Corrupt Practice: The Sanctions Committee found that it was more likely than not that the Respondent engaged in a corrupt practice by facilitating money to public officials involved in the program, to improperly influence them.
The Respondent represented a firm that provided external technical audit related to the Program to Strengthen Results-Based Management in the Health Sector (the “Program").
The Office of Institutional Integrity (“OII”) submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against the Respondent and others for allegedly engaging in corrupt practices related to the Program. OII’s specific allegations were that during the process of awarding the contract for the Program the Respondent had engaged in a corrupt practice by offering money to public officials to improperly influence their actions.
Consequently, and in accordance with the Sanctions Procedures, the Sanctions Officer (“SO”) issued a Notice of Administrative Action (“Notice”) to the Respondent. In the Response to the Notice, the Respondent denied the allegations presented by OII. Following the issuance of the Notice and reviewing the Respondent’s Response, the SO issued a Determination finding that the Respondent had engaged in corrupt practices. The SO imposed a debarment against the Respondent. In accordance with the Sanctions Procedures, the Respondent appealed the SO’s Determination before the Sanctions Committee (the “Committee”). The Respondent denied committing the prohibited practices.
Following a de novo review of the written record (including the Statement of Charges, the Notice, the Respondent’s Response, the SO’s Determination, Respondent’s Appeal and OII’s Reply), the Committee concluded that it was more likely than not that the Respondent had engaged in a corrupt practice. The Committee imposed a ten (10) year-debarment period in which the Respondent will be ineligible to participate or be awarded contracts for projects or activities financed by the Bank. The Committee took in consideration the central role in prohibited practice as aggravating factor. The Committee did not consider mitigating factors.