ABSTRACT
What characterizes the most ‘actionable definitions’ of corruption? For efficient law enforcement, should reform-friendly countries select a precise definition of liability or a definition with a broader scope? Considering foreign bribery in the light of the increasing use of non-trial resolutions, this chapter explains why, for a given scope of liability, lower precision in the definition of liability impedes anti-corruption law enforcement. It draws on OECD data on the scope and precision of corporate liability in 36 jurisdictions. Countries that perform well in terms of the OECD's definition of corporate bribery, also perform well on a range of other governance indicators, and they are better able to enforce corporate liability. A broad scope of liability can make criminalization of foreign bribery appear more functional than it is.
