Skip to content

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

Sagar Logistics Ltd is charged under Section 9 because its transporter paid an official to speed up a licence. Sagar wants to rely on the proviso to Section 9(1). What must it prove?

Sagar must prove that it had adequate procedures in place, in compliance with the guidelines prescribed by the Central Government, to prevent persons associated with it from giving undue advantage to public servants. The burden lies on the organisation, and the associate's status or outcome is irrelevant.

  1. AThat the transporter was not its employee
  2. BThat the official never received the advantage
  3. CThat it had in place adequate procedures in compliance with the prescribed guidelines to prevent associated persons from such conductCorrect
  4. DThat the transporter has been acquitted

Explanation

The proviso to Section 9(1) gives a defence if the organisation proves it had adequate procedures, in compliance with prescribed guidelines, to prevent associated persons from bribing. Employee status is irrelevant under Explanation 1, and prosecution of the person is not required under Section 9(2).

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