Dominica
Capital
Roseau
Territory
750km²
Population (2020)
71,991
GDP Total (2020)
469.9M USD
GDP Per Capita (2020)
6,527 USD
Icome Group
Upper middle income
Convention Implementation
Corruption Resilience
Convention Implementation
Score by thematic sections and measures
Anti-corruption conventions timeline
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
|---|
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
Dominica ratified the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption (IACAC) on September 14, 2004. It is a State Party to the Follow-Up Mechanism for the Implementation of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption (MESICIC) since March 16, 2018. The country also acceded to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) on May 28, 2010. Accordingly, Dominica has undergone one round of review under the UNCAC review mechanism.
Dominica’s record in implementing its commitments to UNCAC exhibits very few successes and a large number of failures. With an overall score of 38.4, the measures adopted place the country towards the bottom level of compliance with international norms, surrounded by Saint Lucia (30.9), Suriname (31.7), Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (46.7), and Guyana (49.1). Furthermore, progress in implementation is unequally distributed. Although a number of measures related to criminalization and law enforcement show progress, all the measures found to be implemented belong to the international cooperation section, which results in a score more than double that received by criminalization.
Regarding the prevention of corruption, the country’s absence from the MESICIC until 2018 does not allow for the assessment of most preventive measures, as the implementation of its commitments to the IACAC have not undergone review prior to 2021 and preventive measures are not covered by the UNCAC review mechanism during its first round. The sole exception is the state of oversight bodies, for which Dominica receives a score of 40.6 (“core-deficient”) reflecting that “no agency has been designated to handle coordination” and that the country is called to “[a]llocate the human resources necessary for the effective execution of the work of both the Integrity Commission and the Director of Public Prosecutions, and develop local capabilities for officers of the Commission, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Financial Intelligence Unit.” However, no other information is available.
In terms of criminalization and law enforcement, Dominica shows poor results. Significant deficiencies remain, with two thirds of all measures within this section classified as core-deficient or unimplemented. Only two measures in progress receive a score above 50—the criminalization of illicit enrichment (57.8), and the legal mechanisms to facilitate cooperation with law enforcement (e.g., plea bargain) (57.8). Significant measures are found largely or fully unimplemented, including the protection of those who report acts of corruption (i.e., whistleblower protection) as well as the criminalization of abuse of functions and active and passive bribery of foreign officials. Other measures remain deficient at core, such as the criminalization of private bribery (14.8), obstruction of justice (14.8), active and passive bribery in the public sector (33.6 and 40.6, respectively), illicit acquisition of a benefit (i.e., influence trading) (33.6), embezzlement in the private sector (35.9), and others.
Among the severe problems identified in connection with criminalization and law enforcement, the country’s limited jurisdiction over the offenses covered by the conventions deserves special attention, as Dominica has not established jurisdiction over offenses committed inside its territory, committed by a national, or when the offender is present in its territory, among other required forms. The UNCAC review mechanism briefly reports that “[t]he Integrity in Public Office Act and Criminal Procedure Act do not address the issue of jurisdiction. There are rules on jurisdiction in the Money Laundering (Prevention) Act, but they do not cover acts of participation in the predicate offenses of money-laundering committed abroad.” Dominica’s record in promoting and engaging with international cooperation is also lackluster, yet it receives a general classification of “in progress”. Among the bigger issues reported are the findings that the country does not recognize UNCAC as a legal basis for extradition, requires dual criminality, and only considers bribery, embezzlement, and money-laundering as extraditable offenses.
Corruption Resilience
Score by indicator
Corruption Resilience score over the time
Analysis
Despite a slight decrease between 2019 and 2020, Dominica’s current social context score (84.74) substantially exceeds the Western Hemisphere average and ranks the country within the 75th percentile. Over the last ten years, the highest indicator score achieved was 88.63 in 2010 and its lowest score of 71.20 was measured in 2015. Throughout the decade, Dominica’s social context score has been consistently high compared to its regional counterparts, and this is largely the result of respected—and guaranteed—political rights and civil liberties. In terms of media freedom, within Dominica, the media is independent and constitutionally protected.
With respect to the quality of government indicators, Dominica’s current score (51.23) increased by 10.33 points from the previous year, however it remains just above the Western Hemisphere average of 50.63. Since 2010, the country's quality of government indicator has been declining, achieving its lowest score of 40.90 in 2019.
Across the rule of law indicators, Dominica’s 2020 score (68.84) exceeded the Western Hemisphere average (51.15) by 17.69 points and ranked within the 75th percentile for the region. Since 2010, the country’s scores have been steadily increasing. Most notably, there has been a 15.5-point increase between the indicator scores for 2010 and 2020. Dominica’s current score was largely influenced by the country’s independent judiciary which is safeguarded by constitutional protections. Unlike many of its regional counterparts, the courts are relatively resistant to political pressure and corruption.
In terms of the business stability indicator, Dominica has fluctuated between their highest score of 64.79 in 2010 and their lowest score of 56.44 which was recorded in 2017. Over the last decade, the country’s business stability score has been steadily declining. Dominica’s business stability score faced another marginal decrease (of 0.11 points) between 2019 and 2020, resulting in a current score of 57.53. The country’s score is largely attributed to inefficiencies in regulations and policies. In 2020, Dominica was cited as one of several countries with the lowest rates of property registration in the World Bank’s Doing Business Survey.
With regard to the violence and security indicator, Dominica’s score increased by 14.60 points from the previous year. However, despite this increase, Dominica’s indicator score (44.95) remains within the 25th percentile for the Western Hemisphere and falls 10.09 points below the regional average. While Dominica’s indicator score fluctuated between its highest score of 59.99 in 2014 and its lowest score of 25.44 in 2011, the country never retained an optimal score compared to its better-performing neighbors.