Private Sector Anticorruption Legislation

New Zealand Private Sector Legislation

The risk of committing corruption offenses for organizations in New Zealand is very little. Like Denmark, the country is among states with the least corruption globally. This is promoted by rigorous and transparent law enforcement, which effectively limits fraud. As per the state legislations, passive and active bribery is restricted in the private sector. Some of the legislation which dictates the private sector includes the Crimes Act and the Secret Commissions Act. Bleach of these legislation results in a penalty amounting to NZD 2,000 and 14 years of imprisonment (Legislation, 2017). Some of the bribe cases in the private sector include manipulation of procurement or tendering processes, secret conflicts of interest, extravagant corporate gift or hospitality, and undisclosed receiving or giving of gifts. The Crimes Act 1961 (CA) is the first act that legislates bribery in New Zealand. The legislation part six of the Crimes Act 1961 includes criminal bribery offenses which relate to the corruption of the Judiciary, members of parliament, Ministers of the Crown, law enforcement officers as well as fraudulent use of official information. In the private sector, corruption is also governed by the Secret Commissions Act 1910 (Gregory & Zirker, 2017). The section contains legislation that is directly linked to the private sector. Some of the significant corruption offense includes bribing an agent, including giving or receiving a gift. Besides, another offense under this section includes failure of an agent to disclose to their principal a financial interest in a contract, false receipt provision with intent to cheating a principal, and a secret reward for advising the individual to enter a contract. For students seeking criminology dissertation help, understanding the legal framework surrounding corruption in New Zealand can provide the most valuable insights into the challenges and strategies for combating such offenses.

In New Zealand, misappropriating company funds in criminalized under the Crimes Act 1961 Sections 224 and 227A. The act covers various dishonesty offences, including forgery, bribery, extortion, misappropriation, corruption, embezzlement, money laundering, false representation, and concealment of material facts and collusion. Misappropriating funds in the office are usually covered by section 224 Crimes Act 1961. Forgery, on the other hand, is covered under section 266 of the Crimes Act. Furthermore, the Crimes Act 1961 was amended by the Crimes Amendment Act 2003 to cover crimes involving computers, money laundering and forgery.

Sources

Gregory, R. and Zirker, D., 2017. Corruption in New Zealand: A case of reputational erosion?. In The Changing Face of Corruption in the Asia Pacific (pp. 149-166). Elsevier. Available:

Singapore Private Sector Legislation

The anti-corruption policy in Singapore is intended to help every individual conduct their business ethically, legally, and with integrity. Therefore, it doesn’t stop legitimate business activities. The private sector thus has to comply with applicable laws, including local anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws. Some of the rules which apply to corruption and bribery include the Prevention of Corruption Act, Chapter 241 of Singapore (Assegaf, 2015). Some types of bribery include indirect and direct cash payments, bribery in the form of gift-giving, lavish hospitality, and favors for relatives and friends. Other examples of corruption include facilitation payments, bribes disguised as charitable and political donations. However, the most common means of inducement in the private sector contains businesses paying bribes, including to introducers, agents, associates intermediaries, etc. the primary legislation regulating the private sector in Singapore includes the Prevention of Corruption Act, Chapter 241 of Singapore (Global Legal Insights, 2020). However, the section does not only regulate the private sector alone; it also controls the public sector. Besides, other legislation that governs bribing includes the corruption and Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits Act, Chapter 65A of Singapore (the "CDTSA"). The legislation advocate for the confiscation of benefits derived from corruption offenses. From the Prevention of Corruption Act, Chapter 241 of Singapore, an individual committing corruption offense risk conviction to a fine not exceeding SGD 100,000 (Assegaf, 2015). Besides, the offense is also punished by imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both. If an individual is guilty of accepting a gift, the court may also order him to pay the penalty equivalent to the received amount of bribes. The benefits accrued from the bribe may also be confiscated. Looking for further insights on Mental Capacity in Will Making? Click here.

In Singapore, misappropriating company funds is covered under a Criminal breach of trust (“CBT”) sections 405 to 409 of the Penal Code. An individual commits a crime under this act when he is entrusted with or has dominion over property, which he dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his use. When convicted under the CBT, an individual is imprisoned up to seven years and/or a fine. Besides, the Companies Act (Cap. 50) also cover some corporate fraud offences like making false and misleading statements, fraud by officers as well as breaching directors’ duties.

Sources

Assegaf, A.R., 2015. Policy Analysis and Educational Strategy for Anti-Corruption in Indonesia and Singapore. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 5(11), pp.611-625.

