16th IACC has ended
Back To Schedule
Wednesday, September 2 • 18:00 - 20:00
Rolling back the red carpet: no safe haven to the corrupt

Log in to save this to your schedule, view media, leave feedback and see who's attending!

What Australia, the US and the UK have in common? They are among the most popular destinations for allegedly corrupt individuals seeking a safe haven for themselves and their ill-gotten gains.

For far too long, corrupt individuals have been allowed to freely enjoy the proceeds of corruption through the purchase of luxury goods and real estate abroad, the use of diplomatic passports and investor’s VISA programmes.

Just last year, a series of scandals involving supposedly corrupt officials hiding in foreign jurisdictions were uncovered, including for instance the son of Kyrgyzstan’s former Prime Minister who owns and resides in a £3.5 million mansion in the UK, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea’s officials purchases of luxury assets and visits to Australia, irregularities in golden visa schemes in Latvia and Portugal, and China’s “fox hunt” for corrupt officials who have fled to Canada, the US, and South Africa, among others.

The G-20 and non-governmental organisations have called on countries to impose travel restrictions on individuals suspected of corruption, believing that, if sufficient guarantees are put in place, these measures can act as a sanction as well as disincentive. Similarly, non-governmental organisations have called on governments to align their “investor programmes” with denial of entry procedures and to ensure that these programmes follow a commonly agreed integrity criteria and due diligence process.

In 2016, the G20 is expected to publish a common set of criteria with a view to endorsement at the 2016 Summit. This will be the first set of international guidance on the issue and therefore crucial to ensure the effectiveness and fairness in the use denial of entry on the grounds of corruption allegations.  This session aims to contribute to this debate by exploring how denial of entry can be used as an anti-corruption tool while respecting individuals’ rights and discussing what should be considered as adequate criteria for denying an individual entry.

avatar for Casey Kelso

Casey Kelso

Advocacy Director, Transparency International
Casey Kelso is Advocacy Director at Transparency International (TI) Secretariat. Casey joined the TI Secretariat as the Director for the Africa and the Middle East Department in October 2005 until his appointment as Advocacy Director in 2016. Prior to that, he was the chief executive... Read More →

avatar for Ana Gomes

Ana Gomes

MEP, European Parliament
Ana Gomes is a Member of the European Parliament, since 2004. Her main interests are the build up of a united Europe and the promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law in the EU and in the world. In the European Parliament, she tries to mainstream these concerns by being... Read More →

Sam Koim

Anti-Corruption Investigator, PNG
avatar for David M. Luna

David M. Luna

Senior Director for National Security and Diplomacy, Office of Anti-Crime Programs, International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, U.S. Department of State
David M. Luna helps coordinate diplomatic initiatives on national security and threat convergence including international organized crime, corruption, money laundering, terrorist financing, IPR enforcement, consumer counterfeits, cybersecurity/cybercrime, environmental crime (wildlife... Read More →

Dr. Jürg Steffen

Managing Partner, Henley & Partners
Member of the Executive Committee and Managing Partner of the Singapore office of Henley & Partners

Session Coordinators
avatar for Maira Martini

Maira Martini

Knowledge Coordinator, Transparency International

Wednesday September 2, 2015 18:00 - 20:00 GMT+08
Hall 7

Attendees (0)