UN Guide for Anti-Corruption Policies - United Nations Office on ...

as statutes creating anti-corruption authorities or establishing criminal
offences and punishments. Delegated authorities are then called upon, in the
context of each institution, to consider how best to implement re<strong>for</strong>ms in each
institution, to create the necessary rules and, periodically, to review and
amend them.
In many cases, the problem will be to obtain the necessary degree of
understanding, support and commitment <strong>for</strong> the re<strong>for</strong>ms on the part of those
who work in the institutions and the outsiders with whom they deal. Legislative
anti-corruption re<strong>for</strong>ms must be accompanied by campaigns to train and
educate workers about the nature of corruption, the harm it causes and need
<strong>for</strong> re<strong>for</strong>m, as well as the mechanics of the re<strong>for</strong>ms being proposed. Since
those who profit from corruption lack positive incentives to change their
behaviour, elements of surveillance and deterrence will also usually be
needed.
It will also be important to ensure that any restructuring is kept as simple and
straight<strong>for</strong>ward as possible. Overly complex structures tend to create further
opportunities <strong>for</strong> corruption. Complexity also makes new procedures more
difficult to learn and may provoke resistance from officials who see them as an
obstacle to the per<strong>for</strong>mance of their duties. Re<strong>for</strong>ming institutional cultures
also requires time as those accustomed to the old values come to understand
and adopt new ones.
Re<strong>for</strong>m programmes must seek to accomplish change as quickly as possible,
and incorporate as many incentives <strong>for</strong> change as possible. Nevertheless,
objectives and expectations must be reasonable. The pace of change should
not be <strong>for</strong>ced to the point where it triggers a backlash. Where anti-corruption
re<strong>for</strong>ms are developed in reaction to high-profile corruption, scandals or other
major public events that generate political pressure to act quickly, a moderate
pace of re<strong>for</strong>m may conflict with political agendas.
C. Judicial Institutions
The re<strong>for</strong>m or rebuilding of judicial institutions is often identified as a major
priority in anti-corruption strategies because the courts play a critical role in
ensuring that other elements are effective. Judicial independence is identified
as a necessary condition <strong>for</strong> the effective rule of law. Commonly judicial
independence is understood to require independence from undue influence by
non-judicial elements of government or the state, but in practice, judicial
independence requires the insulation of judicial affairs from all extrinsic
influences. The process of interpreting law and resolving disputes be<strong>for</strong>e the
courts involves a carefully structured process in which evidence is screened
<strong>for</strong> reliability and probative value and presented in a <strong>for</strong>um in which it can be
tested through such means as the cross-examination of witnesses, and in
which it can be used in support of transparent legal arguments from all parties
with an interest in the issue or dispute. This ensures basic diligence, quality
and consistency in judicial decision-making, and inspires public confidence in
the outcomes.
48