pongsotorn
66
Nitiphan Prachuabmoh
Director , Bureau
International Affairs
of
Office of the National AntiCorruption Commission
prachuabmoh@gmail.com
67
Panicha Vornpien
Officer , the Office of
Student Affairs
Mahidol University International
College (MUIC)
panicha.vor@mahidol.ac.th
68
Peter Bjork
Executive Directive
Thai Swedish
Commerce
director@swecham.com
Deputy Director
Thai PBS
Chamber
of
50
Name
Position
69
PhontipTanompongphan
dh
International
Officer
70
Que Anh Pham
71
Organization
Affairs
Email
Office of the National AntiCorruption Commission
phontip_tan@nacc.go.th
Director
CUTS International
Resource Centre
ap@cuts.org
Thatri Sunchayanukul
HR Manager
Alfa Laval Thailand Company
Limited
Thatri.sunchayanukul@alfal
aval.com
72
Utain Shartpinyo
Ex-Chairman
Board
Flood Relief Operation Centre
utain.s@hotmail.com
73
Wisit
Chutchawantipakorn
Trainer and Project
King Prajadhipok’s Institute
wisit@kpi.ac.th
of
the
,
Hanoi
Manager
Embassy
74
Antti Inkinen
Head of Development
Cooperation
Embassy of Finland
antti.inkinen@formin.fi
75
Brieseid Marte
Second Secretary
Royal Norwegian Embassy
Marte.Briseid@mfa.no
76
Dr. Chatri Moonstan
Senior Program
Royal Norwegian Embassy
chmo@mfa.no
77
Srin Boonyoung
Programme Officer
Embassy of Finland
srin.boonyoung@formin.fi
Speakers/ Moderators
78
Aled Williams
Senior Advisor
The U4 Anti-Corruption Resource
Center
Aled.Williams@cmi.no
79
Antje Kraft
Justice and Human Rights
specialist
Asia-Pacific
UNDP
antje.kraft@undp.org
80
Conchita Carpio Morales
81
Dhep Vongvanich
82
Dr. Juree
Regional
Centre,
Ombudsman Morales
jccm.morales@gmail.com
Vice Chairman
Anti-Corruption Organization of
Thailand and Advisor to Siam
Cement Group
dhep@hotmail.com
Secretary-General
Transparency Thailand
juree@cpcsnida.com
Vichit-Vadakan
83
Dr.Somrudee Nicro
CEO
INTEGRITAS Co., Ltd
somrudee.nicro@gmail.com
84
Gayathry Venkiteswaran
Executive Director
South East Asia Press Alliance
( SEAPA)
gayathry@seapa.org
51
Name
85
Gilbert Sembrano
86
Grizelda Gerthie MayoAnda (4)
Position
Organization
Executive Director
Email
Ateneo Human Rights Center,
Philippines
gvshoe@yahoo.com
Environmental Legal Assistance
Center, Inc.
gerthiem@yahoo.com
( ELAC)
87
HuongThiLan Tran
Assistant to James
The Worldbank, Vietnam
88
James Anderson(3)
Senior Governance
The Worldbank, Vietnam
Janderson2@worldbank.org
The U4 Anti-Corruption Resource
Center
Jesper.Johnson@cmi.no
UNDP
Centre
joseibarraa.angeles@undp.o
rg
Specialist
89
Jesper Johnsøn
Advisor
90
Jose Ibarra A. Angele (2)
Consultant
for
Corruption
Communication
91
Molly Lien
Senior Policy Specialist ,
Anti-
Anti-
Asia-Pacific
Swedish
Development
Agency ( Sida)
Resource
International
Cooperation
Molly.Lien@sida.se
Corruption
92
Paul Wade
Director
The U4 Anti-Corruption Resource
Center
paul.wade@cmi.no
93
Prof.Vicha Makakhun
Director
National
Commissioner
paa_paa_p@hotmail.com
94
San Chey (5)
Speaker
Affiliated Network of Social
Accountability-East Asia and the
Pacific ( ANSA)
sanchey33@gmail.com
95
Shervin Majlessi
Regional Anti-Corruption
Adviser
United Nations Office on Drugs
and Crime
shervin.majlessi@unodc.org
96
Somchai Suwanban
Director of General
Thai Public Broadcasting
somchaiuk@gmail.com,
Service (Thai PBS)
pornprateeps@thaipbs.or.th,
Anti-Corruption
varinthrab@thaipbs.or.th
97
Soren Davidsen
Senior Governance
Specialist
The Worldbank , Vietnam
sdavidsen@worldbank.org
52
98
Name
Position
Timothy Boyle
UN-REDD
Coordinator
Organization
Regional
Email
UN-REDD Programme
timothy.boyle@undp.org
UNDP Regional Centre
99
Yunus Husien (1)
Expert staff in President
Delivery Unit
for
Development monitoring
and Oversight
President Delivery Unit for
Development monitoring and
Oversight , Indonesia
yunus.husein@ukp.go.id
Embassy of Sweden / Sida
100
AnnaMaria Oltorp
Head of Development
Cooperation Section
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
annamaria.oltorp@gov.se
101
Christoffer Berg
Minister Counselor
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok)
christoffer.berg@gov.se
102
Karl-Anders Larsson
Counselor
Embassy of Sweden
karl-anders.larsson@gov.se
(Cambodia)
103
Renee Ankarfjard
Senior Research Advisor,
Development Cooperation
Section
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
renee.ankarfjard@gov.se
104
Stuart Ward
Controller ,
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
stuart.ward@gov.se
Embassy of Sweden (Cambodia)
mikael.bahrke@gov.se
Development Cooperation
Section
105
Mikael Bahrke
Controller
106
Ola Moller
Programme Manager /
Policy
Adviser
,
Environment and Climate
Change
ola.moller@gov.se
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok)
107
Rehana Khan
Program Officer
Embassy
(Bangladesh)
of
108
Ulrika Akesson
Senior
Programme
Manager / Environment
and Climate Change
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok)
