“Global corruption levels remain alarmingly high, with 85 percent of the world’s population living in jurisdictions that have significant corruption problems,” observes Sara Carnegie, alongside George Artley during a recent Platforum9 session. More alarming still, traditional bastions of transparency – Germany, Austria, France, Switzerland – are all recording their highest corruption scores ever, challenging assumptions about where corruption thrives.
The Evolution of Corruption
The challenge begins with definition. Corruption extends beyond simple financial gain to encompass “the abuse or misuse of trust or authority for self-serving reasons.” This broader understanding includes emerging threats like “sextortion” – the abuse of power for sexual favors – which Carnegie notes “happens in every country in the world” yet lacks consistent legal frameworks to address it.
The Professional Paradox
For lawyers, corruption presents a multilayered challenge. “There is a sort of scale of different ways that corruption might affect a lawyer,” explains George Artley. “At one end you’ve got the corrupt lawyer… tantamount to the doctor or nurse that kills patients rather than cures them. But then you’ve got a whole category of lawyers who, as part of their day-to-day business… are facilitating financial deals where corruption can be enabled.”
The Global Challenge
The problem becomes particularly acute in regions where corruption is endemic. As Carnegie notes, “If you’re operating in an environment where corruption is endemic, what are the realistic options available to you?” This creates a practical dilemma for firms trying to maintain ethical standards while remaining competitive.
The Institutional Decline
Perhaps most concerning is what Artley describes as a return to “some sort of late 19th century, almost imperial model where the world’s going to be divided between super blocks.” Recent moves to potentially weaken the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act – legislation that has been “the bedrock for a huge number of international treaties” according to Carnegie – signal a troubling shift away from multilateral cooperation.
The Path Forward
Despite these challenges, both Moderators emphasise the importance of maintaining professional standards. “It’s vital to remember why you became a lawyer,” Artley suggests, calling for “some sort of revival of a true sense of why it’s an honorable profession as opposed to just a money-making business.”
Carnegie adds a practical note: “Be careful who you deal with because actually you could go down a different line and then find under a next administration in three or four years time you’re in trouble… if the rest of the world is still wanting to operate within a high standard, then one would have hoped business will metaphorically vote with its feet.”
The message is clear: while the world may be trending toward what Artley calls a “profit finance generation” mindset that disregards process legitimacy, the legal profession must maintain its ethical core. As Carnegie concludes, “Lawyers shouldn’t be advocating for anything other than the highest standards of behavior.” In an era of declining trust and institutional frameworks, this commitment to principle may be more important than ever.
