The relevance of moral arguments against foreign bribery

Abstract

The preamble to the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions (OECD Convention) states that ‘bribery is a widespread phenomenon in international business transactions, including trade and investment, which raises serious moral and political concerns, undermines good governance and economic development, and distorts international competitive conditions.’ While the OECD Convention identifies several justifications for the anti-corruption standards it imposes, in the context in which it was adopted and is executed, the economic and competitive ramifications of bribery of foreign officials are those that are usually emphasized. This article draws on the example of Israel to argue that the moral aspects of bribery abroad should not be abandoned in the discussion. The article argues that the notion of universality, and, in particular, the internalization of the notion that conduct that is wrong ‘at home’ is also wrong abroad is key in facilitating successful domestic implementation of transnational anti-bribery laws. Efforts should be made towards mobilizing public opinion within member states in order to eradicate the perception that this is ‘how things are done’ in the foreign country, and the general obliviousness towards acts committed abroad. The article argues that instrumental, deterrence-based arguments may not suffice to change public tolerance towards foreign bribery, and that substantive change is likely to be achieved when the prohibited conduct is genuinely perceived as wrong, both by those responsible for enforcing the law and by society in general. It argues that awareness-raising efforts should also be geared towards development of a normative commitment to the prohibition on foreign bribery.