ulrika.akesson@gov.se
109
Marie Svensson
First
Secretary
/
Development Cooperation
Section
Embassy
(Afghanistan)
marie.svensson@gov.se
of
Sweden
Sweden
rehana.khan@gov.se
53
Name
Position
Organization
110
Samuel Hurtig
Head of division /
Department
for
Programme Cooperation
Swedish
International
Cooperation Agency , Stockholm
samuel.hurtig@sida.se
111
Petra Smitmanis Dry
Analyst
Swedish
International
Cooperation Agency , Stockholm
petra.smitmanis.dry@sida.s
e
112
Tomas Lundstrom
Senior
Programme
Manager / Myanmar
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok)
tomas.lundstrom@gov.se
113
Camilla Ottosson
Program Manager /
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok)
camilla.ottosson@gov.se
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok)
kriangkrai.thitimakorn@gov
.se
Titimakorn
National
Programme
Officer / Sustainable
Communal Service
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
maja.forslind@gov.se
Maja Forslind
Programme Manager /
Private
Sector
Collaboration
116
Parichart Tridej
Programme Administrator
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
parichart.tridej@gov.se
117
Kalyakorn Mongkolchart
Trade Officer
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
kalyakorn.mongkolchart@g
ov.se
118
Panyada Chotamongsa
Administrative Assistant
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
panyada.chotamongsa@gov
.se
119
Samira Kousha
Intern
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
samira.kousha@gov.se
120
Rebecca Leissner
Intern
Embassy of Sweden (Bangkok )
rebecca.leissner@gov.se
Human
Rights
Democracy
114
Kriangkrai
115
Email
and
54
ANNEX C
Questionnaires 1
Regional Workshop on Anti-Corruption
Hosted by Development Cooperation Section, Embassy of Sweden, Bangkok
22-23 May 2013, Bangkok, Thailand
Dear participants,
Please respond to the following simple questions to help us understand our audience so that we
can best respond to your expectations. It will take you only 15 seconds to respond !
Please send your responses to Ms Panicha Vornpien at zai.sai@gmail.com ASAP and no
later than Tuesday, 14 May PLEASE.
Please tick.
1. You are
…..female
.....male
2. Your affiliated organization is
.....civil society organization (CSO)
.....higher education
.....governmental agency
.....Embassy
.....private sector
.....UN agency
…..international/regional financial institution
55
.....independent/ no affiliation
.....others, please specify......................................................................
3. Your work area is in
.....natural resources and environment
.....human rights and democracy
.....anti-corruption and governance
.....others, please specify............................................................................
4. You are
…..Board member
.....Executive (Secretary General, Executive Director, President, CEO, etc.)
.....Management (Program manager, project manager, etc.)
.....technical personnel (specialist, technician, project officer, etc.)
.....support staff (admin, financial, etc.)
5. Have you engaged in any anti-corruption activities before attending this workshop?
....Yes, please specify..........
....No
6. Your reason(s) for attending this workshop is(are)
......to learn more about anti-corruption
......to network with other participants
......to cooperate with the Swedish Embassy's Development Cooperation Section
......was assigned to attend
......to take anti-corruption actions
Please send your responses to Ms Panicha Vornpien at zai.sai@gmail.com ASAP and no
later than Tuesday, 14 May PLEASE. Thank you very much!
The Workshop Team : )
56
ANNEX D
Evaluation Form
Regional Workshop on Anti-Corruption
22-23 May 2013
Name of participant (optional)…………………………………
Your gender
Female……………….
Male……………
Organization (optional)………………………………………...
Country…………………………………………………………
Please circle the number corresponds best to your opinion with 5 being the highest and 1 being
the lowest mark.
1.How was your understanding of anti-corruption before attending this workshop?
Excellent
5
Poor
4
3
2
1
2. How is your understanding of anti-corruption now, after attending the workshop?
Excellent
5
4
3
2
Poor
1
3. How did the workshop meet your expectations?
Excellent
5
Poor
4
3
2
1
Please explain………………………………………………………………………......
…………………………………………………………………………………………
57
4. The presentations in this meeting were
Excellent
5
.
4
3
2
Poor
1
Comments/suggestions………………………………………………………………….
5. What are the three most important things you will take with you from this workshop?
………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………….
6. Will you take any anti-corruption actions after returning to your country/office?
Yes………..
Not sure…………..
No…………….
If yes, what will you do?.......................................................................................................
