List of anti Corruption Laws in India

However, under the Securities Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations 2015, listed companies are required to disclose in a prescribed manner fraud and default committed by the company or its promoter, its principal officers, directors or employees. The Prevention of Corruption Act (Prevention of Corruption Act) 1988 is the main law to punish bribery and corruption in India. It specifies the acts constituting criminal offences and provides for the criminal prosecution of such offences. Offences under the Capital Protection Act are also predicate offences under the Money Laundering Prevention Act 2002 (PMLA). A committee headed by the chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has been set up to explore ways to strengthen laws to curb the production of black money in India, its illegal transfer abroad and its collection. “The Committee shall examine the existing legal and administrative framework to address the threat posed by the illicit production of currency, including, inter alia: 1. Declaration of illegally created property as national property; 2. Enact/amend laws on confiscation and confiscation of such assets; and 3. It provides for an exemplary punishment of its perpetrators. (Source: EY Report on Bribery and Corruption 2013) Given that internal investigations conducted by companies have no legal basis and are voluntary, challenges include the lack of a guidance framework, the lack of consistent fact-finding and evidence-gathering methods, and the inability to compel participation in such internal investigations. In addition, the admissibility and probative value of the results of these internal investigations currently remain a grey area. In addition, in cross-border investigations against Indian subsidiaries of international groups, cooperation between different interest groups is minimal and there are sometimes differences in the perception of corruption problems between the parent company and its subsidiary.

The problems caused by corruption in state-funded projects are not limited to the state of Uttar Pradesh. The World Bank study reveals that public distribution programmes and social spending contracts have proved useless due to corruption. [23] Professional communication between a lawyer and a client is considered privileged and protected by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Evidence Act), the Advocates Act, 1961 (Advocates Act) and the Bar Council of India Rules (BCI Rules). Professional communication is any communication during or for the purpose of hiring or employing an attorney or in anticipation of litigation, the content of a document shared with the attorney and/or any advice given by the attorney. According to the Evidence Act, professional communication between a lawyer and a client is not considered protected: the causes of corruption in India include excessive regulations, complicated tax and licensing systems, many ministries with opaque bureaucracy and discretionary powers, the monopoly of state-controlled institutions on certain goods and services, and the absence of transparent laws and processes. [12] [13] There are significant differences in the level of corruption and in the government`s efforts to reduce corruption in India. India`s regulatory framework is analysed taking into account the above-mentioned corruption issues and the mechanism to combat these problems. Technological advances have led to the creation of new and innovative mechanisms to combat bribery and, more recently, the Government has taken concrete steps to combat bribery and corruption. The publication of the “Citizens` Charter for the Fight against Corruption” and the launch of the VIGEYEs project by CVC are remarkable steps in the mobilization of citizens and civil societies in the fight against corruption. As before, the scope of anti-corruption laws is limited to the private and public sectors in India and has no extraterritorial jurisdiction over cases of illegal gratuity and payments to foreign officials or persons employed by public international organizations.

In addition to tax rates and regulatory burdens, the KPMG report claims that corruption is due to opaque processes and red tape on the part of the government. A lack of transparency leaves room for both consumers and providers of corruption. Whenever objective standards and transparent processes are lacking, and opinion-driven subjective regulators and opaque/hidden processes are in place, the conditions are ripe for corruption. [12] [92] The central government has not yet imposed guidelines to facilitate business organizations` compliance with existing anti-corruption laws. Therefore, commercial organisations currently generally follow the FCPA, the UK Bribery Act, 2010 and the UK Guidance Note. The UK Guidelines essentially recognise the following general principles as an appropriate anti-corruption mechanism: In recent years, the approach to the enforcement of anti-corruption laws has changed considerably. One of the driving forces behind this change has been increased public attention to the issue of corruption in government, coupled with an active role for the judiciary in the fight against corruption. This anti-corruption movement was triggered by the revelation of several cases of large-scale corruption by influential ministers and bureaucrats within the government apparatus.

Recently, cases of financial fraud by established giants and millionaire businessmen have also come to light. This has led to a huge public outcry over the impact of corruption on the Indian economy and its citizens. In a separate study, Dev Kar of Global Financial Integrity concludes: “Media reports circulating in India that Indian nationals hold an estimated $1.4 trillion in illicit foreign assets fall far short of his study`s estimates. Kar says the amounts are significantly lower, only about 1.5 percent of India`s GDP on average per year, between 1948 and 2008. These include corruption, bribery and bribery, criminal activities, improper prices, and efforts to protect the wealth of Indians from Indian tax authorities. [46] “The Prevention of Corruption Act is the main legislation in India that provides for sanctions for bribery by officials and also for those involved in complicity in an act of corruption.” There is a trend towards greater vigilance in certain sectors, particularly in the financial and real estate sectors, where opportunities for corruption may be greater. The registration of cases, investigations and prosecutions of leaders of organizations accused of bribing officials by imposing enforcement agents have become very common. In recent years, the Law Enforcement Directorate (which investigates money-laundering offences) has become very active, often seizing proceeds of crime or equivalent assets. Management has focused not only on the sanction, which takes place at a much later date, but also on the confiscation of the proceeds. Compliance with bribery and corruption – and mitigating the associated risks – remain among the biggest challenges facing businesses, both in their domestic markets and abroad. Globally, we are seeing more and more countries adopting new, more sophisticated anti-corruption laws, as well as aggressive enforcement by government regulators.

Law enforcement agencies in various countries are also increasingly cooperating in the fight against corruption. In addition, more and more countries are introducing individual criminal liability for corruption offences. The Companies Act 2013 contains certain provisions to regulate corporate fraud, including increased penalties for fraud, increased powers for the Serious Fraud Investigation Bureau, mandatory auditor liability to detect fraud, and expanded responsibilities for independent directors. [79] The Companies Act 2013 also provides mandatory due diligence mechanisms for directors and staff to report concerns, as well as whistleblower protections for any listed company and any other company that accepts deposits from the public or has borrowed more than Rs 50 crore from banks and financial institutions.