Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

E-raamat: Fighting Corruption in Public Procurement: A Comparative Analysis of Disqualification or Debarment Measures [Hart e-raamatud]

(Stellenbosch University, South Africa)
Teised raamatud teemal:
  • Hart e-raamatud
  • Hind: 119,98 €*
  • * hind, mis tagab piiramatu üheaegsete kasutajate arvuga ligipääsu piiramatuks ajaks
Fighting Corruption in Public Procurement: A Comparative Analysis of Disqualification or Debarment MeasuresSuurem pilt
Teised raamatud teemal:
Wiley OnlineRohkem infot Hart e-raamatute kohta
Anti-corruption measures have firmly taken centre stage in the development agenda of international organisations as well as in developed and developing countries. One area in which corruption manifests itself is in public procurement and, as a result, States have adopted various measures to prevent and curb corruption in public procurement. One such mechanism for dealing with procurement corruption is to debar or disqualify corrupt suppliers from bidding for or otherwise obtaining government contracts. This book examines the issues and challenges raised by the debarment or disqualification of corrupt suppliers from public contracts. Implementing a disqualification mechanism in public procurement raises serious practical and conceptual difficulties, which are not always considered by legislative provisions on disqualification. Some of the problems that may arise from the use of disqualifications include determining whether a conviction for corruption ought to be a pre-requisite to disqualification, bearing in mind that corruption thrives in secret, resulting in a dearth of convictions. Another issue is determining how to balance the tension between granting adequate procedural safeguards to a supplier in disqualification proceedings and not delaying the procurement process. A further issue is determining the scope of the disqualification in the sense of determining whether it applies to firms, natural persons, subcontractors, subsidiaries or other persons related to the corrupt firm and whether disqualification will lead to the termination of existing contracts. The book compares and contrasts the legal, practical and institutional approaches to the implementation of the disqualification mechanism in the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, the Republic of South Africa and the World Bank.
Preface vii
Table of Cases
xv
Table of Legislation
xvii
Table of Conventions, Treaties, etc
xlv
1 Introduction
1(6)
2 Corruption, Anti-Corruption Measures and Disqualification
7(31)
2.1 Introduction
7(1)
2.2 The Meaning, Nature and Effects of Corruption
7(6)
2.2.1 Economic Theories on Corruption
9(1)
2.2.2 Political Theories on Corruption
10(1)
2.2.3 Social Theories on Corruption
11(2)
2.3 Anti-Corruption Measures
13(11)
2.3.1 Domestic Measures against Corruption
14(2)
2.3.2 International Measures against Corruption
16(8)
2.4 Public Procurement And Corruption
24(7)
2.4.1 The Incidence of Corruption in Public Procurement
24(1)
2.4.2 The Common Types of Corrupt Activity in Public Procurement
25(2)
2.4.3 Measures Used in Procurement Regulation to Fight Corruption
27(4)
2.5 The Use of Disqualifications in Public Procurement
31(7)
3 An Overview of Procurement Regulation, Anti-Corruption and Disqualification Policy in the Jurisdictions
38(44)
3.1 Introduction
38(1)
3.2 The European Union
38(9)
3.2.1 Public Procurement Regulation in the EU
38(3)
3.2.2 The EU's Policy Against Corruption
41(2)
3.2.3 Disqualification in the EU
43(4)
3.3 The United Kingdom
47(9)
3.3.1 Public Procurement Regulation in the UK
47(4)
3.3.2 The UK's Policy Against Corruption
51(2)
3.3.3 Disqualification in the UK
53(3)
3.4 The United States
56(8)
3.4.1 Public Procurement Regulation in the United States
56(2)
3.4.2 The United States' Policy Against Corruption
58(2)
3.4.3 Disqualification in the United States
60(4)
3.5 The World Bank
64(7)
3.5.1 Procurement Regulation in the World Bank
64(2)
3.5.2 The World Bank's Anti-Corruption Policy
66(3)
3.5.3 Disqualification in the World Bank
69(2)
3.6 South Africa
71(11)
3.6.1 Public Procurement Regulation in South Africa
71(3)
3.6.2 South Africa's Anti-corruption Policy
74(2)
3.6.3 Disqualification in South Africa
76(6)
4 The Offences and the Requirement for a Conviction for Disqualification
82(24)
4.1 Introduction
82(1)
4.2 The European Union
82(6)
4.2.1 Offences for Disqualification
82(2)
4.2.2 Disqualifying on the Basis of Convictions
84(2)
4.2.3 The Status of Foreign Convictions
86(2)
4.3 The United Kingdom
88(5)
4.3.1 Offences for Disqualification
88(2)
4.3.2 Disqualifying on the Basis of Convictions
90(1)
4.3.3 The Status of Foreign Convictions
91(2)
4.4 The United States
93(3)
4.4.1 Offences for Disqualification
93(1)
4.4.2 Disqualifying on the Basis of a Conviction
94(1)
4.4.3 The Status of Foreign Convictions
95(1)
4.5 The World Bank
96(2)
4.5.1 Offences for Disqualification
96(1)
4.5.2 Disqualifying on the Basis of Convictions
96(1)
4.5.3 The Status of Foreign Convictions
97(1)
4.6 South Africa
98(4)
4.6.1 Offences for Disqualification
98(3)
4.6.2 Disqualifying on the Basis of Convictions
101(1)
4.6.3 The Status of Foreign Convictions
102(1)
4.7 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
102(4)
4.7.1 Requirement for Convictions
102(2)
4.7.2 The Issue of Foreign Convictions
104(2)
5 Procedural Issues Affecting Disqualification
106(34)
5.1 Introduction
106(1)
5.2 Procedure for Disqualifying
107(23)
5.2.1 The Stages of the Disqualification Process and Accompanying Procedural Requirements
107(18)
