Humanitarian NGOs have a social contract with donors and the grassroots populations with whom they work. Emergency workers are stewards of scarce funds – We are entrusted with resources in order to use them in the most efficient way possible to better the lives of those affected by disasters. Transparency International’s brand-new Handbook on Preventing Corruption in Humanitarian Operations is a great tool to help use scarce funds efficiently to achieve the greatest impact for the greatest number. CARE International (along with six other major international NGOs) has signed on to this important initiative and participated in the Handbook development, as we believe that it will be a useful tool for reducing the risk and pernicious effects of corruption in humanitarian programming.

The TI Handbook is organized around a series of practical topics, including targeting of beneficiaries, procurement, finance, human resources, and the like. For each topic, the authors describe the nature of the risk of corruption, as well as a number of “red flags” that can tip one off to something fishy. The Handbook is a very-user friendly reference and is not intended to be read cover-to-cover. Rather, it is to be consulted as needed to improve performance on specific topics. It provides concrete, actionable recommendations on how to reduce corruption risk while under time pressure to produce quick results. My colleagues and I at CARE Madagascar are already using a draft version of the Handbook and we look forward to the final version.

In a perfect world, all aid workers would have great integrity and be guided by their best instincts in implementing programs for those most in need. Each and every one of us would take seriously our accountability to local communities and to the donors providing the wherewithal to get the job done. Unfortunately, experience shows that emergency programs experience the same corrupt practices as other fields. Moreover, given the haste with which emergency programs have to get up and running, controls on the use of funds are often a bit less rigorous than in development programming, when organizations have more time to build a foundation for rigor and transparency. Thus, as stated in the Introduction of the Handbook, “There were numerous examples of corruption during the massive Asian tsunami humanitarian response, and examples of substantial diversion of aid resources have been reported recently in Afghanistan, Iraq, Liberia and Somalia.”

Given the challenges, the TI Handbook is a great collection of tips of what to look out for in humanitarian situations. Emergency professionals at all levels should have it at their fingertips when responding to man-made and natural disasters. This will permit them to get the best bang for their buck in saving lives and helping victims return to normal lives as quickly as possible. Mobilized humanitarian workers should stuff the planned “pocket book” version in their cargo pants as they board planes and Land Cruisers to mobilize to the epicenters of suffering.

The unfolding tragedy in Haiti is a timely and moving reminder of the high stakes we face. The TI Handbook on Preventing Corruption in Humanitarian Operations can help us make sure that the giant sums being injected are used well and for the greatest good. While Haiti is an extreme example of a huge humanitarian disaster, the Handbook is practical and useful for emergency professionals at all levels in a wide array of disasters. I highly recommend it.

Alexei Dymovsky, the former police major who spoke out against corruption in a series of videos that appeared on YouTube, has been arrested on fraud and corruption charges. On 22 January he was taken into custody under allegations he embezzled money allocated to agents under his command, during his time in the anti-drug department. His arrest has been criticised by human rights activists, who believe the arrest is purely revenge for the shock his whistle-blowing videos caused in November.

Blowing the whistle on YouTube

Pale and still in his stiff blue police uniform, Alexei Dymovsky takes a deep breath. A brief eye flutter of uncertainty is the only clue that the ordinary police officer from Russia’s Black Sea port of Novorossiysk appears to realise the enormity of what he has planned, and its possible consequences. Then nerves subside, as deep conviction takes hold; perhaps this is partly relief that thoughts previously stifled or simply shared across a kitchen table will now be out in the open.

“Hello fellow comrade officers. I am talking to those officers for whom words such as, ‘honour’ and ‘dignity’ are not just words or sounds.”

Then he drops his bombshell. After explaining that he had spent ten years working hard as a police officer, he went on to denounce the treatment of honest police officers like himself by corrupt bosses. He spoke of how young recruits are led to expect bribes will subsidise poor wages and enforced unpaid overtime. Clearly exasperated, he describes the part of his job he hated: “I can’t stand detecting non-existent crimes, imprisoning people who are not guilty. I can’t stand it any more.”

He then launched a passionate appeal: “Senior policemen, where are you? … Lift your heads and help raise young policemen.” Remarkably, he finished by addressing the Russian prime minister, Vladimir Putin, using his traditional name: “Vladimir Vladimirovich, I am appealing directly to you. You have been talking about corruption. You have been saying that not only should corruption constitute a crime, you said it should also be unseemly to engage in corrupt practices. But this is not the case in this country.”