If not sure, please explain why…………………………………………………………
If no, please explain why……………………………………………………………….
7. How do you like the workshop venue, hotel room, and food?
Excellent
5
Poor
4
3
2
1
Please provide comments/suggestions..................................................................................
58
8. How are you satisfied with the arrangements?
Excellent
5
Poor
4
3
2
1
Please provide comments/suggestions..................................................................................
Thank you very much for your contributions!
59
ANNEX E
Photos
60
61
62
ANNEX F
Speakers' presentations
Presentations
Speakers
Links
Day 1: Wednesday, 22 May 2013
Introduction of participants
Workshop agenda overview and participants’ expectations
Dr. Somrudee Nicro
[Link]
What is corruption and anti-corruption? How is anti-corruption related to democracy and human
rights?
Global perspectives on costs of corruption and anti- Mr. Jesper Johnsøn [Biodata]
corruption approaches
Sida’s policy on anti-corruption and approach on the
relationship between anti-corruption, democracy and human Ms. Molly Lien [Biodata]
rights
Anti-Corruption Reforms
[Link]
[Link]
The United Nations Convention against Corruption
Mr. Shervin Majlessi [Biodata]
[Link]
Anti-Corruption Reforms in Philippines
Ms. Conchita Carpio Morales
[Link]
Anti-Corruption Reforms in Thailand
Prof. Vicha Makakhun [Biodata]
[Link]
Vietnam’s experience with anti-corruption reforms
Mr.James Anderson [Biodata]
[Link]
Anti Corruption Reforms: Academe/NGO Perspective
Mr. Gilbert V. Sembrano
[Link]
Day 2: Thursday, 23 May 2013
Corruption in natural resources sector: forms, patterns, and causes
Potential for corruption in REDD+, and Measure to Mitigate Mr. Timothy Boyle
Risks
Corruption risks in the utilisation of natural wealth: The Atty. Grizelda "Gerthie" MayoMalampaya, Palawan experience in the Philippines
Anda
Mr. Yunus Husein
Illegal logging in Indonesia
Corruption in fishery sector in Cambodia
Mr. Chey San [Biodata]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
63
Anti-corruption initiatives by different stakeholders
Transparency International - Thailand
Dr. Juree Vichit-Vadakan
[Link]
Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand
Mr. Dhep Vongvanich [Biodata]
[Link]
ThaiPBS : Participation, ownership, public Media and antiMr. Somchai Suwanban [Biodata]
corruption
Ms. Gayathry Venkiteswaran
Role of the media in fighting corruption: Advocacy role of
Southeast Asia Press Alliance (SEAPA)
[Link]
Asia-Pacific Integrity in Action Network (AP-INTACT) —
How a Moderated Email List Facilitates Knowledge Sharing
Mr. Jose Ibarra A. Angele
and Information Exchange among Anti-Corruption
Practitioners in the Asia-Pacific Region
[Link]
[Link]
64
ANNEX G
Speech of Ombudsman of the Philippines
REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON ANTI-CORRUPTION
The Sukosol Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand
22 May 2013, 1:00 PM
“Ripples of Reform that Create a Wave of Change”
Conchita Carpio Morales
Ombudsman, Republic of the Philippines
[Greetings]
Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon.
First, let me thank the Embassy of Sweden in Bangkok for extending the invitation to
participate in this regional workshop and share with you the Philippine experience in terms of
confronting the gargantuan challenge that corruption poses in the life of a nation.
INTRODUCTION
Indeed, citizens aspire their government to be a good one, or a government running
under an efficient and effective system of delivering government services. After all, sovereignty
resides or emanates from the people whose taxes fuel the operations of government.
Corruption, however, creeps in the system, with people unduly using their power for
personal gain.
65
The Philippines is no exception to this global scenario. It has had its share of scandals,
scams or exposés involving or arising from government contracts, procurement irregularities,
behest loans, payroll insertions or the so-called “ghost” employees, inexistent or “ghost”
projects, among others that haunt the bureaucracy.
There is nothing left to do but to recognize the existence of the problem and do
something about it. There is the continuing imperative to restore or maintain public trust or the
people’s confidence in the system of government.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES
The Philippines had to learn its lesson the hard way. In certain phases of its colorful
history, it had ignored the dictum that adherence to the rule of law is the exponent of a good
government. A one-man rule – under what experts term as “constitutional dictatorship” – can
never sustain the country’s gains. Consequently, liberty and prosperity suffered. It took a
People Power revolution in 1986 to topple a dictator.
With the downfall of President Ferdinand Marcos, there was the urgent need to rebuild
democratic institutions. For one, the creation of the Presidential Commission on Good
Government (PCGG) was instrumental in rebuilding the foundations of good governance. It was
tasked to run after the Marcoses and their cronies in order to recover ill-gotten wealth in the form
of off-shore accounts, shares of stocks, and the famed jewelries of the former First Lady.
According to ta PCGG report,1 the Philippine government, as of January 2011, has
recovered assets in the total amount of more than P93 billion2 or roughly $2.2 billion dollars,
mostly from equities, jewelries, real properties and overseas accounts including some $638
million3 in Swiss deposits. With the successful recovery of these assets, the PCGG has been
internationally recognized as a trailblazer in terms of initiatives in asset recovery.
