(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
In November, the newspaper Klassekampen revealed that the partially Telenor-owned telecommunications company Vimpelcom had committed bribes by transferring more than 600 million to a radiation company for Uzbekistan's president, Gulnara Karimova, as payment for telecommunications licenses in the country. Telenor controls 43 percent of the company, and Telenor's CEO Jon Fredrik Baksaas sat on Vimpelcom's board from 2010 to December 2014.
On Monday, it became clear that the American authorities can bring charges in the Vimpelcom case already on 20 August – three days after the current Telenor CEO Jon Fredrik Baksaas resigns as head of the company. Because Vimpelcom is listed in the US, the company is subject to US anti-corruption rules. Violations of this law can thus be decided in a US court. Guro Slettemark, Secretary General of Transparency International Norway, believes that the case will have consequences for Telenor – also beyond the purely legal ones. "The legal consequences will be investigated and dealt with by the court in the judicial system. That said, there is no doubt that Telenor's reputation will suffer from this case, "says Slettmark. "In addition, it can have consequences for their future business and the opportunity to get contracts, because they are identified with Vimpelcom as long as they have ownership interests in the company," Slettemark told Ny Tid.
Small risk. On Thursday 11 and Friday 12 June, the Anti-Corruption Conference 2015 will be held in Oslo. This year's main themes are reasons why there is a culture of corruption and bribery in companies that basically have preventive devices to prevent this. According to a survey conducted by Transparency International Norway last year, greed and low risk of being caught are the main reasons why people are involved in corruption.
The conference also highlights the situation in some countries where corruption is widespread and where Norwegian businesses operate, including Angola, Indonesia and Ukraine. Sletemark believes it is important to get acquainted with the corruption situation when establishing business in other countries. “Our message is that you have to be well prepared – especially when working with companies or establishing oneself in places with major corruption challenges,” she emphasizes. "Companies have a responsibility – both legally and morally – to be part of the solution and not part of the problem," she says. She points out that different regulations can be a challenge in terms of drawing clear dividing lines between what can be said to be corruption and not. “There may be different definitions, which is why it is important that Norwegian companies have an active attitude and inform all their partners about the anti-corruption program they operate under, which defines where the limit goes. Of course, this must come in addition to transparency about what payments are made to whom – it is a good 'vaccination', "says Slettemark.
Norway must take responsibility. Norwegian law does not make a difference between corruption in the public and in the private sector. The OECD Convention on which Norwegian law is based sets a framework for bribery of public employees. Known international regulations such as the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) also sanction only bribes by public officials.
Helge Kvamme, partner in the law firm of Selmer, believes that Norway must take more responsibility for countering bribery and corruption in the rest of the world. «Norway has a clear responsibility for participating in a comprehensive international work against bribery and corruption. An important factor is to have a better public debate on the right measures, and the authorities must contribute to the expectations of the measures that operate internationally, ”says Kvamme. "We must increasingly participate in international initiatives aimed at freezing and returning funds to people in the countries where corrupt leaders have stolen and brought significant sums out of the countries – often into tax havens," he continues. He says that there are initiatives both to register legitimate owners of companies used to hide such funds, and to more easily freeze and secure the funds that stem from corruption and bribery. Kvamme has backgrounds from both Eokrim and Kripos, and is currently a Norwegian delegate to the ICC Commission on Corporate Responsibility and Anti-Corruption.
Among the guests attending the 2015 Anti-Corruption Conference is former corruption convicted sales director Richard Bistrong. He comes to tell how he got involved in the payment of bribes, and later convicted and punished with jail.
The conference is a collaboration between Økokrim, Transperency International Norway, the organization PwC and the law firm Selmer. Through the lectures and panel debates, the conference highlights the causes of – and consequences of – corruption.
Helge Kvamme believes that there has been an increase in corruption cases in Norway in recent years. “We know little about the extent of corruption in Norway, and the knowledge is largely based on the cases being investigated. It is possible to give an impression that the scope is increasing, since we have had a number of cases that have resolved each other over the last five to ten years – both in international operations such as Statoil, Unibuss, Yara International, Klaveness and VimpelCom, where Telenor was involved, » says Kvamme. “But most of these cases have been investigated in ways other than the companies themselves reporting the cases. Some research and experience from investigative work indicates that the dark numbers are significant, ”he says. He calls for an improvement in the possibility conditions for corruption notification.
“We lack a system in Norway for companies that are affected by corruption cases to report to the authorities without falling into a criminal case directly. It should be a mitigating circumstance if the cases are uncovered by the companies' own robust anti-corruption programs, and a self-reporting system, which many countries have gradually implemented, should be opened, ”Kvamme concludes.
Corruption
- According to Norwegian law, corruption is giving or offering (active corruption) or demanding, receiving or accepting (passive corruption) a so-called "undue advantage", which is the legislator's term for bribery. This must be done by virtue of the position, position or assignment of those involved in order for it to be defined as corruption.
- Internationally, corruption is often defined as abuse of public position or power for one's own private gain. In accordance with international rules and conventions (such as the OECD Convention), the concept of corruption is also covered by bribes by government employees with profits in the form of business as reuse.
- Norwegian law makes no difference between corruption in the public and private sectors, but the preparations state that it will be less so before corruption in the public sector is considered as serious corruption with a penalty of XNUMX years. The OECD Convention, on which Norwegian law is based, sets a framework for bribery of public employees.
- Known international regulations, such as the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), only sanction bribes by public officials.
carima@nytid.no
