Skip to content

CS Professional · Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) - Principles and Practice · Business Ethics, Code of Conduct and Anti-Bribery

Kaveri Infra Ltd's board adopts an anti-bribery policy but never trains staff, never monitors its sales agents and does not review the policy. A sales agent bribes a public servant to win a tender for Kaveri. On the facts, what is the likely position regarding the adequate procedures defence?

The defence is unlikely to succeed. The organisation bears the burden of proving adequate procedures in place to prevent associated persons from bribing, and an unimplemented, unmonitored paper policy does not demonstrate that. Section 9 also covers agents, not only employees.

  1. AThe defence is available because a written policy exists
  2. BThe defence is available because the agent is not an employee
  3. CThe defence is unlikely to succeed because the organisation must prove adequate procedures actually in place to prevent such conduct, and a paper policy alone does not show thisCorrect
  4. DThe defence is unnecessary because Section 9 applies only to employees

Explanation

The burden lies on the organisation to prove adequate procedures were in place to prevent associated persons from bribing. A policy that is never implemented, trained on or monitored is weak proof. Section 9 covers agents too, since capacity does not matter.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Business Ethics, Code of Conduct and Anti-Bribery shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Business Ethics, Code of Conduct and Anti-BriberyFree diagnostic mock

More Business Ethics, Code of Conduct and Anti-Bribery questions