Corporate fraud and corruption are on the rise in the United Kingdom (UK). In a devastating article, Oliver Bullough proved that the UK is fast becoming the money laundering capital of the world. In addition, the most recent Guardian article “If you think the UK is not corrupt, you haven’t looked enough” by George Monbiot pointed out that billions of pounds of COVID-19 contracts issued by the government without competition would have cost taxpayers £ 800 for each protective suit delivered, and appear to have been issued to dormant companies, several of which benefited from this largesse are closely linked to senior government officials.

According to the Sunday Times, corruption in Britain was on the rise while David Cameron was in power, allowing specific people without the proper qualifications or experience to gain privileged access to senior officials as a means of lobbying for get money from the best stock options. . It has been reported that the number has since doubled with Boris Johnson in power, particularly in the wake of this pandemic. The UK’s National Audit Office revealed last November that Johnson’s government had awarded £ 10.5 billion in pandemic-related contracts without a tendering process, and that companies with the right political connections were ten times more likely to win them. How many other corporate frauds are hidden from the public? Read more about the situation in the UK in the answers to the following questions:

• To what extent are boards of directors and senior executives in the UK taking proactive steps to reduce instances of fraud and corruption within their companies?
• Have there been any significant legal and regulatory developments regarding corporate fraud and bribery in the UK over the past 12-18 months?
• When suspicions of fraud or corruption arise within a business, what steps should be taken to assess and resolve the potential problem?
• Do you think companies pay enough attention to employee awareness, for example training staff to identify and report potential fraud and misconduct?
• How has the renewed focus on encouraging and protecting whistleblowers change the way businesses manage and respond to reports of potential wrongdoing?
• and much more…

Q. To what extent are boards of directors and senior managers in your region taking proactive steps to reduce instances of fraud and corruption within their companies?

Anjum: Business leaders in the UK recognize that being proactive against fraud and corruption is not only about protecting the business – which is essential – but it is also a key part of growth and connection to more opportunities. According to the World Bank, businesses grow on average 3% faster where corruption is low. One way for organizations to demonstrate their commitment to preventing bribery and corruption is to commit to ISO 37001 certification. We expect more UK companies to seek certification and we are working towards certification. expect this trend to intensify as organizations seek to differentiate themselves from their competition.

Q. Have there been any significant legal and regulatory developments regarding corporate fraud and bribery in the UK?

Anjum: Perhaps the greatest development, by extension, has been the official start of the Brexit process and its potential impact on how the region continues to enforce and regulate corruption. While the UK has so far had a strong track record in combating fraud, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) recently warned that corporate pressure to weaken bribery laws , coupled with the government’s inability to focus on non-Brexit issues, have increased the risks of increased bribery and corruption. Civil society group Corruption Watch has made similar complaints and noted with concern new regulations that allow companies to resolve investigations with just a fine and an apology. The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is responsible for controlling this volatile landscape, while it has just appointed an interim director, pending the appointment of a new permanent director.

Q. When suspicions of fraud or corruption arise within a business, what steps should be taken to assess and resolve the potential problem?

Anjum: Any allegation of fraud, including bribery and other forms of corruption, is very serious and requires expert treatment. Only those trained in investigative techniques, including thorny issues such as gathering evidence and hearing witnesses and suspects, should be engaged to help establish the facts of the case. To be clear, not all suspicion leads to fraud – trained investigators understand this and will approach any allegation from an objective and factual perspective. One key thing to remember is that companies don’t have the option to “redo” if they mess up a survey.

Q. Do you think companies pay enough attention to employee awareness, for example training staff to identify and report potential fraud and misconduct?

Anjum: We can clearly see that the awareness of fraud and corruption is moving in the right direction among business leaders and their employees. This is evident when companies engage in certification courses such as ISO 37001, which certifies that an organization has implemented reasonable and proportionate measures to prevent corruption.

Q. How has the renewed focus on encouraging and protecting whistleblowers change the way businesses manage and respond to reports of potential wrongdoing?

Anjum: In the UK, the focus is on encouraging and protecting business whistleblowers, as statistics show fraud is most often discovered through whistleblowers. Employees are truly the first line of defense against corruption. This change in approach and attitude, however, revealed two issues that require special attention. First, the worker must understand what constitutes fraudulent behavior – if not, how will he know what to report? This is where a training protocol like ISO 37001 comes in, with a program to help educate a company’s staff about the red flags of fraud and how to identify it. Second, employees need to know how to report fraud. A hotline or other reporting system is useless if the company doesn’t communicate properly how to hire it – or it exists at all.

Q. Can you describe the main fraud and corruption risks that can arise from relationships with third parties? In your opinion, do companies pay enough attention to due diligence when starting a new business relationship?

Anjum: Many business leaders have learned the hard way that new partnerships require more than handshakes, optimism, and a basic level of fact-checking. To be protected, an organization must engage a due diligence firm before undertaking any merger, acquisition, partnership or other engagement with a third party. Some of the risks of inadequate due diligence include merging with an international company involved in several backstage legal battles, finding out that your new partner is a credit risk, has filed for bankruptcy, or is facing debtor statements, learning that your new overseas entrepreneur has none of the industry experience they claim, affiliate with a conflict-of-interest partner and, worse yet, see your own organization’s reputation damaged or destroyed by the actions of a third party.

Q. What advice can you offer companies on implementing and maintaining a robust process for managing fraud and corruption risks, with appropriate internal controls?

Anjum: Regardless of your location, industry or the size of your organization, having a process for managing fraud and corruption risks is essential. The first step is to establish a zero tolerance position against fraud. This is done by communicating the right “tone at the top” throughout the organization, clarifying management’s stance against corruption. An ethical code of conduct should be adopted and signed by all employees from top to bottom, and the organization’s hiring policies should include extensive background checks before and after employment. The organization should engage in ISO 37001 certification to ensure that employees are trained to recognize and report bribes and other types of fraud, and that appropriate compliance controls and procedures are in place to limit the company’s exposure and risks. Finally, the company must conduct regular audits and encourage denunciations through an anonymous reporting system.