The young, brave police officer knew of what he spoke. According to new figures released by Information Science for Democracy (INDEM), a Moscow-based foundation, a staggering US $319 billion (€216 billion) in bribes is paid out each year in Russia. With a population estimated at just over 142 million, that is an average pay-out of more than US $2,000 a year per head.

The findings of Transparency International’s (TI) Global Corruption Barometer 2009 suggest corruption is endemic in Russia. Public officials and civil servants were perceived as the country’s most corrupt institution sector at 4.5 out of 5 (1 = not at all corrupt, 5 = extremely corrupt), with 31 per cent of respondents reported paying a bribe in the previous 12 months. Just over half thought their current government’s efforts to fight corruption were ineffective.

In TI’s recent Corruption Perceptions Index 2009, Russia’s low score of 2.2 out of 10 put it on a par with Zimbabwe and Sierra Leone. In TI’s 2008 Bribe Payers Index, which rates 22 of the leading exporting economies, the country came last, with a score of 5.9 (Scores range from 0 to 10.The higher the score for the country, the lower the likelihood of companies from this country engaging in bribery when doing business abroad.) The index also showed that the police force was perceived as being the institution which had been most affected by bribery, rated 4.0 out of five (1 = not at all corrupt, 5 = extremely corrupt)

Dymovsky’s going-for-broke speech revealed a man of extraordinary courage. Within days he was suspended and within weeks was the focus of an investigation alleging misconduct. He has also been forced to relocate his pregnant wife to Moscow for her safety and hire a bodyguard himself.

The effects of corruption outlined by Dymovsky’s statement, reveal its multi-faceted nature. His own case demonstrates the damaging personal repercussions on a policeman who believes in his work, yet is forced to serve a deeply flawed Justice system that exploits the very citizens it is supposed to protect.

Dymovsky’s point about new recruits to the Russian police force accepting the low wages in the expectation of bribes to subsidise the shortfall, is a clear example of the how corruption is perpetuated within the system.

A recent academic study, “Attitudes to corruption amongst Russian police officers and trainees”, shows “fast-streamed police recruits” think corruption is often justifiable and/or morally acceptable under particular circumstances, or for specific goals.

During his address Alexei Dymovsky stated, “I said to my boss that police in Novorossiysk are corrupted, but he told me that corruption cannot be removed by any means, and that it’s the local mentality”.

This notion of endemic corruption was further highlighted by President Medvedev in a recent interview when he admitted, “From the political leadership all the way down to local administrations, we are hampered by corruption.” He added, “In Europe, drivers don’t automatically pull out their wallets when stopped by a traffic policeman.”

Despite a push by Medvedev to place corruption high on the political agenda, his words remain just that. His efforts in the past three months to champion new anti-corruption laws, including one that forces government officials to disclose their assets, have stalled. He glumly conceded that corruption “will take years to solve”.

The fate of Alexei Dymovsky is a disheartening example of a missed opportunity. He speaks out in frustration about what everyone knows is the norm at a time when Russia’s leaders say fighting corruption is a top priority. If this can not provide impetus for change, what can? Rather than praised for his courage, he is hounded out of his job, his pregnant wife goes into hiding, and then he is arrested for the very acts he had the bravery to expose. Perhaps Medvedev was optimistic. Corruption in Russia appears so ingrained; it may be a problem that will take decades, rather than years to solve.

The concept of “social damage” implies that a financial retribution should be made by those found guilty of a corruption crime to repair the damage caused to a society. It is a quite innovative concept introduced in 1998 in Costa Rica – unique in Latin America - that has been used by the Office of the Public Ethics Prosecutor in their investigations against two former Costa Rican Presidents and European firms, including Rodríguez and Alcatel-Lucent, involved in major corruption cases.

The total amount requested by the Office of the Public Ethics Prosecutor as a result of the damage caused to society by the seven parties accused of corruption has been set in this case at US $52 million. The agreement reached with Alcatel-Lucent – by which the company accepted paying the bribes – is expected to be validated by a Court in the next few days and it won’t stop the Prosecutor’s Office, the General Attorney and other damaged institutions from continue seeking further civil and penal consequences for those involved in the scandal.

A landmark for the anti-corruption struggle?

