A Principled Approach
Edited by Tina Søreide and Abiola Makinwa
Chapter 11: What counts as a good settlement?
This chapter discusses the criteria that ought to be used to evaluate negotiated solutions in transnational bribery cases and the rules that govern them. The premise is that the rules that govern negotiated resolutions should, at the very least, conform to the principles set out in the United Nations Convention against Corruption. The UN Convention suggests that the objectives of anti-corruption initiatives include effectiveness, efficiency, and due process, with condemnation, compensation, and prevention as subsidiary objectives. In addition, the anti-bribery regime generally should allocate power and resources legitimately and fairly. Both the rules which govern negotiated resolutions and the resolutions themselves ought to be evaluated in terms of the extent to which they achieve all of these objectives. However, the range of ways of defining and weighting these objectives, combined with the difficulty of assessing the harm associated with any given instance of misconduct, makes it unlikely that there will be any consensus about how to evaluate any given resolution or resolution process.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.