Настоящая статья посвящена чрезвычайно важной и актуальной проблеме — борьбе против коррупции на морском транспорте. Морская антикоррупционная сеть (MACN) как коллективный механизм этой борьбы находится в центре внимания. MACN собирает информацию о коррупции в морской индустрии, анализирует ее, а также организует коллективные действия против коррупции. Особенное внимание автор уделяет ситуации в портах Нигерии и проходу торговых судов Суэцким каналом. В завершение публикации приводятся 7 антикоррупционных принципов.
Seafarers and those working in maritime business operations continue to face demands for payments, goods or favours to earn’ out business-as-usual operations. These demands are unethical and illegal, and they endanger the men and women on board our vessels. But we know that if we work together — and involve a range of stakeholders around the world — we can reduce and eliminate these demands.
The private sector has a critical role to play in combatting corruption. Companies recognise that there is a pressing need to take a firm stance against corruption. However, it has become clear that only by working collectively will the private sector be able to bring about the systemic changes in the operating environment that are required to eliminate corruption.
This is particularly true in the global maritime industry, where corruption occurs as a result of the interplay of a multitude of public and private-sector stakeholders. That is the mandate of the Maritime Anti-Corruption Network (MACN). Collectively, MACN can have a game-changing effect on corruption and bribery around the world.
The Maritime Anti-Corruption Network (MACN)
MACN is a global business network working towards a goal of a maritime industry free of corruption that enables fair trade to the benefit of society at large. Established in 2011, MACN comprises vessel-owning companies, ship managers, cargo owners and service providers from all the main sectors of the maritime industry.
MACN and its members work towards the elimination of all forms of maritime corruption by:
• Raising awareness of the challenges faced
• Implementing the seven MACN Anti-Corruption Principles (see box)
• Developing and sharing best practices
• Collaborating with government and non-governmental organisations
• Working with civil society to identify and mitigate the root causes of corruption
• Creating a culture of integrity within the maritime community.
Fighting corruption through collective action
MACN seeks to improve the operating environment by encouraging and enabling collective action. With nearly 100 member companies, representing a substantial percentage of global tonnage, the network wields considerable commercial influence in the fight against corruption and bribery.
For change to occur, kev maritime sector stakeholders need to be involved in both assessing the challenges and devising the solutions. This collective approach also stresses the importance of transparency throughout. Stakeholder inclusiveness, local ownership and transparency are fundamental to the collective action approach taken by MACN.
Through our collective actions, we have:
• Inspired and delivered increased participation in the Suez Canal ‘Say No’ campaign
• Developed a new regulatory framework for the dry-bulk vessel clearance process in Argentina, training over 400 stakeholders and providing open-sourced guidance to support implementation Enhanced container tracking in Indonesia Delivered ethics training for close to 600 government officials in Nigeria.
The importance of data
The information MACN collects on corruption and bribery plays a key role in its collective action projects, providing industry expertise in identifying the highly specific drivers of corruption in individual ports or countries.
For example, MACN’s ‘Say No’ Sue/, campaign assessed the impact of the campaign by surveying members and collecting incident data. The situation has improved every year, and feedback in 2017 shows that companies taking part in the campaign are transiting Suez without any delays. Demands for cigarettes have decreased dramatically, or have been eliminated, while threats to the safety of both crcw and vessel have also decreased significantly.
In Nigeria, MACN’s root cause analysis of the Nigerian port sector showed that it typically takes over 140 signatures to get a vessel and cargo cleared by the local authorities, with port officials having wide discretionary powers over the speed of this process. These challenges lead to an unpredictable operating environment for the private sector, and it means costly business disruptions and delays.
How you can help: incident reporting
MACN’s anonymous incident reporting system enables shipping companies and seafarers to submit reports about corrupt demands they have faced during port operations. These anonymous incident reports provide MACN with a strong platform to better understand the challenges and to engage with stakeholders, including governments, on shared solutions. It also allows MACN members to learn from each other about ways of avoiding similar incidents in their own operations. The use of this reporting platform has significantly increased over the years. To date, MACN lias collected more than 19,000 reports of corrupt demands globally.
MACN uses this data to analyse trends in frequency of incidents, allowing MACN to target collective action efforts and engage with governments. It has been a highly effective way to facilitate a constructive dialogue in meetings with governments and other stakeholders. Reporting is anonymous and non-attributable: It is not possible to identify who has submitted a report, and the report does not include details that would identify specific dates, ships, or individuals.
MACN invites both members and non-members, seafarers and companies, to share details of corrupt demands or threats. Even- report helps the overall fight against corruption.
Those wishing to share anonymous data on incidents can use the following link:
Seven anti-corruption principles
Compliance programme requirements
Members should create and maintain an anti-corruption compliance programme that reflects and is designed to address the risks pertinent to the company’s business.
Senior management and/or the Board of each Member should give explicit and visible support to the anti-corruption compliance programme. Members should confer responsibility for the anti¬corruption compliance programme on trustworthy officers who are sufficiently independent and empowered to fully implement the programme.
Members should have clearly articulated policies and procedures that comply in full with applicable laws and, as a minimum, prohibit all forms of corruption and give specific guidance on facilitation payments with the ultimate aim of their elimination.
The policies and procedures should be proportionate to the risks faced by the various parts of each Member, as well as the nature, scale and complexity of the organisation’s activities, and should apply to all employees and to third parties that act on behalf of the Member.
Members should assess external and internal corruption risks on a regular basis and document their findings.
Training and communications
Awareness of policies and procedures should be reinforced through communications and training to employees and, where appropriate, third parties. A record should be kept of all training provided.
Monitoring and internal controls
The anti-corruption compliance programme should include features designed to prevent and detect incidents of bribery, facilitation payments and other forms of corruption through appropriate monitoring and auditing protocols.
Internal controls should be implemented to protect the integrity of financial and accounting procedures such that the company keeps fair and accurate books, records and accounts.
The programme itself should be audited regularly and improved or updated as necessary.
Reporting, discipline and incentives
Members should provide employees with access to methods for asking questions and/or reporting concerns. Those asking questions or reporting concerns in good faith should be able to do so without fear of retribution.
Members should investigate credible reports of improper behaviour and should implement appropriate corrective actions when necessary.
Compliance with the anti-corruption compliance programme should be encouraged through incentives for proper behaviour and, where necessary and appropriate, enforced through discipline for improper behaviour.
Members should conduct risk-based due diligence on counterparties as well as in respect of the hiring and oversight of third parties and business partners. The due diligence should include an anti-bribery commitment from third parties.
Автор: Graeme Somerville-Ryan
Источник: Seaways. — 2018. — October. — P. 22 — 23.