Definitively yes! The concept of “social damage” is meant clearly for all of those who try to keep governments and companies accountable for their acts, mostly when huge amounts of tax payers money are in question and even more when such major corruption scandals occur in societies in need. Now, the concept can count on legal arguments and a specific reference of success. While the “social damage” concept achieves a wider use in other countries and regions, those advocating for private firms’ responsibility in fighting corruption can look at Costa Rica to continue building their demands.

What if all major multinationals that have paid bribes to ensure contracts going in the millions recognise their faults in local courts and compensate societies for their corrupt practices without further conditions? …we are getting there!

PS: By the way, isn’t this a case of transnational bribery falling under the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention? An Alcatel-Lucent executive was indeed condemned in the US in 2008 for this case, any echo in Europe?

PPS: And most importantly: congratulations to all Costa Ricans and the Office of the Public Ethics Prosecutor!

A year has passed, yet the investigation into the murder of Lasantha Wickramatunga has achieved nothing. Revealing only ineptitude, a growing sense of impunity, and a loss of public faith in the rule of law and media freedom in Sri Lanka. Not a single arrest has been filed since the assassination of the leading Sri Lankan newspaper editor, not a single suspect.

Lasantha Wickramatunga

Lasantha Wickramatunga was the first journalist to receive Transparency International’s Integrity Award, in 2000. Bestowed as an act of recognition from the international anti-corruption community for his contribution to the defence of press freedom rights in Sri Lanka, and for his investigative journalism abilities in fearlessly exposing corruption within Sri Lankan politics for over a decade.

In the years that followed, Lasantha Wickertunga continued to work tirelessly. He became the most vocal critic of president Rajapaksha, using newsprint to staunchly advocate a political solution to the ethnic conflict, and expose arms deals at critical moments during the civil war.

In a posthumous editorial that was published in the Sunday Leader a few days after his death, he wrote. “Murder has become the primary tool whereby the state seeks to control the organs of liberty…Countless journalists have been harassed, threatened and killed. It has been my honour to belong to all those categories and now especially the last”.

The brutal murder, followed by the editorial speaking of its inevitability, sent shockwaves through a Sri Lankan society still reeling from the attack on the television channel Sirasa, which had occurred two days previous. The widely publicised editorial stemmed international outcry and drew intense media scrutiny, which forced the government to make a statement outlining its intention to conduct a vigorous investigation into the murder.

Despite 23 court hearings taking place in the previous year, the police are yet to file an investigative report. The investigation has now been transferred to the criminal investigation unit, however there is scepticism that this has only been done to pass the responsibility on to the former army commander, General Sarath Fonseka, who is the opposition candidate for the elections on 26 January.

Once again, a year on – with the parody of an impotent investigation continuing to fruitlessly limber on – civil society urges the Sri Lankan authorities to bring to justice those responsible for the assassination of Lasantha Wickramatunga.

It is incumbent on the government of Sri Lanka to demonstrate its commitment to the rule of law, and human rights, especially the right of individuals to free expression. An investigation that contained, even just a fraction, of the commitment demonstrated by Lasantha Wickramatunga to his values and beliefs, would be a start.

Events have taken place across the globe to mark the first anniversary of the loss of Lasantha Wickermatunga. It is a tribute to the impact his work achieved that his loss is felt in so many circles.

The following post has been written by Ximena Salazar, Coordinator for the Anti-Corruption Conventions Programme in the Americas at Transparency International.

Estamos comenzando el 2010 y dentro de los desafíos para este año está que comience a operar el mecanismo de seguimiento de la Convención de las Naciones Unidas contra la Corrupción (UNCAC), recientemente aprobado en la Conferencia de Estados Parte de Doha.

A este respecto, me llamó poderosamente la atención que en el marco de la XIX Cumbre Iberoamericana celebrada en Portugal, se haya sacado un comunicado especial sobre la lucha contra la corrupción, en el cual se reconoce a las convenciones internacionales anti corrupción, me refiero específicamente a la UNCAC y a la Convención Interamericana contra la Corrupción (CICC), como instrumentos que deben ser promovidos e implementados por los Estados.

Da gusto ver que los Estados Iberoamericanos reconocen a la UNCAC como el mayor avance normativo internacional en la lucha contra la corrupción y que promueven la recuperación de los activos, que son recursos que los Estados dejan de poder aplicar en inversión social. Esta mirada es la que esperamos se instale no sólo en los Jefes de Estados de Iberoamerica, sino en los ciudadanos, en los funcionarios públicos, en los empresarios, y en la sociedad civil de cada uno de los Estados.

