View/save PDF version of this document - La Strada International

Part One. Article 8 83Rolling text (A/AC.254/4/Rev.6)“Article 4 ter“Criminalization of corruption“1. Each State Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as maybe necessary to establish as criminal offences the following conduct, when committedintentionally [and involving an organized criminal group]: 19“(a) The promise, offering 20 or giving to a public official, directly or indirectly,of an undue advantage, for the official himself or another person or entity, in orderthat the official act or refrain from acting in the exercise of his official duties;“(b) The solicitation or acceptance by a public official, directly or indirectly,of an undue advantage, for the official himself or another person or entity, in orderthat the official act or refrain from acting in the exercise of his official duties. 21“[2. Each State Party shall consider adopting such legislative and other measuresas may be necessary to establish as criminal offences conduct referred to in paragraph1 of this article involving a foreign public official or international civil servant.] 22“3. Each State Party shall also take such measures as may be necessary toestablish as criminal offences the participation as an accomplice in an offence establishedin accordance with this article [and conspiracy to commit or criminal associationwith respect to such offence]. 23“4. Each State Party shall consider adopting such legislative and other measuresas may be necessary to establish as criminal offences other forms of corruption,when committed intentionally [and involving an organized criminal group]. 24“5. For the purposes of paragraphs [...] 25 of this article and article 4 quater, apublic official shall be a public official or a person who provides a public service 26as defined in the domestic law and as applied in the criminal law of the State inwhich 27 the person in question performs that function.” 2819As indicated above, some delegations felt that a transnational aspect could be included. Others felt that this mightrestrict the scope of the obligation so as to make it of more limited value in fighting organized crime. At its sixth session,the Ad Hoc Committee agreed that the obligation created in this article was not intended to include the actions of a personwho acted under duress or undue influence.20At the sixth session of the Ad Hoc Committee, the Islamic Republic of Iran noted that, while the terms “promise”and “offer” used in connection with the proposed criminalization were not contrary to the fundamental legal principles ofthe legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, they currently presented difficulties.21At the sixth session of the Ad Hoc Committee, one delegation was of the opinion that in both subparagraphs (a)and (b) the purpose for which a person could offer an undue advantage to a public official should be in order to obtain anundue advantage from the official concerned.22The text of this paragraph was submitted by Belgium at the sixth session of the Ad Hoc Committee as a compromiseproposal. The question of whether the paragraph would be retained might depend on the decision of the Ad HocCommittee on the possible separate international instrument on corruption. Several delegations insisted on the deletion ofthis paragraph.23At the sixth session of the Ad Hoc Committee, it was decided to postpone discussion of this paragraph until thefinalization of article 3 of the convention.24At its sixth session, the Ad Hoc Committee deferred discussion of this paragraph until such time as it had reacheda decision on the possible separate instrument on corruption.25Paragraph(s) pertaining to the criminalization of certain conduct involving domestic public officials.26The concept of a person who provides a public service applies to particular legal systems and insertion of this conceptin the definition is intended to facilitate cooperation between parties with that concept in their legal system.27One delegation expressed a preference for the words “for which” instead of the words “in which”.28At the sixth session of the Ad Hoc Committee, Colombia proposed the following formulation for this article in orderto take into account concerns expressed about the clarity of the text: “For the purpose of paragraph [...] of this article, apublic official shall be a person who provides a public service or performs a public function as defined in the domestic lawof the State in which the person in question provides that service or performs that function.”