5.2.2 Are Disqualification Procedures Fair and Transparent?
125(5)
5.3 Time Limits for Disqualification
130(7)
5.3.1 Time Limits in the EU and UK
130(4)
5.3.2 Time Limits in the US
134(1)
5.3.3 Time Limits in the World Bank
134(1)
5.3.4 Time Limits in South Africa
135(1)
5.3.5 Time Limits, Proportionality, Reasonableness, Fairness and Transparency
136(1)
5.4 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
137(3)
5.4.1 The Existence of a Clear Procedure for Disqualification
137(1)
5.4.2 Time Limits
138(2)
6 Disqualifying Entities and the Scope of Disqualification
140(17)
6.1 Introduction
140(1)
6.2 Disqualifying Entities
141(8)
6.2.1 Courts
141(2)
6.2.2 Procuring Authorities
143(3)
6.2.3 Administrative Bodies
146(2)
6.2.4 The Legislature
148(1)
6.3 The Scope of Disqualification
149(6)
6.3.1 A Requirement that Disqualification be Extended and Discovering Previous Disqualifications
150(2)
6.3.2 No Clear Requirement that Disqualification be Extended
152(2)
6.3.3 The Elements of the Disqualification Decision Left to the Non-Disqualifying Entity
154(1)
6.4 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
155(2)
7 Investigations
157(11)
7.1 Introduction
157(1)
7.2 The Existence of a Requirement or Obligation to Investigate
158(4)
7.2.1 The Requirement to Investigate for Disqualification Measures Based on a Conviction
158(3)
7.2.2 The Requirement to Investigate for Disqualification Measures Not Based on a Conviction
161(1)
7.3 The Entity with the Power to Investigate and the Extent of the Entity's Powers
162(2)
7.4 The Nature and Sources of Information and Evidence
164(2)
7.5 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
166(2)
8 The Disqualification of Persons Related to a Corrupt Supplier
168(40)
8.1 Introduction
168(1)
8.2 Rationales for Disqualifying Related Persons
169(1)
8.3 The Related Persons
170(34)
8.3.1 Natural Persons
171(15)
8.3.2 Connected Companies
186(10)
8.3.3 Cooperating Companies
196(8)
8.4 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
204(4)
8.4.1 Discovering the Existence and Complicity of Related Natural and Legal Persons: The Expense and Difficulty of Investigations
205(1)
8.4.2 Procedural Burden and Delays to the Procurement Process
206(1)
8.4.3 The Absence of Procedural Safeguards
206(1)
8.4.4 The Lack of Clarity in the Legislation
207(1)
9 The Effect of Disqualification on Existing Contracts
208(40)
9.1 Introduction
208(2)
9.2 Rationales for Contractual Termination
210(1)
9.3 Is There a Duty to Terminate Existing Contracts for Disqualification?
210(15)
9.4 Problems with Contractual Termination
225(19)
9.4.1 Determining if Termination is Prospective or Retrospective
225(2)
9.4.2 Restitution and Apportionment of Losses
227(8)
9.4.3 Disproportionality and the Rule against Double Jeopardy
235(3)
9.4.4 Waste and Inefficiency
238(2)
9.4.5 The Effect of Termination on the Delivery of Public Services
240(1)
9.4.6 The Effect of Termination on Third Parties
241(3)
9.5 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
244(4)
9.5.1 The Existence of a Duty to Terminate
244(1)
9.5.2 The Nature and Consequences of Termination
245(3)
10 Derogating from Disqualification
248(26)
10.1 Introduction
248(1)
10.2 Reasons for Derogating from Disqualification
249(21)
10.2.1 Exceptional Situations
249(11)
10.2.2 Rehabilitation Measures
260(10)
10.3 Preventing Abuse in the Use of Derogations
270(3)
10.4 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
273(1)
11 Remedies for Affected Suppliers
274(25)
11.1 Introduction
274(1)
11.2 The Availabilty of a Right of Review
275(12)
11.2.1 The EU
276(1)
11.2.2 The UK
277(2)
11.2.3 The US
279(2)
11.2.4 The World Bank
281(4)
11.2.5 South Africa
285(2)
11.3 The Kinds of Remedies Available
287(8)
11.4 Summary and Analysis of Main Issues
295(4)
11.4.1 Balancing the Tension between Effective Remedies and Delays to the Procurement Process
296(1)
11.4.2 The Availability of a Right of Review
297(2)
Index 299
Sope Williams-Elegbe is a Research Fellow at Stellenbosch University, South Africa, a public procurement consultant and former lecturer at University of Nottingham.
Püsilink: https://www.kriso.ee/db/9781782250142_pe.html
Märksõnad: