Integritetsutfordringer i militære operasjoner

Transparency International sin Government Defence Index er publisert. Norge scorer godt på
en rekke områder, men har også utfordringer å ta tak i.

Norway, 2015, Country Summary

Norway’s GI ranking in Band B places it in the low category for corruption in the defence and
security sector. Norway scored higher for Political and Personnel, which score in Band A
(very low risk of corruption). The highest risk area is Operations, which fell in Band D (high
risk of corruption).

Enhancing Integrity of Procurement
With a robust system of parliamentary oversight over the defence sector supported by
capable audit institutions, Norway makes a large amount of information of defence budget
and policies available for public scrutiny. Norway is also home to the Centre of Integrity in
the Defence Sector, which provides expertise on anti-corruption to the Norwegian and
partner armed forces through the NATO Building Integrity programme. The Norwegian
defence sector could build on this anti-corruption expertise by ensuring that offset contract
regulation seeks to minimise corruption risks. We recommend that procurement procedures
restrict the incidence of single-source — and therefore non-competitive tender procedures —
as well as nudge companies bidding for defence contracts towards adopting comprehensive
compliance and anti-corruption programmes.

Approach to Anti-corruption
Since the Action Plan on Attitudes, Ethics and Leadership expired in 2012, the Norwegian
MOD has guided its departments to adopt anti-corruption training and standards into their
routine management practices. This appears to be a promising approach and will make
anticorruption activities a part of everyday operations. We encourage the MOD to keep
promoting, monitoring, and reporting on these developments in order to ensure that they
are successful. It would also be beneficial to institutionalise regular corruption risk
assessments to ensure solutions put in place address the most important issues.

Building Integrity in Military Operations
Norway’s experience in Afghanistan has brought recognition that corruption is an important
variable affecting the stability and good governance in international operations. However,
this recognition has yet to yield a detailed anti-corruption doctrine for operations. While
there appears to be some anti-corruption training for commanders and some guidance on
contracting is in place, it is not clear if either are tailored to operational challenges, such as
contracting in complex environments. Specialist corruption monitors are also not deployed
in operations. Norway could build on its experience in Afghanistan and specialist expertise
within CIDS to ensure that anti-corruption guidance becomes part of pre-deployment
guidance and training. Not only would this benefit Norwegian armed forces, it would help
enhance NATO’s institutionalisation of recent anti-corruption experience. Given its
leadership role within the Building Integrity programme, Norway is well placed to assist the
Alliance on this issue.

Reducing Procurement Risks in Offset Contracts and Subcontractors
While there is no evidence of corruption within offset arrangements, it appears that offset
contracts regulations do not impose due diligence and/or audit requirements that would
help prevent corruption risks or foster good practice. However, the Norwegian government
has made known its intention to address the issue of offsets in a new White Paper,
forthcoming in late 2015. We welcome this development and the opportunity of introducing
more robust regulations.

Norway requires that companies bidding for defence contracts show that they have not
been convicted of corrupt practices. The government could build on this to ensure that
companies bidding for defence work have anti-corruption programmes in place and that this
requirement trickles down the supply chain to subcontractors.