The saga continues, as the government goes on in the recovery of monies and properties
rightfully belonging to the Filipino people.
Still in line with the reinstatement of legal and regulatory frameworks, the ratification of
the 1987 Philippine Constitution paved the way for the restoration of the rule of law and a
vibrant democracy.
1
Under Executive Order No. 1 (series of 1986), the PCGG is the agency tasked to recover ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses, among other
functions.
2
PCGG’s “An Introduction to the Conclusion: 100 Day Report and Plan of Action” (2011), p. 4.
3
Darwin Mariano, “Unfortunate Consequences: Legal Barriers to Ill-Gotten Wealth Recovery” (2006), in Jovito Salonga’s Foreword.
66
The framers saw the need to establish an independent complaint system and mechanism
which shall be the lead anti-corruption agency in the Philippines. Thus, the rebirth4 of the Office
of the Ombudsman.
ABOUT THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN
The Constitution affirms as a policy of the State “to maintain honesty and integrity in the
public service and take positive and effective measures against graft and corruption.”5 In one
full article (Article XI) devoted to “Accountability of Public Officers,” the Constitution declares
that “public office is a public trust” and that “public officers and employees must at all times be
accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and
efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.”6
In giving life to these avowed policies, the Constitution created the Office of the
Ombudsman as the lead enforcer of public accountability. It was established as an independent
constitutional office with full powers and authority to see to it that the actions of all public
officials and employees conform to the standards of the Constitution and the statutes.
4
Precursor of the Office of the Ombudsman:
The Philippine revolutionary government in 1898 formed a commission tasked to decide on criminal cases approved by provincial councils.
Succeeding administrations created their own anti-graft bodies to investigate corruption and inefficiency in the government service. In 1950,
President Elpidio Quirino formed an Integrity Board, while his successor, President Ramon Magsaysay, had created a Presidential Complaints
and Action Commission in 1957.
In 1958, President Carlos Garcia also formed a Presidential Committee on Administration Performance Efficiency, which was followed by
President’s Diosdado Macapagal's Presidential Anti-Graft Committee. In 1966, President Ferdinand Marcos formed the Presidential Agency
on Reforms and Government Operations.
Prior to the Ombudsman structure established by the 1987 Constitution after the fall of the Marcos dictatorship, a prior agency known as
Tanodbayan was created pursuant to the 1973 Constitution. Tanodbayan was derived from two Filipino words, Tanod which means “guard”
and Bayan which means “country.”
On July 11, 1978, then President Ferdinand Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 1487 the Tanodbayan which had the mandate to investigate
complaints relating to public office and, in appropriate cases, file and prosecute criminal, civil or administrative cases before the proper court
or body. Its concept was also patterned after that of the Ombudsman of the Scandinavian countries.
The Tanodbayan became operational on December 20, 1978 upon the appointment of its first Tanodbayan. During its existence from 1978 to
1988, four Tanodbayans were appointed. The last Tanodbayan eventually became the first Special Prosecutor after the Tanodbayan was later
referred to, by fiat of the 1987 Constitution, as the new Office of the Special Prosecutor which is placed under the new structure of the Office
of the Ombudsman. In other words, the Office of the Special Prosecutor shall exercise the powers then exercised by the Tanodbayan except
those which the Constitution conferred on the Ombudsman.
5
Philippine Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 27.
6
Philippine Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 1.
67
Pursuant thereto, then President Corazon C. Aquino issued Executive Order Nos. 243 and
244 (July 24, 1987) decreeing the formal organization of the Ombudsman, which was followed
by the passage of ”The Ombudsman Act of 1989” or Republic Act No. 6770 (November 17,
1989) that further strengthened its functional and structural organization.
For the past 25 years,7 the Office has performed its functions under the successive
leadership of five Ombudsmen.8 The Office has assumed the roles of a “watchdog,” a
“mobilizer,” a “dispenser of justice,” and an “official critique.” To fulfill its mandates, the
Ombudsman discharges five major functions:
1. Investigation. The Ombudsman has the power to investigate, on its own or upon
complaint, any act or omission of any public officer or employee, office or agency, which
appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient.
2. Adjudication. The Ombudsman exercises disciplinary authority over public officials and
employees committing administrative infractions punishable with penalties ranging from
admonition to dismissal from service.
The Ombudsman’s disciplinary authority covers all elective and appointive officials of
government except members of Congress and the Judiciary as well as officials who may
be removed only by impeachment such as the President, Vice President, and members of
the Supreme Court and Constitutional Commissions.
3. Prosecution. Unlike most Ombudsman institutions in the world, the Philippine
Ombudsman has the authority to prosecute erring public officials and their cohorts in
criminal cases filed in either the “anti-graft court” known as the Sandiganbayan (for
high-ranking officials) or the regular courts (for low-ranking officials).
4. Public Assistance. The Office is empowered to provide assistance to people who
complain about inaction, delay or impropriety committed by public functionaries. It can
direct any public official or employee to perform and expedite any act or duty required by
law, or to stop, prevent, and correct any abuse or impropriety in the performance of
duties.
5. Corruption Prevention. The Office performs pro-active functions in dealing with
corruption. It has the duty to determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape,
mismanagement, fraud and corruption in government, and make recommendations for
their elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics and efficiency.
