Belize’s illicit enrichment laws need upgrading

BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Belize’s illicit enrichment laws need upgrading

Last year, the Belize Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCCI), the National Trade Union Congress of Belize (NTUCB), and the Belize Network of Non-governmental Organizations (BNN) all formed what has since been dubbed “The Social Partners of Belize” (SPoB). In the preamble of the SPoB declaration, the partners wrote:

“Recognizing that for approximately two decades, successive government administrations have failed to institute the necessary reforms that would guarantee oversight institutions their true independence, which is defined as institutions that are adequately resourced and insulated from the control of the Executive Branch.” The preamble would go on to state: “Recalling that the oversight institutions referenced above include, but are not limited to, the Integrity Commission, …Office of the Contractor General, … the Public Accounts Committee… and the Judiciary”.

It ought not to surprise that the declaration named the “Integrity Commission” (“the Commission”) first in that list. The Commission—established under the Prevention of Corruption Act (POCA)—is arguably the first “rung” in the anti-corruption ladder, as it serves as the proverbial gatekeeper of Belize’s Asset Disclosure System (ADS) that is designed to preclude illicit enrichment in public life. It’s no secret. Many times, in countries all around the world, persons in public life and public servants with decision-making powers are found to have come into wealth that can neither be reasonably explained by the size of their public-sector remunerations nor by their legitimate private-life economic activities.

However, to catch such persons with their hands in the so-called “cookie jar”, a set of baseline data that looks at their incomes, assets, liabilities, and the like must be established at the very beginning of their term in public life, with regular checks while they continue as a public servant. This is done so as to enable the ADS to identify when a public official manifests unexplained jumps in wealth; thereby, serving as the first signal that an investigation for graft may be warranted.

Naturally, the attentive citizen will ask: “Is that ADS working as it should?” To answer that question, it becomes useful to analyze Belize’s ADS alongside the international benchmarks and principles that should inform such a system. A recent review conducted by the BCCI, found that if you were to grade Belize’s ADS on a scale of 10 to 30—with the latter implying that the ADS is fully aligned with those international benchmarks—it would score closer to 18.5 out of 30. As a percentage, that’d be closer to 62%—a “C” average if you translate that to a type of school grading system.

The BCCI’s review document states: “The midpoint (Cutoff) … is 65%; therefore, a score below this percentage could be deemed ‘deficient alignment’. Scores between 65% and 75% could be treated as ‘weak alignment’, and 75% to 85% is ‘moderate alignment’. Above 85% could be considered ‘satisfactory alignment’ with international standards.”

Why the low score?

The next question would naturally be this: “Why has the POCA received such a low score?” The BCCI’s review, employing a Content Analysis methodology, compared Belize’s ADS laws to the ten-point guiding principles articulated by leading anti-corruption organizations such as Transparency International (TI).

While we will dive into these principles in more detail over the next few weeks, the ten principles state that a proper ADS system needs (i) strong “Legal Basis”; (ii) detailed requirements as it pertains to “Declarations”; (iii) wide coverage of public-sector decision makers; (iv) a clear independent process for submitting timely declarations; (v) a strong verification mechanism to ensure the accuracy of public officials’ declarations; (vi) an independent “Oversight Body”; (vii) Cooperation across private and public-sector entities; (viii) public accessibility to information, especially via online means; (ix) heavy sanctions to deter graft; and (x) a role for civil-society oversight and involvement.

As shown in the accompanying image, the POCA’s lowest scores are found in areas such as “Coverage of Officials”, proper “Oversight”, and limited “public access”. We will explore these aspects of the POCA and Belize’s ADS in this month’s Business Perspective columns.