Participar del nuevo mecanismo de monitoreo que se acaba de aprobar en Doha, es ahora el desafío. Ojalá sean justamente los países de Iberoamericana quienes den el ejemplo de publicar los informes, de desarrollar las visitas in situ y que integren la sociedad civil de sus países en el proceso.

La colaboración internacional entre este nuevo mecanismo que se iniciará a mediados del 2010 y el mecanismo de seguimiento de la CICC, MESICIC de la OEA, es prioritario para el monitoreo del cumplimiento de las recomendaciones que en este sistema se han hecho a los 28 países que lo integran en cada una de sus rondas. A este respecto un estudio desarrollado por TI en cuanto al cumplimiento de los mandatos de las Cumbres de las Américas en transparencia y anti corrupción y su vinculación con el MESICIC, destacó que la mayoría de las recomendaciones menos implementadas se relacionaban con la apertura a consulta, con la protección de denunciantes, la cooperación internacional y la participación de la sociedad civil en la revisión de la implementación. Por otra parte, y si bien el número de recomendaciones convertidas en leyes nacionales ha aumentado dichas leyes aún no han sido incorporadas en las prácticas y políticas nacionales.

Es por ello que el cumplimiento de las recomendaciones formuladas a los Estados es la verdadera señal que las convenciones están cumpliendo el fin para el cual fueron creadas, y no tan sólo buenas intenciones.

No me cabe más que felicitar a los Estados Iberoamericanos por esta señal y esperar que efectivamente la Declaración de luchar contra la corrupción no se convierta en letra muerta sino en un instrumento en que se inspiren las normas nacionales y las nuevas políticas anti corrupción en los países. La sociedad civil estará atenta!

See our little Season’s Greetings card here:

Transparency International thanks you
for your support in 2009 and sends best
wishes to you and yours this holiday
season and in the year ahead.

click to receive your e-seasons card.

See you all in the New Year!

Run for transparency!

Around the world, Transparency International is taking Anti-Corruption Day as an opportunity to commemorate and raise awareness to the importance of fighting corruption. Chapters in every region have organised events to bring people together, from lectures, conferences and national integrity awards celebrations, to rallies, theatre shows, festivals and concerts. In Beirut, people even ran 42.195 km for transparency and against corruption.

That’s a lot of kilometres. But fighting corruption needs perseverance.

What makes this year different? What does the Anti-Corruption Day stand for?

Let me give you a couple of my thoughts. It has been a challenging year for the fight against corruption.

Increasingly, anti-corruption activists have been in the line of attack. Journalists writing on corruption in politics and society such as Sri Lanka’s Lasantha Wickramatunga earlier this year have given their lives. Activists from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Guatemala or Zimbabwe have faced threats or were being silenced.

Anti-Corruption Day stands for a day to remember, recognise and honour these brave and fearless people, who went to prison or lost their lives believing that through fighting corruption they will make the world a better place.

Teethless!

To punish those who undertake corrupt actions and reduce risks and opportunities for corruption, implementing an national integrity system through appropriate laws and institutions is fundamental. The only tool providing a global anti-corruption framework, the UN Convention against Corruption has received a set-back in agreeing on a flawed review mechanism earlier this year that is not transparent and inclusive to civil society.

Anti-Corruption Day is a day to call on the governments that civil society needs to be taken seriously as a partner in fighting corruption. Transparency matters and the UN Convention needs to have teeth to be effective.

This year’s Corruption Perceptions Index received a huge amount of attention showing us that corruption is still high on the agenda. But the CPI is only one of many tools that help us understand how deeply corruption affects society. To complement the picture we have to look at what people say, as well as on what we call the supply-side of corruption. TI’s 2009 Global Corruption Barometer has surveyed over 70,000 people on their views and experience with corruption, and the Bribe Payers Index looks at the tendency of firms based in international and regional exporting countries to bribe when doing business abroad.

Anti-Corruption Day is a good moment to highlight that still more research is needed to understand how corruption affects people. And how it affects issues such as climate change.

And most importantly: The “success” of initiatives such as Transparency International’s Advocacy and Legal Advice Centre’s shows, with now over 40 centres worldwide providing legal advice to victims of corruption, there is a dire need to help and support citizens in voicing their concerns. And to give them channels to complain about the injustice they are facing. As this year has shown, social media can be a powerful way to empower citizens to demand accountability, share observations and engagement in addressing and reporting corrupt activities themselves.