Global Legal Insights, 2020. International legal business solutions - Global Legal Insights. GLI - Global Legal InsightsInternational legal business solutions. Available at:

Swedish Private Sector Legislation

The Swedish Penal Code (SPC) regulates offenses concerning bribe specifically in Chapter 10, which stipulates on embezzlement bribery and acts of breach of trust. Other laws govern corruption like the Income Tax Act, which reveal that bribe is not deductible. However, unlike other states, in Sweden, the Legal framework does not distinguish between the public officials and private bribery (Hedwall & König, 2019). Besides, the law also fails to differentiate between foreign and domestic bribery. Corruption is regulated by the Swedish Penal Code, Chapter 10, and Section 5 a-e. Also, other regulations which control, bravery includes the Marketing Act (SFS 2008:486) and the prior mentioned the Swedish Income Tax Act (SFS 1999:1229). Under the Swedish penal code, an individual commits corruption offense when they accept or receive a promise which has an improper benefit for the performance of the employment. Other cases of bribe include receiving, requesting a bribe, accepting a bribe (Chapter 10, section 5a of the Penal Code), trading in influence (section 5d of the Penal Code), and negligent financing of bribery (section 5e of the Penal Code). From these offenses, a fine which is similar to the individual income proportional to the income but limited to a maximum of SEK 150,000 is imposed. Besides, an imprisonment sentence of up to two years may be implanted (Hedwall & König, 2019). For a company, an administrative fine between SEK5, 000, and SEK10 million can be imposed.

Misappropriating company funds and other related crimes in Sweden are criminalized under the Swedish Criminal Code (The Swedish Penal Code- 1962). Besides, Chapter 36, Section 7 of the Swedish Criminal Code states that any crime committed during a company’s business activities is punishable under the legislation, any gross embezzlement, attempted embezzlement, or disloyalty to principal is punishable under Chapter 23. The provisions of Chapter 8, Section 13, concerning restriction of a public prosecutor's right to prosecute shall also apply to crimes as defined in Chapter 10 except gross embezzlement and such disloyalty to a principal which is considered gross

Sources

Hedwall, M. & König, O., 2019. Anti-Corruption in Sweden. Global Compliance News.

Danish Private Sector Legislation

Denmark is among the global states with the least corruption. It possesses some of the strictest anti-corruption legislation. The country also has a well-functioning judicial system that is independent and which supervises the private industry. Besides, the law has zero-tolerance for financial corruption and bribery and is rooted in the cultural norms of Danish people. In the country, fraud and embezzlement are also considered as corruption acts. Therefore, the Danish Criminal Code does not use bribery or corruption; instead, it criminalizes corrupt acts, including bribery. Moreover, bribery is a criminal offense as per the Danish Criminal Code consolidated by Act no. 1156 of 20 September 2018. Under this act, Section 279 falls under crimes against property in Part 28 and criminalizes all act of confirming, creating, and exploiting a mistake to gain an unlawful property for an individual or others resulting in property loss. Further, Section 279a criminalizes data fraud. Moreover, Section 299 (2) of the Criminal Code also criminalizes bribery in the private sector. Under this section, it’s a criminal offense to offer a favor or a gift to a private individual to make the receiver to neglect his/her duties as a trustee. Besides, the act criminalizes the act of an individual in the capacity of a trustee of the property, accepting favor for the benefit of themself or of others. Under the Danish Criminal Code, both passive and active bribery in the private sector is sanctioned by imprisonment of up four years or a fine. Besides, the profit resulting from the bribe may be confiscated.

In Denmark, abuse of functions, embezzlement of funds and illicit enrichment are criminalized under section sections 278 and 280 articles 17, 19, 20 and 22. The domestic misappropriation is provided under article 17 of the Convention against Corruption. It is also notable that the Danish legislation does not separate embezzlement crimes and other breaches of trust committed in the private sector and the public sector (United Nations, 2016). Besides, Article 19 of the Convention against Corruption is implemented through the provision of misuse of office in chapter 20, section 1, PC. This section is used mainly where the offender “seriously abused his position through any misappropriation of funds." Illicit enrichment, which includes organization fund embezzlement, is also criminalized under article 20 of the Convention against Corruption. Section 278 also reveals that an individual who unlawfully spends money entrusted to him, even if he was not under an obligation to keep it separate from his funds, shall be guilty of embezzlement.

Continue your exploration of Possible Claims and Remedies with our related content.