7
8
The operation of the Office of the Ombudsman commenced on May 12, 1988, upon the appointment of the first Ombudsman, from which date
the Office reckoned its years of operational existence.
Conrado M. Vasquez (1988-1995), Aniano A. Desierto (1995-2002), Simeon V. Marcelo (2002-2005), Ma. Merceditas N. Gutierrez (20052011) and Conchita Carpio Morales (2011-present).
68
Structurally, the Ombudsman is ably supported by five (5) Deputy Ombudsmen who
are respectively in charge of (i) overall administration, (ii-iv)) one each for the three
geographical areas of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, (v) and one for the military and other law
enforcement offices (MOLEO). At present, aside from the central office located in Metro
Manila, it maintains area offices in the key cities of Cebu (for Visayas) and Davao (for
Mindanao), as well as satellite offices in four locations9 around the country.
There is also the Special Prosecutor who leads the prosecutorial arm of the Office of the
Ombudsman appearing in criminal cases against high-ranking officials falling within the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
One success story worth sharing is the criminal conviction of a former President.
Former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada served from 1998 to 2001. He faced a mounting public
outcry arising from the jueteng (a local numbers game) payoff scandal and the BW Resources
stock price manipulation stories, which eventually led to his impeachment – the first Philippine
President to be impeached by the House of Representatives.
His impeachment trial by the Senate was cut short by the infamous walk-out of a number
of senators, which impelled what historians call as “People Power II” in 2001 that eventually led
to his acts evincing “resignation” as was described and stamped with judicial imprimatur by the
Supreme Court in a landmark ruling.10
Consequently, the Office of the Ombudsman charged Estrada before the Philippine antigraft court known as Sandiganbayan for (i) receiving gifts and kickbacks from illegal gambling;
(ii) converting and misusing a portion of tobacco excise tax share allocated for one province; (iii)
compelling the country’s public and private pension fund institutions11 to purchase more than
680 million shares of stock in one corporation and deriving sales commission therefrom; and (iv)
accumulating unexplained wealth under a fictitious account name12 in one major bank, with an
involved aggregate sum of almost P4.1 billion or around $95 million.
9
Stationed in Iloilo City and Tacloban City in the Visayas; Cagayan de Oro City in Mindanao; and the municipality of Rosales, Pangasinan in
Luzon.
10
Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15, March 2, 2001, 353 SCRA 452.
11
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) and Social Security System (SSS).
12
“Jose Velarde” in the erstwhile Equitable PCI Bank.
69
The criminal case13 ended on September 12, 2007 with a decision finding him guilty of
plunder14 or what is equally known as “kleptocracy” or “economic treason,” as elucidated in the
court’s decision.
His successor, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, eventually pardoned him, however.
The additional irony is that Estrada even vied for the presidency in the 2010 national elections
and still managed to place second. More interestingly, Estrada won as city mayor of Manila in
the recently concluded midterm-elections two weeks ago.
ANTI-CORRUPTION REFORMS
The Philippines is at the crossroads of meaningful change, as it treads the road towards
peace and prosperity for all.
Transparency International’s latest Corruption Perceptions Index shows that the
Philippines’ has markedly improved in the 2012 rankings, which climbed 29 notches from its
rank two years ago.
The present government administration’s battle cry of “dang matuwid” or translated as
“straight path” has greatly amplified the Ombudsman’s constant call to reform. The resonance
of the message has enhanced the entire government’s overall campaign against corruption.
One of the anti-corruption reforms that the Office has instituted is ZERO BACKLOG.
As a brief background, my predecessor had faced serious charges of having allegedly sat
on a number of cases. After she was impeached by the House of Representatives, she tendered
her resignation even before the Senate impeachment trial could start. This goes to show that not
even the Ombudsman is immune from public scrutiny. Everybody in government should be
accountable to the people.
Faced with this challenge, the Office needed to catch up with resolving cases that have
been pending for the longest time. After all, in order to operate as a form of deterrence to
corruption, the criminal, administrative and forfeiture cases filed against public officials and
employees should illustrate the clear picture of ending impunity.
In a span of twenty (20) months15 since I assumed office, a total of more than 11,500
cases have been resolved. Almost 25% of the administrative and criminal dispositions resulted
13
14
Sandiganbayan Criminal Case No. 26558, People v. Joseph Ejercito Estrada, et al”
Punishable under Republic Act No. 7080 (1991), as amended.
70
in the imposition of penalties from dismissal to admonition, or the filing of criminal cases in
court against public officials and employees and conspiring private individuals, respectively.
There is still a long way to go. This early, however, one independent survey16 about
Philippine government agencies reported that the Office of the Ombudsman climbed 46 notches
in the sincerity ratings from -8 in 2009 to +38 in 2012. Apparently, the message that the Office
is serious in running after the bad elements has been sent across. This reform in the punitive
approach to corruption sits well with the recognized dictum that the best deterrence is the speed
and certainty of penalty.
Zero backlog seeks to end a culture of delay that erodes public trust. Zero backlog
depends on the collective efficiency of the entire human resources of the Office. It entails not
only the speedy disposition of complaints but also enhanced efficiency, effectiveness and
diligence of all accountable personnel in every step of the process.
