Advertisement

Information Availability and Security in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Investigations

  • Tetyana LoskutovaEmail author
  • Rivaj Parbhu
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 973)

Abstract

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) deals with businesses found guilty of bribing foreign officials. The increasing number of cases and high financial penalties present a growing concern for businesses operating or planning to start operating abroad. The ratings of Transparency International offer an indicator of corruption in countries; however, the analysis shows that this indicator is not correlated with the occurrence of FCPA cases in a particular country. This article proposes that the level of availability and security of information is more important in predicting and potentially preventing the need for FCPA investigations. Using the data of cases filed in 2016–2017, the article discusses how the factors of information availability and security influence the likelihood of FCPA investigation in a country. The article contributes to empirical studies on corruption by focusing on fact-based data on corruption as opposed to perception-based data and shows that these two sets of data do not correlate. The positive correlation between the availability of information and the number of FCPA cases especially in the countries with low GDP suggests that companies can leverage from the availability of information to take action against bribery before it is investigated.

Keywords

Bribery Information FCPA 

References

  1. 1.
    Yockey, J.: Solicitation, extortion, and the FCPA. Notre Dame L. Rev. 87, 781–840 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stevenson, D., Wagoner, N.: FCPA sanctions: too big to debar. Fordham Law Rev. 80, 775–820 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koehler, M.: Foreign corrupt practices act ripples. Am. Univ. Bus. Law Rev. 3, 291–350 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Estrin, S., Prevezer, M.: The role of informal institutions in corporate governance: Brazil, Russia, India, and China compared. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 28, 41–67 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Srivastava, S., Teo, T., Devaraj, S.: You can’t bribe a computer: dealing with the societal challenge of corruption through ICT. MIS Q. 40, 511–526 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mashali, B.: Analyzing the relationship between perceived grand corruption and petty corruption in developing countries: case study of Iran. Int. Rev. Admin. Sci. 78, 775–787 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Agrawal, C.: Right to information: a tool for combating corruption in India. J. Manag. Publ. Policy 3, 26–38 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zaman, G., Ionescu, L.: Fighting corruption generated by accounting. Case study Romania. Econ. Comput. Econ. Cybern. Stud. Res. 50, 247–261 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Costa, S.: Do freedom of information laws decrease corruption? J. Law Econ. Organ. 29, 1317–1343 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lio, M.-C., Liu, M.-C., Ou, Y.-P.: Can the internet reduce corruption? A cross-country study based on dynamic panel data models. Gov. Inf. Q. 28, 47–53 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vadlamannati, K., Cooray, A.: Transparency pays? Evaluating the effects of the freedom of information laws on perceived government corruption. J. Dev. Stud. 53, 116–137 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Okello-Obura, C.: Effective records and information management as a catalyst for fighting corruption. Inf. Dev. 29, 114–122 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Escaleras, M., Lin, S., Register, C.: Freedom of information acts and public sector corruption. Publ. Choice 145, 435–460 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Serra, D.: Empirical determinants of corruption: a sensitivity analysis. Publ. Choice 126, 225–256 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gonzalez, A., Lopez-Cordova, J., Valladares, E.: The incidence of graft on developing-country firms. World Bank (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lauth, H.-J.: Informal institutions and democracy. Democratization 7, 21–50 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matthiolius, E.: Measuring transparency. Towards a new model of corruption research. MaRBLe 4, 143–160 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rothschild, J., Miethe, T.: Whistle-blower disclosures and management retaliation: the battle to control information about organization corruption. Work Occup. 26, 107–128 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Relly, J.: Corruption, secrecy, and access-to-information legislation in Africa: a cross-national study of political institutions. In: Maret, S. (ed.) Government Secrecy, pp. 325–352. Emerald Group Publishing Limited (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Relly, J.: Examining a model of vertical accountability: a cross-national study of the influence of information access on the control of corruption. Gov. Inf. Quart. 29, 335–345 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rucht, D.: Movement allies, adversaries, and third parties. In: Snow, D.A., Soule, S.A., Kriesi, H. (eds.) The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, pp. 116–152. Blackwell Publishing, Maiden, MAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Britz, J., Hoffmann, A., Ponelis, S., Zimmer, M., Lor, P.: On considering the application of Amartya Sen’s capability approach to an information-based rights framework. Inf. Dev. 29, 106–113 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Centre for Law and Democracy. Global right to information rating map. http://www.rti-rating.org/. Accessed 18 Mar 2018
  24. 24.
    Transparency International: G20 position paper: open data and corruption (2017). https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/g20_position_paper_open_data_and_corruption_2017
  25. 25.
    Shearman and Sterling, LLP: FCPA digest. Recent trends and patterns in the enforcement of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Central Intelligence Agency, Washington, DC (2018)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Loskutova, T.: CorruptionCasesStats. In: DAUtilities. https://github.com/tetyanaloskutova/DAUtilites/blob/master/CorruptionCasesStats.ipynb. Accessed 8 July 2018
  27. 27.
    Central Intelligence Agency: Country comparison: Distribution of family income - Gini index. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172rank.html. Accessed 18 Mar 2018
  28. 28.
    Transparency International: Corruption perceptions index 2017. https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017. Accessed 18 Mar 2018
  29. 29.
    World Bank: GDP current (US$). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD. Accessed 18 Mar 2018
  30. 30.
    World Bank: Doing business project. https://datamarket.com/data/set/5kcv/extent-of-corporate-transparency-index-0-9. Accessed 18 Mar 2018
  31. 31.
    Gemalto: 2016 Mining for database gold, Washington, DC (2017). https://www6.gemalto.com/breach-level-index-report-full-2016-press-release
  32. 32.
    Centre for Law and Democracy: Global right to information rating. http://www.rti-rating.org/historical/. Accessed 18 Mar 2018
  33. 33.
    Webb, M.: Disciplining the everyday state and society? Anti-corruption and right to information activism in Delhi. Contrib. Indian Sociol. 47, 363–393 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Safa, N., Von Solms, R.: An information security knowledge sharing model in organizations. Comput. Hum. Behav. 57, 442–451 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Reilly, P.: Incentivizing corporate America to eradicate transnational bribery worldwide: federal transparency and voluntary disclosure under the foreign corrupt practices act. Fla Law Rev. 67, 1683–1733 (2015)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mahmood, R.: Can information and communication technology help reduce corruption? How so and why not: two case studies from South Asia. Perspect. Glob. Dev. Technol. 3, 347–373 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    DiRienzo, C., Das, J., Cort, K., Burbridge, J.: Corruption and the role of information. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 38, 320–332 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Control RisksJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations