Loading...

Chile

Capital

Santiago

Territory

743,532km²

Population (2020)

19,116,209

GDP Total (2020)

252.9B USD

GDP Per Capita (2020)

13,232 USD

Icome Group

High income

Convention Implementation

70.5
In progress

Western Hemisphere Ranking

60.7

5th of 31 countries

South America Ranking

63.2

4th of 12 countries

Corruption Resilience

69.2
Moderately Resilient

Western Hemisphere Ranking

54.4

3rd of 31 countries

South America Ranking

53.9

2nd of 12 countries

Convention Implementation

Score by thematic sections and measures

Prevention

In progress
56.0

Western Hemisphere 46.3

South America 47.3

Standards of Conduct

In progress
62.5

Western Hemisphere 42.8

South America 48.0

Enforcement of Standards of Conduct

In progress
62.5

Western Hemisphere 50.6

South America 58.7

Training of Public Officials

Implemented
74.2

Western Hemisphere 36.8

South America 44.5

Asset and Conflicts of Interests Declarations

In progress
47.6

Western Hemisphere 42.3

South America 45.8

Transparency in Government Contracting

In progress
43.8

Western Hemisphere 33.1

South America 40.3

Elimination of Favorable Tax Treatment

In progress
50.7

Western Hemisphere 47.1

South America 49.2

Oversight Bodies

In progress
57.8

Western Hemisphere 36.0

South America 37.6

Measures to Deter Domestic and Foreign Bribery

In progress
43.7

Western Hemisphere 36.7

South America 40.6

Encouraging Participation by Civil Society

In progress
62.5

Western Hemisphere 43.0

South America 52.8

Study of Other Prevention Measures

In progress
54.6

Western Hemisphere 44.9

South America 48.1

Criminalization and law enforcement

Implemented
77.2

Western Hemisphere 61.1

South America 64.1

Protection of Those who Report Acts of Corruption

In progress
50.7

Western Hemisphere 30.7

South America 34.8

Scope

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 67.7

South America 75

Jurisdiction: Offense-in-Territory

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 74.6

South America 77.8

Jurisdiction: Offense-by-National

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 51.9

South America 62.6

Jurisdiction: Offender-in-Territory

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 58.8

South America 79.1

Passive Public Bribery

In progress
62.5

Western Hemisphere 55.8

South America 55.3

Active Public Bribery

Implemented
71.8

Western Hemisphere 56.4

South America 55.3

Abuse of Functions

In progress
62.5

Western Hemisphere 47.0

South America 48.4

Money Laundering

In progress
62.5

Western Hemisphere 55.8

South America 54.3

Participation and Attempt

Implemented
71.8

Western Hemisphere 58.4

South America 56.4

Active Foreign Bribery

In progress
50

Western Hemisphere 39.0

South America 34.4

Illicit Enrichment

In progress
43.7

Western Hemisphere 54.7

South America 59.2

Use of State Property

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 79.5

South America 85.5

Illicit Acquisition of a Benefit

Implemented
85.9

Western Hemisphere 52.1

South America 59.5

Public Embezzlement

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 77.6

South America 83.2

Passive Foreign Bribery

Not Implemented
0

Western Hemisphere 25.6

South America 22.0

Private Bribery

In progress
68.7

Western Hemisphere 22.7

South America 26.4

Private Embezzlement

Implemented
85.9

Western Hemisphere 64.7

South America 70.4

Obstruction of Justice

Implemented
85.9

Western Hemisphere 71.4

South America 79.1

Liability of Legal Persons

In progress
57.8

Western Hemisphere 61.3

South America 60.6

Statute of Limitations

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 79.6

South America 84.3

Prosecution, Adjudication and Sanctions

Implemented
85.9

Western Hemisphere 69.5

South America 71.2

Consequences and Compensation

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 70.3

South America 77.4

Cooperation With Law Enforcement

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 72.2

South America 72.9

Asset Recovery

Implemented
85.9

Western Hemisphere 66.4

South America 68.4

International cooperation

In progress
68.8

Western Hemisphere 68.9

South America 72.5

Assistance Without Criminalization

Implemented
96.8

Western Hemisphere 79.8

South America 82.8

Inclusion in Extradition Treaties

In progress
57.8

Western Hemisphere 55.1

South America 55.3

Convention as Legal Basis for Extradition

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 47.5

South America 55.2

Automatic Application Without Treaty

In progress
50.7

Western Hemisphere 52.7

South America 54.9

Prosecution Without Extradition

In progress
57.8

Western Hemisphere 57.2

South America 58.7

Custody

In progress
50.7

Western Hemisphere 73.4

South America 70.1

Assistance

In progress
45.3

Western Hemisphere 58.0

South America 64.6

Impossibility of Claiming Bank Secrecy

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 84.0

South America 86.3

Limited Use of Information

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 82.6

South America 89.5

Nature of Act

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 84.3

South America 83.3

Designate Central Authorities

Implemented
100

Western Hemisphere 75.9

South America 86.5

Responsibilities of Central Authorities

In progress
57.8

Western Hemisphere 71.5

South America 74.9

Communication Between Central Authorities

In progress
57.8

Western Hemisphere 67.3

South America 78.3

Special Investigative Techniques

Not Implemented
0

Western Hemisphere 56.9

South America 52.0

Technical Cooperation

In progress
57.8

Western Hemisphere 62.8

South America 78.3

Anti-corruption conventions timeline

199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022

Conventions

  • IACAC - Inter-American Convention Against Corruption
  • UNCAC - United Nations Convention against Corruption
  • OECD Anti-Bribery Convention

Key events

  • Signed
  • Ratifed / acceded
  • Review rounds

Convention Implementation Analysis

Chile signed the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption (IACAC) on March 29, 1996, and ratified it on September 22, 1998. It is a State Party to the Follow-Up Mechanism for the Implementation of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption (MESICIC) since June 4, 2001. The country also signed the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) on December 11, 2003, and subsequently ratified it on September 13, 2006. Chile is also party to the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention (OECD-ABC), having signed it on December 17, 1997, and deposited the instrument of ratification on April 18, 2001. Accordingly, Chile has undergone five rounds of review under MESICIC, one round of review under the UNCAC review mechanism, and four phases of evaluation by the OECD Working Group on Bribery. 

Chile’s record in implementing its commitments to IACAC, UNCAC, and OECD-ABC exhibits a number of successes and very few failures. With an overall score of 70.5, the measures adopted place the country at the higher point of compliance with international norms, surrounded by Mexico (69.7), Brazil (69.8), Peru (72.3), and Colombia (74.2). Despite achieving higher success in regard to criminalization and international cooperation (as is the case throughout the region) the large majority of preventive measures are found to be in progress or implemented; furthermore, contrary to the regional pattern, Chile evidences higher performance in the implementation of measures pertaining to criminalization and law enforcement rather than international cooperation.

The prevention of corruption is undergoing, classified as “in progress” by its average score and with prominent measures given a score above 50—standards of conduct and their enforcement, the state of oversight bodies, and encouraging the participation of civil society, among others. Indeed, almost three quarters of all preventive measures are considered to be in progress, and the training of public officials in the country is considered to be implemented, even if mildly (74.2). Within this section, only two measures fall far from the target range—transparency in government contracting and the actions to deter domestic and foreign bribery related to accounting regulations—both of which receive a score of 43.8. These measures represent one third of all “core-deficient” scores given to Chile’s implementation of international commitments, again reflecting the generally satisfactory distribution of progress.

In terms of criminalization of acts of corruption and related offenses, Chile shows mostly satisfactory results. The country is found to have successfully implemented several key commitments set out by the three conventions, criminalizing and enforcing the illicit acquisition of a benefit (i.e., influence trading), embezzlement in the public and private sectors, the obstruction of justice, as well as providing a long statute of limitations and broader consequences—such as the rescinding of contracts and obtaining compensation—for the commitment of corrupt offenses (as required by UNCAC), among others. Furthermore, most measures that are evaluated as remaining in progress—with actions against the active bribery of foreign officials (50.0) and the liability of legal persons (57.8) being exceptions here—received promising scores and are mostly penalized. However, there is a lack of sufficient information to allow for a comprehensive assessment. The measures thus affected include key commitments such those pertaining to active and passive bribery in the public sector, the abuse of functions, money laundering, and bribery in the private sector. While these results and the average section score reflect the fact that Chile can be said to have largely implemented its commitments to the criminalization of corruption, a single issue remains—the criminalization of illicit enrichment, a commitment to which the country’s efforts are still considered deficient for the aims of the conventions.

Chile is found fully compliant in its commitments to establish jurisdiction over the offenses covered by the conventions, including those that have been committed inside its territory, committed by a national, or when the offender is present in its territory, among other required forms. The country’s ongoing efforts to implement its commitments regarding international cooperation is reflected in less than half of all measures within this section receiving an “implemented” score of various degrees. However, only one measure remains deficient or unimplemented: the regulation and application of special investigative techniques such as electronic surveillance, undercover operations, and others.