The number of pending cases is expected to be reduced not only with a higher
disposition/output but also with the implementation of a case evaluation system. To filter the
intake of numerous cases, the Office issued guidelines on case evaluation and records
management through the Complaint and Case Monitoring System (CCMS) which has been under
pilot-testing since August 2012.
Lawyer-evaluators are now assigned at the records
division/sections to evaluate the complaints whether they merit further proceedings or otherwise
outright dismissal. In this manner, increased disposition of aged cases coupled with a lesser
number of docketed cases will eventually result in a manageable case docket, to which the
limited resources and personnel complement of the office will be fully devoted.
As part of its statutory mandate, the Office is prioritizing the disposition of complaints
and cases involving high-ranking officials, large sums of money, grand corruption cases, and
celebrated or high-profile cases. Considering the limited resources of the Office, it is
concentrating on the disposition of these types of complaints and cases. One pertinent reform in
this area is the effective reduction of the volume of non-priority complaints and cases (i.e., noncorruption cases, trivial or frivolous cases, and cases which may be referred to other
fora/agencies).
As a specific measure under this priority item, the Office has forged Memoranda of
Agreement/Understanding (MOA/MOU) with agencies having parallel functions, such as the
Department of Justice, Commission on Audit, Philippine National Police, and the Armed Forces
15
16
From August 1, 2011 to March 31, 2013.
Survey of Enterprises on Corruption conducted by the Social Weather Stations (SWS), Initiated by the Australian AID, The Asia Foundation,
Makati Business Club’s Integrity Initiative, and National Competitiveness Council.
71
of the Philippines, for proper coordination and referral of identified non-graft cases or offenses
and the conduct of joint investigations.
Likewise noteworthy is the existence of a Memorandum of Agreement between the
Office and the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), an agreement which has been in place
since July 2005.
This partnership between the Office of the Ombudsman and the Anti-Money Laundering
Council paved the way for another success story, this time in relation to the eventual
impeachment of a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
The Ombudsman has no administrative or disciplinary authority over the Chief Justice
and the other impeachable officers. Under the Ombudsman Act (Republic Act No. 6770, Section
22), the Ombudsman’s power over impeachable officers is limited only “to investigate any
serious misconduct in office for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if
warranted.”17
Chief Justice Renato Corona was facing impeachment trial before the Senate for culpable
violation of the Constitution and a betrayal of public trust, after allegedly failing to disclose all
his assets in the sworn Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) which every
public officer or employee is required to submit annually.
Pending the impeachment proceedings, the Office received three (3) complaints against
CJ Corona for allegedly amassing properties including peso and dollar deposits without the
means to acquire them or, in other words, manifestly disproportionate to his salary as a public
officer and his other lawful income.
I wrote a letter to the AMLC Chairman-Central Bank Governor Amando Tetangco, Jr.
informing him that the Office had “already initiated an investigation” into the said matter, gave
him copies of the complaints for necessary actions considering that the matters raised therein
were likewise within the AMLC’s jurisdiction (e.g., violation of the Anti-Money Laundering
Act), and requested assistance “by providing relevant information bearing on the financial
transactions, if any, of [CJ Corona], and related transactions.”18
The AMLC transmitted to me copies of Transaction Reports pertaining to bank accounts
in the name of CJ Corona. These Transaction Reports pertained only to “covered transactions”
17
18
While there was then an on-going Ombudsman investigation pending the impeachment proceedings, the investigation’s purpose was not to
discover and present evidence for the current impeachment proceedings; it would have served as a basis for a second impeachment complaint.
Legal bases:
1. Ombudsman’s broad powers under the Constitution and the Ombudsman Act (R.A. 6770), which empowers it, among others, to
request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of its responsibilities, and to
examine, if necessary, pertinent records and documents;
2. Memorandum of Agreement between OMB and AMLC July 20, 2005 on mutual cooperation and coordination on information
exchange and capacity building;
3. Written authorization of CJ Corona in his SALN.
72
or transactions in cash or other equivalent monetary instrument involving a total amount in
excess of P500,000 within one banking day. Under the law, banks have the duty to report the
“covered transactions” to the AMLC.
From my reading of the Transaction Reports, I gathered the following initial findings:
1)
CJ Corona had at least $10 Million in transactional balances;
2)
He had eighty-two (82) US Dollar accounts in five (5) banks;
3)
There were significant deposits and withdrawals on very significant dates, including
the 2004 and 2007 elections, as well as the week he was impeached by the House of
Representatives between December 12 to December 22, 2011.
Considering the highly technical nature of the contents of the Transaction Reports, I
sought assistance from the Commission on Audit (COA) to examine the data provided by the
AMLC.
On motion of the defense, I was ordered to testify before the Senate sitting as
impeachment court. For some unfathomable reason, it was the defense lawyers who moved for
me to testify on the documents on which the complaints based their accusation that CJ Corona
had foreign-denominated accounts.
On 13-14 May 2012, I did testify before the Impeachment Court and presented the results
of the investigation made by the Office. The most crucial part was my presentation of the
AMLC Transaction Reports and the initial findings on the $10 million dollar transactional
balances and 82 dollar accounts under his name.
