A/HRC/26/42 on the verge of being missed. The second aspect relates to the realization of democracy and the implementation of the rule of law. If the authorities of a State are pervaded by corruption, the people’s confidence in the government, and eventually in the democratic order and the rule of law, is undermined. 15. Another approach to classifying types of corruption is to differentiate between active and passive corruption. This distinction is discussed, for example, in the commentaries on the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions,11 which is sponsored by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Active corruption means spending money or providing other benefits to achieve undue advantages, whereas passive corruption refers to the receipt of money or other benefits as an undue advantage. The distinction between offering bribes and taking bribes is very clear. Nevertheless, it is doubtful that this distinction may be helpful from a human rights perspective. The focus of this report is on the negative impact of corruption on the enjoyment of human rights and therefore it has a victim-oriented approach. In cases of corruption, it can be difficult to determine whether the victim has taken part in the corrupt act actively or passively. It is even possible that the victim has stood outside the corrupt agreements. For example, where people are forced to pay to access public services, those who pay bribes are active in corruption but they are also victims. For this reason, the OECD anti-bribery convention does not use the term “active 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. IV. What is the value in linking corruption and its negative impact with the enjoyment of human rights? 16. Corruption is mainly dealt with in a criminal perspective.12 Anti-corruption measures — in the national and the international contexts — primarily concentrate on the prosecution of the related criminal offences. International anti-corruption treaties encourage or even oblige the signing States to undertake efforts within their legal order to criminalize certain kinds of behaviour defined as corruption. 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 member States are obliged to promote. Without disregarding these efforts, anti-corruption measures are focused on consideration of criminal offences, the necessary sanctions and international cooperation in prosecution. Situating anti-corruption measures within the criminal law narrows the perspective to the perpetrators. The purpose of a criminal proceeding is — roughly speaking — to determine who the person is who is 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 11 12 Available from http://www.oecd.org/daf/anti-bribery/ConvCombatBribery_ENG.pdf. The Convention was adopted by the Negotiating Conference on 21 November 1997 and entered into force on 15 February 1999. See also the “Seventh annual report of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment” (CAT/C/52/2), para. 72 et seq. 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). 7