Corruption Resilience

Score by indicator

Social Context

Resilient
80.0

Western Hemisphere 64.8

South America 64.2

Quality of Government

Resilient
75.4

Western Hemisphere 50.6

South America 52.4

Rule of Law

Resilient
78.1

Western Hemisphere 51.1

South America 50.7

Business Stability

Moderately Resilient
66.2

Western Hemisphere 50.5

South America 48.1

Violence & Security

Moderately Resilient
46.4

Western Hemisphere 55.0

South America 54.4

Corruption Resilience score over the time

Analysis

Although Chile’s social context indicator score decreased by 6.35 points from 2019 to 2020, the country’s current score (80.09) continues to exceed the Western Hemisphere average by 15.20 points. Since 2010, Chile has consistently held high social context indicator scores—remaining within the 75th percentile for the Western Hemisphere region throughout the decade. The country’s score is largely attributed to guaranteed and protected civil liberties, political rights, and media freedom.

In terms of the quality of governance and institutions, Chile’s indicator score falls within the top percentile and exceeds the Western Hemisphere regional average by 24.85 points, despite a 0.20-point decrease between 2019 and 2020. Over the last decade, the country’s scores have varied between its highest score of 78.43 in 2010, and its lowest score of 74.29 in 2012. Chile’s 2020 score—75.48—is largely attributed to the country’s efficiency in ensuring fundamental rights, upholding checks on government power and maintaining impartial bureaucracy.

In 2020, Chile’s rule of law indicator score (78.19) was the highest within the Western Hemisphere region. The country’s score increased by 0.60 points from the previous year and exceeded the regional average by 27.04 points. Throughout the decade, Chile has been a top performer in the rule of law indicator—achieving its highest score of 78.19 in 2020 and its lowest score of 73.06 in 2018. The country’s high score is largely the result of an independent and effective judiciary, which is protected by the Chilean constitution and resistant to political pressures.

The business stability indicator for Chile decreased by 2.99 points between 2019 and 2020. Despite this decrease, Chile’s score exceeds the Western Hemisphere average by 15.73 points and remains within the 75th percentile for 2020. Throughout the decade, Chile was consistently high-ranking—reaching its highest score of 76.16 in 2014 and its lowest score of 66.26 in 2020. Chile’s business stability score is largely attributed to a free business environment with effective regulations and policies.

Unlike previous indicators, Chile’s violence and security scores are the worst performing within the country. Over the last ten years, the country’s score has varied within a range of 36.69 points—achieving their highest score of 83.10 in 2015 and their lowest score of 46.42 in 2020.

Transparency Record

Main Reporting NGO

Chile Transparente

Report date

Oct-2011

Review year

2010-2011

Document reviewed

Executive Summary

language

English

Did the government make public the contact details before the country focal point? No
Was civil society consulted in preparation for the self-assessment? No
Was civil society invited to provide information to the official reviewers? Yes
Was the self-assessment published online or provided to CSOs? No

The UNCAC parallel review report for Chile was authored by Chile Transparente, the Chilean chapter of Transparency International, during the first review cycle which took place between 2010 and 2011. The review assessed Chile’s compliance in the implementation of articles found within chapters III and IV of the UN Convention against Corruption and mainly focused on articles 15, 16, 17, 23, 26, 32, 33, and 46. The authors reported that the availability of information, namely in regard to locating legislation related to UNCAC was relatively straightforward—all of Chile’s laws are published and accessible online (www.leychile.cl). However, locating statistics related to the prosecution of UNCAC relevant offenses or information on the details of these cases proved to be difficult. The NGO author requested information using the Transparency Law, yet the resulting data they obtained was limited or incomplete.

The report’s findings highlighted several key details. In regard to the country’s legal framework, the authors found that Chile was largely compliant with the aforementioned UNCAC provisions. However, major deficiencies were found within several areas, namely those of sanctions, whistleblower protections, and bank secrecy. The organization also noted there were no mechanisms within the legal framework to prevent conflicts of interest. In terms of the country’s enforcement system, the report found that there was a general lack of capacity to sufficiently conduct financial investigations. To mitigate these concerns, Chile Transparent noted several recommendations for priority action by state officials. The organization called for the implementation of quicker probity and transparency agendas, and enhanced training for public officials. The recommendations also called for the introduction of an easily accessible online complaint mechanism which guaranteed no retribution against those who utilize it.