Anti-Corruption Day needs to highlight that corruption has victims. It hurts the people in their basic needs whether it be access to water, education or health, and it hurts the poor the most.

Sometimes, it seems easy to blame only one actor, mostly either the government or the private sector. But fighting corruption is everyone’s responsibility. Corruption can not be fought alone. It needs everyone to be involved.

So finally, Anti-corruption Day should also be a call for all groups of society to unite, build coalitions and speak up against corruption together.

As our chapter in Bangladesh says: Jago Manush Durnity Protirodhe Jago (Rise up people, rise up against corruption).

What are you doing for Anti-corruption Day?

As the climate talks at the COP15 open with urgent calls for action, massive funds will be mobilized to manage climate change adaptation and mitigation. If not managed and governed adequately, large sums will be lost in corruption and mismanagement.

New investments will flow into the water sector to adapt to climate change

The water sector is heavily affected by the consequences and impacts of climate change. Increasing floods and droughts force people to move their homes and threaten their means for subsistence. It is predicted that 2/3 of the world’s population will live in areas with water stress in 2025, out of whom 15% will live in areas with real water scarcity. As so often, it is the poor who are most severely affected by the negative impacts of climate change.

To secure future water resources and adequately manage the effects of climate change in the water sector, a strong and enforceable agreement on future global commitments on climate change measures is necessary. This will involve the mobilization and pooling of enormous funds to prevent and adapt to the effects of a changing climate. Large amounts of money will be invested into new water infrastructure, governance mechanism and technology for climate change adaptation and mitigation.

However, there are only few studies on the actual costs of adaption and mitigation in the water sector, but existing numbers suggest the following:

• According to the World Bank, the estimated annual incremental climate costs (required for a 2°C trajectory) range from US$9 billion to US$100 billion by 2030. Mitigation proves even more costly with estimates up to US$565 billion.
• An UNFCCC estimate states that additional investment and financial flows required for adaption to potential changes in the availability of water supplies would be approximately $9-11 billion per year in 2030.
• These figures represent the additional costs to maintain the current standard; they do not include the costs of providing this level of services where it currently does not exist. In relation, the same amount of money is required to meet the MDG targets for sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.

Preventing the misuse of funds from the start

If not managed and governed adequately, large sums of these unprecedented flows of financial assistance can be lost in corruption and mismanagement. Instead of improving the negative impacts of climate change, this will worsen social inequality as well as ecological degradation.

• A great extent of these investments will flow into large infrastructure projects such as flood proofing. The construction sector is one of the most corrupt sectors worldwide because of the size, complexity and large sums of money involved in such projects.
• Current CO2 trade mechanisms are not transparent and have a convoluted design. This can corrupt the decision making process for technology and investment choices for adaptation and mitigation.
• As climate change will worsen existing water sector stresses, it will render the current impacts of corruption even more severe, meaning increased inequality in water and sanitation service distribution, lowered agricultural yields, increased prevalence of ruptured dams, and increased frequency of power outages.

To avoid these and other effects of corruption, it is essential to strengthen transparency and integrity in the management of funds and projects for climate change adaptation and mitigation from the beginning. The funds need to be carefully designed, planned and harmonized with the inclusion of those who will be affected the most. Effective and enforceable transnational governance structures that can oversee and monitor the distribution and use of funds are crucial to ensure trust between contributors and recipients.

Therefore, ensuring that finance for coping with climate that reaches their intended beneficiaries and provides effective and long lasting solutions requires the cooperation and coalitions between multiple stakeholders in the water sector. These include the public sector, private sector and civil society. The Water Integrity Network supports and stimulates existing organisations to include integrity on their agendas and mainstream anti-corruption in climate change adaptation and mitigation processes.

What a surprise: there is match-fixing in football and the authorities appear to be taken aback. This was not supposed to happen. Four years ago when German referee Robert Hoyzer was indicted for match-fixing and subsequently sentenced to 2 years in prison, the football authorities promised to clean up the sport. Clearly they did not succeed.

Declan Hill in his 2008 book “The Fix” was far more prescient: he described how betting rings had infiltrated and were corrupting European football. Last week’s arrests and announcements have proven him right. For the football authorities meeting this week in Europe and next week in South Africa, this has to be a wake-up call to action.

Football suffers from a structural dearth of transparency, a surplus of cash and a desperate lack of support for the most vulnerable in the game – the players, referees and officials who are not in the top leagues but play week after week for far less glamorous salaries, across the continent. The current state of affairs is unacceptable.