After my testimony, various reactions and media commentaries came in a flurry. Others
stated that it was a “bombshell” revelation that nailed it. The prosecution panel opined that it
was the end game for the defense. Certain quarters opined that the defense strategy of calling me
as the defense’s own hostile witness backfired in the end. On the part of CJ Corona, he stated in
the media that my testimony was “a lantern of lies.”19 Some Senator-Judges maintained their
opinions and apprehensions on possible violations of the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
As a show of support from the AMLC itself, the AMLC gave the media a copy of its
Primer to answer basic questions on CJ Corona’s bank deposits. The Primer stated that the
“AMLC does not need a court order before it can require covered institutions (banks and other
financial institutions) to submit covered and/or suspicious transaction reports.”
19
Chief Justice Corona's statement on Ombudsman testimony (taken from http://anc.abs-cbnnews.com/blogs/188/chief-justice-coronasstatement-on-ombudsman-testimony-cjontrial/)
73
The people, however, knew better. The tide of public opinion turned against CJ Corona,
with increased public clamor for CJ Corona to take the stand and controvert the Ombudsman.
He did. CJ Corona himself took the stand. He testified and admitted to holding two
million dollars ($2,000,000) in his dollar-denominated bank accounts. Certain quarters say it
was a lame excuse for him to claim that he supposedly invested in foreign exchange.
Parenthetically, he also admitted having P80,000,000 in his peso accounts. Both admitted
accounts were not reported in his SALNs, however.
On May 29, 2012, the Senate Impeachment Court, voting 20-3, found CJ Corona guilty
of Betrayal of Public Trust and/or Culpable Violation of the Constitution for failing “to disclose
to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required under the constitution.”
The Senators’ reasons in explaining their votes convicting CJ Corona were largely influenced by
the above-discussed testimony on the dollar accounts and his admission of the existence of parts
thereof.
Each story of government irregularity is neither isolated nor peculiar; it is part of a bigger
picture that we ought to reconfigure by sending a warning of deterrence to all public servants. If
we can send the message across that this Office is using all its might under the Constitution to
send former Presidents to jail, or dismiss Presidential appointees from service, or expose and
recover unexplained wealth – whether denominated in pesos or dollars, then we are making a
dent in the public mindset that the government is serious in doing its job. Only then can we
make a difference in the people’s outlook on government services.
Indeed, there is much work to be done. The long and arduous path to good governance is
not easy. The good news is that the anti-corruption initiatives are starting to nourish a greener
landscape.
This month, the Office of the Ombudsman marks its silver anniversary with the theme,
“Ombudsman at 25: Empowering the Nation in its Unrelenting Pursuit of Good Governance.” It
is renewing its commitment to join the global battle against corruption, as it endeavors to infuse
a culture of integrity in public service in the Philippines.
Thank you and good afternoon.
74
ANNEX H
Press release (in Thai)
กรุงเทพฯ.
สถานทู ต สวี เ ดนจั ด ประชุ ม ระดั บ ภู มิ ภ าคเอเซี ย “การต่ อ ต้ า นคอรั ป ชั น่ ” สองวั น 22 -23
