IIA's Big Anti-Bribery Debate


Date: 12/12/2016


On December 6th, Invest in Africa joined forces with Global Partner Clyde & Co to debate the motion:

This house believes that international anti-bribery & corruption legislation has reduced the ability of local African companies to compete for business opportunities.”

Below are the highlights of each side’s argument.

FOR

  • Economies in some developing countries, especially in Africa, are hindered by the current design of international anti-corruption laws.
  • The international anti-bribery laws were developed in a western context and do not necessarily fit within the mould of African economies.
  • They are too punitive to SMEs and attempts to revise legislation should begin by addressing this aspect.
  • A country’s perceived level of corruption does not necessarily affect potential investors/investments as there are countries perceived to be very corrupt with high growth trajectories and FDI investments.

AGAINST

  • In the long term, a lack of legislation on corruption is too costly, inefficient and bad for business for multinational companies working on the continent.
  • Anti-bribery and corruption laws have proven to improve and grow businesses and the ease of business.
  • There is a universal international frame work for anti-bribery laws that creates continuity across the world but can also be further adapted for different markets and economies.
  • Foregoing the current international anti-bribery and corruption laws adversely affects the growth of multinational companies and SMEs.
  • There are multinational companies currently working with local business to help them understand and attain the standards required.

Both sides however agreed that anti-bribery compliance is unquestionably an additional burden on small companies, but one that is worthwhile for long-term change.

The motion failed with 20 against, 9 for and 4 abstained.