First, football needs a comprehensive compliance system. Each club, at least in the professional leagues, must adopt globally recognised standards of transparency and good governance. These are becoming increasingly common in business, but are rare in professional sport.

Football as a high-risk business, due to the huge public interest and large amounts of money coming from sponsors and the media, has for the most part a rather unsophisticated business culture and structure. Many clubs are not organised like a company with clear responsibilities and reporting and disclosure obligations. In effect, clubs lack what is most important to establish good governance: effective control mechanisms.

Second, football requires a universally accepted code of ethics and guidelines to educate players, referees and officials from all levels on how to face difficult scenarios and conflict of interests. How do they deal with, for example, gifts and invitations?

There needs to be an effective protection system for those who blow the whistle both on and off the pitch. Vulnerable players, referees and officials need to know there is a mechanism to help them say no to inappropriate approaches and to report on suspicious incidents. The early-warning system regarding unusual betting patterns needs to be complemented by early warnings from within the structure of football itself.

Third, a code of ethics has to be combined with clear signals of zero-tolerance of all forms of corruption from the top down. There should be no hidden cash payments and dubious transfers of young players. The headline-grabbing case of Gael Kakuta’s controversial move from Lyon to Chelsea is a case in point.

In the short-term there has to be systematic, high-level prosecution of corruption of all kinds and sufficient punishments to act as deterrents in this cash-rich sport. Countries should be compelled to adopt universally accepted measures so that wrong doing in all countries is punished equally and no country can protect its national sport. The message needs to be loud and clear: corruption does not pay.

The European football association UEFA and its president Michel Platini have started to address the problem. UEFA is cooperating with international law enforcement and the betting industry to establish an early-warning system at least for the top leagues and competitions. The German Football Association introduced two important provisions after the Hoyzer scandal: the names of referees are now published closer to game time, and betting by football players on games in their league is prohibited.

But the roots of corruption cannot be excised simply by the coordinated monitoring of betting websites and an informal ban on betting. Football’s governing bodies have to help national federations and clubs build up professional management structures. The current scandal should help the sport’s governing bodies to analyse systematically the structural deficiencies that open the door for corruption, and find new ways to spot “red flags” and institute the changes required to shut out corrupt behaviour.

If football wants to stay – or in some countries where it is just taking hold become – a premium sport with serious sponsors and public support over the long-term, it has to learn its lesson quickly.

Above all each member of the football family – be it at the international level down to local clubs – has to recognise its responsibility for the future of football.

Sports seen to be corrupt, lose their appeal. The governing bodies of football need to help the beautiful game regain its reputation as an exciting sport where no one – and it should really be no one – knows the result in advance.

A new comic-book anthology turns heads without a single trace of caped crusaders or friendly neighbourhood superheroes. A far cry from the scandals of Gotham City, this anthology focuses instead on a specific breed of dark deeds around Chinese AIDS programmes, British parliamentary expenses scandals and Haitian slum gangs and police forces. These are true stories where the protagonists are real people fighting a common enemy: corruption.

Spelling corruption

The anthology, Ctrl.Alt.Shift Unmasks Corruption, is no child’s play. It presents both a captivating and accessible depiction of over 20 corruption-centred episodes penned by many prominent names in the industry.

The Ctrl.Alt.Shift project, launched by the international development agency Christian Aid, is one led by youth for youth and successfully illustrates the way in which youth can play a prominent role in the fight against corruption.

The project also mirrors TI’s current and past work on the important relationship between Youth and Corruption, which has most recently been explored in a brand new Working Paper on the topic. The publication emphasises the potential of young people to transform this present reality and make a lasting impact as tomorrow’s leaders by creating a world free of corruption. It begins a discussion about why and how young people should get engaged in the anti-corruption struggle, particularly through effective youth-led activities that challenge and change the status quo. To access the document and learn more about the topic, click here.

‘Ctrl.Alt.Shift Unmasks Corruption’ is an exhibition hosted by the Lazarides Gallery on Greek Street in Soho, London as part of the London International Comics Festival, Comica. Running from 6th November to 30th November, the exhibition will display a history of political comic art as well as some of the pieces we commissioned for our very own ‘Ctrl.Alt.Shift Unmasks Corruption’ comic book.

The anthology is available for purchase at Ctrl.Alt.Shift for £4.99.