พ ค . ที่ โ ร ง แ ร ม สุ โ ก ศ ล เ พื่ อ เ ส ริ ม ส ร้ า ง ค ว า ม เ ข้ า ใ จ ใ ห้ กั บ อ ง ค์ ก ร ภ า คี ใ น ป ร ะ เ ท ศ ต่ า ง ๆ
ในเอเซีย ตะวัน ออกเฉี ย งใต้ใ นเรื่อ งคอรัป ชัน่ โดยเฉพาะที่เ กี่ย วกับ การจัด การทรัพ ยากรธรรมชาติแ ละสิ่ง แวดล้อ ม
และความเกี่ย วเนื่ อ งระหว่ า งการต่ อ ต้ า นคอรัป ชัน่ สิท ธิม นุ ษ ยชน และประชาธิป ไตย โดยมี ผู้ เ ข้า ร่ ว มกว่ า 100
คนจากมากกว่า 30 องค์กร และมีวิท ยากรจากยูโฟร์ซ่ึงเป็ นองค์กรวิจ ัยด้านการต่ อต้านคอรัป ชันในประเทศนอร์
่
เวย์
องค์กรความร่วมมือด้านการพัฒนาระหว่างประเทศแห่งประเทศสวีเดน หรือซีด้า องค์การสหประชาชาติ ธนาคารโลก
ผู้ ต รวจการแ ผ่ น ดิ น ป ระเทศฟิ ลิ ป ปิ นส์ ศู น ย์ สิ ท ธิ ม นุ ษยช นฟิ ลิ ป ปิ นส์ และ เอ็ น จี โ อจา กกั ม พู ช า เป็ นต้ น
วิทยากรจากประเทศไทย ประกอบด้วย ศาสตราจารย์วชิ า มหาคุณ กรรมาธิการป้องกันและปราบปรามการทุจริตแห่งชาติ
ดร.จุ รี วิ จิต รวาทการ เลขาธิก ารองค์ ก รความโปร่ ง ใสสากลแห่ ง ประเทศไทย คุ ณ เทพ ว่ อ งวานิ ช รองประธาน
องค์การต่อต้านคอรัปชันแห่
่ งประเทศไทย และผูอ้ านวยการไทยพีบเี อส
ส วี เ ด น เ ป็ น ป ร ะ เ ท ศ ที่ เ ชื่ อ กั น ว่ า มี ก า ร ค อ รั ป ชั ่ น น้ อ ย ที่ สุ ด
ไม่เคยเกินอันดับทีห่ กของโลกตัง้ แต่มกี ารจัดทาดัชนีคอรัปชันขององค์
่
กรความโปร่งใสสากลตัง้ แต่ปี 2538
ท่ า น เ อ ก อั ค ร ร า ช ทู ต
ค ล อ ส
โ ม ลี น
ก ล่ า ว ว่ า
การต่อสูก้ บั คอรัปชันและการส่
่
งเสริมธรรมาภิบาลเป็ นความมุ่งมันที
่ ส่ วีเดนมีต่ออนุ สญ
ั ญาต่อต้านคอรัปชันในสหภาพยุ
่
โรป
สภายุ โ รป องค์ ก ารสหประชาชาติ และในกลุ่ ม ประเทศโออี ซี ดี เหตุ ผ ลที่ ส าคัญ ที่ สุ ด ที่ จ ะต่ อ ต้ า นคอรัป ชัน่ ก็ คื อ
ค อ รั ป ชั ่ น มี ร า ค า แ พ ง แ ล ะ ท า ล า ย ทั ้ ง ร ะ บ บ เ ศ ร ษ ฐ กิ จ แ ล ะ ก า ร เ มื อ ง
ท า ใ ห้ นั ก ล ง ทุ น ไ ม่ อ ย า ก ม า ล ง ทุ น ใ น ป ร ะ เ ท ศ ที่ มี ค อ รั ป ชั ่ น ม า ก
คอรัปชันยั
่ งทาลายความชอบธรรมของนิติธรรมและสันคลอนความเชื
่
่อมันในสถาบั
่
นทางสังคม ระบบเศรษฐกิจตลาด
และรัฐบาลประชาธิปไตย
การต่อต้านคอรัปชันและธรรมาภิ
่
บาลประชาธิปไตยจึงกาลังเป็ นประเด็นทีเ่ วทีระหว่างประเทศกาลังให้ความสาคัญ
“ ก า ร ที่ ส วี เ ด น มี ค อ รั ป ชั ่ น น้ อ ย ก ว่ า ป ร ะ เ ท ศ ส่ ว น ใ ห ญ่
เป็ นเพราะระบบการเมืองและระบบกฏหมายทีเ่ ดินหน้าไปได้ดว้ ยดี มีระบบราชการทีม่ ปี ระสิทธิภาพกว่าอีกหลายประเทศ
และมีพลเมืองทีไ่ ม่ยอมทนและไม่ดดู ายต่อคอรัปชัน”
่
คุ ณ อั น น า ม า เ รี ย โ อ ล ท อ ร์ ป หั ว ห น้ า ซี ด้ า ป ร ะ จ า ส ถ า น ทู ต ส วี เ ด น เ พิ่ ม เ ติ ม ว่ า
ซีด้า ถือ ว่ า คอรัป ชัน่ เป็ น อุ ปสรรคต่ อ การพัฒ นา
คอรัป ชัน่ หมายถึง การใช้ป ระโยชน์ จ ากความไว้ว างใจ อ านาจ
หรือตาแหน่งหน้าทีโ่ ดยมิชอบ เพื่อการให้ได้มาซึง่ ประโยชน์สว่ นตนหรือพวกพ้อง
75
“การประชุ ม นี้ ไ ม่ ไ ด้ เ พี ย งเพื่ อ บอกว่ า ซีด้ า ให้ ค วามส าคัญ กับ คอรัป ชัน่ และการต่ อ ต้ า นคอรัป ชัน่ เท่ า นั ้น
แต่เพื่อเสริมสร้างองค์ความรูใ้ นวิธกี ารสร้างความซื่อตรงและการปรับปรุงธรรมาภิบาลในระดับภูมภิ าคอีกด้วย”
(ข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมติดต่อ ดร.สมฤดี นิโครวัฒนยิ่งยง ผูด้ ำเนินกำรประชุม 081 422 4949, somrudee.nicro@gmail.com)
76
ANNEX I
Press Coverage
Press & Media
สถานทูตสวีเดนจัดประชุมระดับภูมภิ าคเอเชีย
“การต่อต้านคอรัปชัน”
่ (Embassy of
Sweden held a regional
workshop on “Anti-Corruption”)
ขยายเครือข่ายปปช.76จังหวัดต้านคอร์รปั ชัน่
(Expand networks of National
Anti-Corruption Commission in
76 provinces to combat
corruption)
Press Agencies
Date
Links
[Link]
สานักข่าวกรมประชาสัมพันธ์
(National News Bureau
of Thailand)
22 May 2013
Post Today
22 May 2013
[Link]
Thai PBS
23 May 2013
[Link]
Embassy of Sweden
Bangkok
29 May 2013
[Link]
[Download VDO]
รายการทีน่ ่ี Thai PBS
(“This is Thai PBS,” a TV
Program)
Workshop on Anti-Corruption
77
ANNEX J
Anti-Corruption Initiatives Posters
78
79