Abstract
As in many countries, corruption is a matter of growing concern in Germany. It is especially corruption in the public service which is perceived as a potential menace for the rule of law and economic prosperity. However, one of the difficulties in dealing with this topic is that the precise meaning of “corruption” is unclear. In German legal language, “corruption” is not a technical term and does not appear in the definitions of the various criminal offences related to this topic. Some commentators suggest a wide understanding that covers any abuse of entrusted power for the sake of a personal advantage.1 In a narrower sense, corruption means a situation where a person (especially an official) makes his conduct (especially a decision) the object of an exchange (especially the offer of some kind of personal advantage) although the rules of the underlying normative system do not permit such a deal.2 It is this narrower sense of corruption, which will be used in this report.
The author wishes to thank Prof. Dr. Lothar Kuhlen for his helpful comments and Tina and Andreas Lach for their advice on the subtleties of the English language.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Cf. R. Zimmerling, Politische Korruption: begrifflich-theoretische Einordnung, in: U. von Alemann (ed.), Dimensionen politischer Korruption, 2005, 79.
For an overall analysis of corruption in Germany see B. Bannenberg, Korruption in Deutschland und ihre strafrechtliche Kontrolle, 2002, 51 et seq.; H.R. Claußen/ H. Ostendorf: Korruption im öffentlichen Dienst, 2nd ed. 2002; H. Fiebig/ H. Junker, Korruption und Untreue im öffentlichen Dienst, 2nd ed. 2004, 49 et seq.
Bundeskriminalamt , Bundeslagebild Korruption 2004, 38, available on 〈http://www.bka.de〉. Figures of the preceding years: 18.3% in 2000; 30% in 2001; 32% in 2002; 34% in 2003.
Ibid., 33. Figures of the preceding years: 20.9% in 2000; 25.4% in 2001; 10.7% in 2002; 18.7% in 2003.
Ibid. Figures of the preceding year: 5.2% in 2002; 10.5% in 2003; not separately listed in the preceding reports.
Ibid. Figures of the preceding years: 17% in 2000; 7.6% in 2001; 6.4% in 2002; 13.6% in 2003.
Ibid., 29. Figures of the preceding years: 46.2% in 2000; 47.4% in 2001; 63.9% in 2002; 54% in 2003.
Ibid. Figures of the preceding years: 8% in 2000; 11% in 2001; 5.9% in 2002; 12.3% in 2003.
Transparency Deutschland, Transparenzmängel, Korruption und Betrug im deutschen Gesundheitswesen, 2005, 4, available on 〈http://www.transpar ency.de/fileadmin/pdfs/intern/AG_Gesundheit/Gesundheitspapier_Version_05.pdf〉.
Bundeskriminalamt , Bundeslagebild Korruption 2004 (note 4), 30. Figures of the preceding years: 16.2% in 2000; 15.5% in 2001; 34.3% in 2002; 18.8% in 2003.
Ibid., 29. Figures of the preceding years: leß than 1% in 2003; no cases in 2000–2002.
Bundeskriminalamt : Bundeslagebild Korruption 2004 (note 4), 29.
Ibid., 36.
Ibid., 29. Figures of the preceding years: 71.7 % in 2000; 74 % in 2001; 79 % in 2002 and 2003.
Ibid. Figures of the preceding years: 17 % in 2000; 14.6 % in 2001; 6.3 % in 2002; 8.3 % in 2003.
H. Ostendorf: Korruption im öffentlichen Dienst, 2nd ed. 2002 Claußen/Ostendorf (note 3), 18.
Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2005, available on 〈http://www.transparency.org/cpi/2005/cpi2005.sources.en.html〉.
This is the lowest figure of the last 10 years; the highest figure was 5,223 offences in the year 2000. Cf. Bundeskriminalamt : Polizeiliche Kriminalstatistik 2004, 213, available on 〈http://www.bka.de〉, and Bundeslagebild Korruption 2004 (note 4), 84.
Ibid. The lowest figure amounted to 1,448 suspects in the year 1994; the highest figure was 4,593 suspects in the year 2000.
Bundeslagebild Korruption 2004 (note 4), 12. The lowest figure amounted to 258 cases in 1994, the highest figure to 1,683 cases in 2002. The “situation report on corruption” (Bundeslagebild Korruption) has been published annually by the Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt) since 1994. It is based on the legal evaluation at the beginning of investigations. By contrast, police criminal statistics are based on the legal evaluation at the end of police investigations, when cases are handed over to the prosecution authorities. This explains why the two statistics come to somewhat different results.
Ibid., 13. The lowest figure was 6,743 offences in 1994; the highest figure was 15,968 offences in 2002.
