The summit concluded with the adoption of a leaders’ declaration where G20 countries reiterate their commitment to the fight against corruption and related illicit financial flows and intention to build a just world and sustainable planet also by countering corruption and promoting principles of integrity, as well as by making the best use of the Global Operational Network of Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement Authorities (GlobE Network) and other international anti-corruption networks.
A number of documents prepared by the G20 Anti-Corruption Working Group (ACWG) were also endorsed at the summit:
1. G20 Anti-Corruption Working Group Action Plan 2025-2027
The Plan defines the following main areas of the ACWG action for the upcoming three years:
1. Asset recovery in corruption cases, international cooperation, including mutual legal assistance, and direct recovery of assets (DRA);
2. Anti-money laundering and beneficial ownership transparency;
3. Countering foreign bribery;
4. Public sector transparency, integrity and accountability, ensured by:
- Promoting good practices;
- Implementing new methods for measuring, detecting and mitigating corruption risks also by detecting and managing conflicts of interest, enhancing whistleblowers’ protection, and increasing transparency and accountability of decision-making;
- Introducing advanced technologies;
- Strengthening interagency cooperation;
- Considering possibilities to engage individuals and groups outside the public sector in promoting the principles of integrity;
5. Promoting transparency and integrity of the private sector.
The document provides recommendations on how to incentivise organisations of the private sector to comply with and promote the principles of integrity with a view to preventing and combating corruption, and supporting the implementation of the mechanisms for preventing and detecting corruption and other related offences, in particular:
- Promote the development of regulations, policies, guidelines, or incentives for the private sector to adopt integrity measures to prevent and combat corruption in line with the international anti-corruption standards;
- Provide appropriate incentives for private sector entities to adopt integrity measures in the context of access to domestic public programs and financial and investment opportunities;
- Enforce effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal, civil or administrative sanctions for legal persons for corruption and related offenses also in the framework of international cooperation, and define mitigation factors for the organisations that voluntarily self-report, cooperate with the investigation and adopt corrective measures;
- Raise awareness of the need to promote the principles of integrity within the private sector also by publishing appropriate documents, implementing training and awareness-raising initiatives, and providing technical assistance in developing such measures;
- Strengthen partnerships with the private sector in anti-corruption efforts also by developing anti-corruption policies and procedures, sharing expertise and good practices between the public and private sectors.
3. Brazil - StAR Initiative Report: Survey on Direct Recovery of Assets
The paper prepared by the Attorney-General’s Office of Brazil (Advocacia-Geral da União) and the Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (StAR) for the ACWG provides analysis of approaches to DRA from abroad in the G20 member and invitee countries. The DRA mechanism implies that states are entitled to initiate civil proceedings to establish title or ownership over proceeds of corruption crimes or pursue compensation or damages for harm caused by illegal acts as a civil party to foreign court proceedings.
The DRA mechanism has the following advantages:
- Serves as an alternative when non-conviction based forfeiture is unavailable or mutual legal assistance (MLA) conditions are not met;
- Provides the possibility to suit a wide range of individuals (for example, intermediaries);
- Entails a lower standard of proof;
- Provides flexible procedures;
- Does not require sharing the assets recovered with the requested jurisdiction.
At the same time, DRA has the following shortcomings:
- Possibility to make claims with regard to specific property or damage;
- Less opportunities for gathering evidence than in MLA;
- Relatively high costs of application;
- Insufficient decision-making transparency;
- Risk of counterclaims and potential obligations (attorneys’ fees and taxes).
The survey, with the participation of 22 countries (16 G20 members and six invitees), has produced the following findings:
1. Almost all countries report the use of at least one DRA mechanism:
- The law of 20 countries allows for initiating court proceedings to establish title or ownership of proceeds of crime;
- 17 countries provide the possibility to request compensation or reparation of damage within separate civil proceedings, 15 countries make it possible to participate in criminal proceedings as a victim or civil party;
- 16 jurisdictions recognize the right of foreign states to present civil claims within criminal proceedings, and restitution and compensation claims are granted priority over confiscation orders in five of them;
2. In practice, the DRA mechanism has been used only in four jurisdictions with only seven countries having the bodies responsible for filing relevant requests;
3. All countries reviewed provide for the use of general legal provisions for DRA application due to the lack of dedicated legislation;
4. The standards applied to DRA in the jurisdictions reviewed differ in a considerable manner, in particular:
- Granting of the right to compensation or damage;
- The need for a prior sentence to establish the right to title or ownership of a foreign state or for considering a civil claim of compensation within civil proceedings;
- Possibility of confiscation within civil proceedings;
- Possibility to use provisional measures (such as seizure and other restraining orders);
- Obligation to hire a counsel, including local one;
5. All countries reviewed have no mechanisms to notify foreign states of criminal proceedings regarding the assets located in their territory;
6. International community has made insignificant progress in asset recovery: this is a conclusion made by the authors of the report coinciding with the findings of a 2021 report of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime on the implementation of the chapter on asset recovery of the United Nations Convention against Corruption.
To enhance the effectiveness of the DRA mechanism, the authors of the report put forward the following recommendations:
1. Improve legal framework, in particular:
- Develop and adopt the provisions clarifying the existing requirements and norms regarding the use of the DRA mechanisms;
- Consider the need to harmonize applicable legal provisions in different jurisdictions;
2. Enhance the effectiveness of the use of DRA specifically through international cooperation by:
- Establishing and maintaining the mechanisms for notification of foreign countries about criminal proceedings with regard to the assets located in their territory also through the GlobE Network;
- Appointing focal points (establishing the bodies) responsible for implementing the DRA mechanisms;
- Developing and issuing guidance on how to use the DRA mechanisms;
3. Maintain regular dialogue on the use of the DRA mechanisms and discuss the issue in future ACWG meetings.
