A/HRC/28/73 bribery”, in order to avoid it being misunderstood as implying that the briber has taken the initiative and the recipient is a passive victim. It is more useful to determine which party is the victim in a corrupt setting. In many cases, this can be determined by examining the distribution of power between the parties to the corrupt agreement. Typically, the less powerful or even oppressed party will be the victim. This is reflected in the distinction between “petty corruption”, which takes the form of a low-ranking public official taking a bribe for doing something that is already required by law or for not doing something that is prohibited by law, and “grand corruption”, which is carried out by high-level officials who seek payment for exercising their discretionary powers. 18 IV. What is the value in linking corruption with its negative impact on the enjoyment of human rights? 24. Corruption is mainly dealt with from a criminal perspective.19 Anti-corruption measures — in the national and the international contexts — primarily concentrate on prosecution of the related criminal offences. International anti-corruption treaties encourage or even oblige States parties to take steps within their legal order to criminalize certain kinds of behaviour defined as corruption. However, discussing the negative impact of corruption on the enjoyment of human rights should not be seen as jeopardizing any effort to combat corruption by means of the criminal law. Corruption is a crime. Impunity in cases of corruption must end. In that sense, a human rights perspective to combating corruption and its effects is complementary to the criminal law approach. 25. However, the United Nations Convention against Corruption and regional conventions against corruption include preventive measures (e.g. accountability, transparency, and access to public information) that States parties are obliged to take. Without disregarding those efforts, anti-corruption measures are focused mainly on the consideration of criminal offences, the necessary sanctions, and international cooperation in prosecution. The situating of anti-corruption measures within the criminal law narrows the focus to the perpetrators. The purpose of criminal proceedings is — broadly speaking — to determine the person responsible for the offence. Focusing criminal proceedings on the perpetrator can lead to a loss of focus on the victim of the corruption. The position of those affected by corruption is not very strong in criminal proceedings. Furthermore, the criminal approach does not offer ways of addressing the structural problems caused by corruption. It is concentrated, by its very nature, on a single offence, and typically cannot address the collective and general effects of corruption referred to in the present report. 26. Corruption can also be combated by applying remedies from private law. This approach is quite common among States. In international law, the Civil Law Convention on Corruption, which was adopted by the Council of Europe in 1999, 20 deals, inter alia, with compensation for damage, liability, the validity of contracts and the protection of employees, and therefore focuses on the consequences of corruption in private law. Furthermore, the United Nations Convention against Corruption21 requires each State party to take measures to address consequences of corruption, for example considering corruption 18 19 20 21 See, for example, the statement by Nihal Jayawickrama in the report on the United Nations conference on anti-corruption, good governance and human rights, A/HRC/4/71, p. 8. Leonie Hensgen, “Corruption and human rights – making the connection at the United Nations”, in the Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, Armin von Bogdandy and Rüdiger Wolfrum, eds., vol. 17, pp. 197��219 (200) (Brill and Nijhoff, 2013). Civil Law Convention against Corruption, ETS No. 174. Adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 58/4 of 31 October 2003. 9