Statistisches Bundesamt, Fachserie 10 Reihe 3 (Rechtspflege, Strafverfolgung), 2003, 38 et seq. Reports for the preceding years have come to similar results. However, these figures do not include criminal proceedings in the East German Länder because they have not yet established a comprehensive statistical measurement of criminal proceedings. Moreover, the cited statistics do not take into account judgments which are primarily based on other offences (such as fraud etc.), even if a corruption offence has also been committed.
Claußen/Ostendorf (note 3), 17 et seq.
OJ EC 1997, C 195.
P. Kunig, Das Recht des öffentlichen Dienstes, in: E. Schmidt-Aßmann (ed.), Besonderes Verwaltungsrecht, 13th ed. 2005, 735 et seq.
Critical against this „overstretch“ M. Deiters, Die UN-Konvention gegen Korruption — Wegweiser für eine Revision der deutschen Strafvorschriften?, in Alemann (note 2), 432 et seq.
EU-Bestechungsgesetz, Federal Law Gazette II 1998, 2340. This extension does not apply to the offences of granting or accepting an advantage, nor does it apply to advantages for conduct lying in the past.
Sections 46 and 71 Judiciary Act (Richtergesetz). Cf. also Kunig Das Recht des öffentlichen Dienstes, in: E. Schmidt-Aßmann (ed.), Besonderes Verwaltungsrecht, 13th ed. 2005 (note 33), 808 et seq.
Claußen/Ostendorf (note 3), 37 et seq.
Federal Civil Service Act (Bundesbeamtengesetz), sections 65, 66, and Bundesnebentätigkeitsverordnung, section 5. For civil servants of the Länder, see section 42 of the Framework Act on the Law Applicable to Civil Servants (Beamtenrechtsrahmengesetz) and the various Civil Service Acts of the Länder, e.g. sections 83, 84 of the Civil Service Act Baden-Württemberg. Cf. also Das Recht des öffentlichen Dienstes, in: E. Schmidt-Aßmann (ed.), Besonderes Verwaltungsrecht, 13th ed. 2005 Kunig (note 33), 806 et seq.
Informationsfreiheitsgesetz des Bundes of 5th September 2005, Federal Law Gazette I, 2722 et seq. The Länder which have enacted similar laws are Berlin, Schleswig-Holstein, Brandenburg and North Rhine-Westphalia; in Hamburg, a Draft Freedom of Information Act is under discußion. Of course, even under this legislation acceß to files of the public administration remains subject to a number of exceptions. Critical under this aspect M. Kloepfer/K. von Lewinski, DVBl 120 (2005), 1280 et seq.
M. Wiehen, Nationale Strategien zur Bekämpfung der politischen Korruption, 410 et seq., in: Alemann (note 2).
Art. 2 lit. a and 15 of the Convention. For a detailed analysis see A. van Aaken, ZaöRV 65 (2005), 423 et seq.
See, in particular, Decisions of the German Constitutional Court (BVerf-GE), vol. 85, 264 et seq.; A. Römmele, Partei-und Wahlkampfspenden — Erfahrungen aus der BRD und den USA, 384 et seq., in: Alemann (note 2).
Nationale Strategien zur Bekämpfung der politischen Korruption, Wiehen, (note 71), 397 et seq.
Wiehen, (note 71), 416.
Note 68.
Cf. J. Stoye, ZRP 2005, 265 et seq.
Income Tax Act (Einkommenssteuergesetz), section 4 para 5 sentence 1 no. 10. See also Bannenberg (note 3), 26.
R. Thiel, Die Ressourcen der Korruptionsbekämpfung in Deutschland. Dokumentation für Transparency International Deutschland, available on 〈http://www.transparency.de/Schwerpunktstellen_bei_Staatsa.423.0.html〉.
Bannenberg (note 3), 246 et seq.
Wiehen (note 71), 421; Bannenberg (note 3) B. Bannenberg, Korruption in Deutschland und ihre strafrechtliche Kontrolle, 2002, 258 et seq. Less critical Fiebig/ Junker (note 3) B. Bannenberg, Korruption in Deutschland und ihre strafrechtliche Kontrolle, 2002, 160.
See the criticism of B. Bannenberg/W. Schaupensteiner, Korruption in Deutschland, 2004, 212.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften e.V.
About this paper
Cite this paper
von Kielmansegg, S.G. (2006). Legal Means for Eliminating Corruption in the Public Service. In: Riedel, E., Wolfrum, R. (eds) Recent Trends in German and European Constitutional Law. Beiträge zum ausländischen öffentlichen Recht und Völkerrecht, vol 188. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-37720-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-37720-7_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-34667-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-37720-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)