Corruption is not easily defined and is constantly evolving. Traditionally, it was perceived to occur in secrecy, “behind closed doors.” However, in poorly governed or highly corrupt states, corruption can happen “in broad daylight” and may even be seen as a necessary “grease that oils the wheels of industry and commerce.” The advent of technology, like Facebook and AI, has made it easier to connect and move money, adding a layer of complexity. This highlights that corruption is not solely a clandestine activity but can be overt and even justified under certain conditions.

The “triple challenge” encompasses structural inequality, heightened issues around poverty (including extreme poverty), and unemployment. These conditions, often exacerbated by conflict and war, create an environment where economic crime flourishes. Despite receiving significant aid (e.g., USD 30-50 billion from the UN), illicit financial flows (around USD 90 billion exiting the continent) far exceed this, prompting questions about the necessity of aid and the need to leverage internal resources.

Blockchain offers a highly transparent and difficult-to-manipulate ledger system, which can bolster governance and procurement processes, making it harder for corruption to occur. It can also facilitate anonymous whistleblowing, protecting individuals who disclose corrupt activities, particularly in contexts where whistleblowers face threats. AI, when viewed through a human rights-based approach, can aid in demanding accountability and transparency. Instead of solely relying on law enforcement to pursue criminals, a human rights approach enables a broader societal role in fighting corruption, utilising AI to monitor and expose suspicious activities, such as unexplained wealth displayed on social media.

Criminals are constantly innovating and are often a step ahead of law enforcement. Emerging technologies provide enhanced anonymity, making it difficult to identify perpetrators. This includes using fake names in emails for scams (like inheritance scams) and hiding behind shell companies or legitimate businesses. Money laundering is also facilitated by the internet, allowing illicit profits to be moved rapidly and reinvested into further criminal activities, creating a “virtuous cycle” for criminals. The rise of deepfakes and voice cloning further blurs the lines between reality and deception, enabling new forms of fraud.

It is crucial to categorise corruption to offer appropriate solutions. “Grand corruption” involves large sums of money and occurs at high-level decision-making points (e.g., government contracts), often driven by greed or systemic capture. “Petty corruption” (or administrative corruption) occurs at the administrative level, involving smaller bribes for services (e.g., access to water), often driven by the individual’s lack of adequate salary. Different solutions are required for each: improving salaries might curb petty corruption, while tackling grand corruption requires addressing greed and systemic issues, potentially through international mechanisms. This classification helps in applying appropriate technological and policy interventions.

Combating corruption ethically is vital to prevent the politicisation and instrumentalisation of anti-corruption mechanisms. It requires adhering to due process of law and respecting the rights of the accused. There is a risk of “corruption of anti-corruption,” where mechanisms are twisted to target political opponents. A key ethical dilemma arises with information leaks (e.g., Panama Papers) where illegally acquired evidence, while useful for public opinion, may not be admissible in a court of law due to privacy rights and surveillance concerns. Striking a balance between aggressive anti-corruption measures and upholding human rights is a constant challenge.

Policymakers and regulators must actively engage with civil society and researchers to inform policy, ensuring that empirical research is considered rather than shelved. There’s a need for a “multi-pronged approach” involving different sectors. While some question whether the private sector is better equipped than governments to fight corruption, it’s acknowledged that corruption exists in both. Ultimately, a fundamental shift in societal culture and ethics is required. Individuals must also take responsibility by refusing to engage in corrupt practices (e.g., paying bribes) and inculcating ethical awareness in future generations, moving away from a sole focus on material wealth. Support for international mechanisms, such as an International Anti-corruption Court, is also proposed to provide a neutral and effective means of tackling corruption beyond domestic political influence.