Iraq's Federal Integrity Commission and illicit gain law

In briefThe Integrity Commission is an independent body subject to oversight by the Council of Representatives under article 102 of the Constitution, and its work is governed by the Integrity Commission and Illicit Gain Law No. 30 of 2011 as amended by Law No. 30 of 2019. The Commission investigates corruption cases through its investigators under the supervision of the competent investigative judge and the Criminal Procedure Law, follows financial disclosure statements, pursues illicit gain and conflicts of interest, and works to recover corruption proceeds moved abroad.

The office of lawyer Ali Barakat in Baghdad, based in al-Yarmouk, follows matters that pass through the Federal Integrity Commission and the investigative and felony courts dealing with integrity cases: reporting corruption offences, being summoned for investigation, financial disclosure statements, illicit gain charges, conflicts of interest, and challenges to investigative judges' decisions. The material here is drawn from the law as published in the Official Gazette and from Supreme Judicial Council publications, to explain the legal framework.

Where the Commission's authority comes from

The Commission rests on article 102 of the Constitution and on Law No. 30 of 2011, which the 2019 amendment (Law No. 30 of 2019) renamed the "Integrity Commission and Illicit Gain Law". That amendment rewrote the definitions and gave the Commission a role in national anti-corruption policy. How the Commission is constituted, who heads it and what it may and may not do is set out on the Integrity Commission: mandate and limits.

What is a "corruption case" in law?

The Commission does not investigate every offence committed by an official. The third paragraph of the first article defines a corruption case as a criminal case under investigation concerning theft of state funds, bribery, embezzlement, illicit gain, or officials exceeding the limits of their posts, under specified articles of Penal Code No. 111 of 1969: 328 to 331, 334 to 336, 338, 340 and 341.

The amendment adds corruption and breach of trust in public-benefit non-governmental organisations and in unions, syndicates and professional associations in whose funds the state participates; bribery in the domestic and foreign private sector in dealings connected with the public sector; and bribery of foreign officials. The enlarged criminal panel of the Federal Court of Cassation applied this limit in its decision of 27/1/2020, holding that an act not falling within the concept of corruption in the first article lies outside the jurisdiction of the court for integrity cases. The practical consequences of that line are compared on integrity cases versus ordinary criminal complaints.

How a file moves from report to court

In outline, a file passes through four hands: whoever reports the act, the Commission's investigators, the investigative judge who supervises them, and finally the trial court. The Commission cannot act alone at the coercive stage; a judge's decision stands behind every summons or investigative measure. The step-by-step sequence is on the investigation route in integrity cases, and the courts that hear these cases, including the central anti-corruption felony court the Supreme Judicial Council announced on 16/10/2019 within the Baghdad/Karkh appeal presidency, are covered on integrity courts and what they hear.

Financial disclosure and illicit gain

Article 16 requires holders of specified senior posts to file a financial disclosure statement, including the President and Vice-Presidents, members of the Council of Representatives, ministers, governors, directors general, holders of special grades, officers of specified ranks, chairs of public-sector company boards, university presidents and college deans, and others listed in the article. The Commission may also require any official or person in public service to disclose, on the basis of a report supported by credible evidence.

The statement is filed within ninety days of taking up and of leaving the post, and each January, under article 17. The law defines illicit gain as any increase of more than twenty percent a year in the wealth of the filer, spouse or children that is out of proportion to their ordinary resources and for which no lawful cause is shown. Where the Commission finds a large increase, it refers the matter to the investigative judge to consider requiring the filer to prove lawful sources within ninety days, and article 19 sets the penalties and the return of the gain's value.

Conflict of interest

The definition of a conflict of interest, in the wording introduced in 2019, ties it to the same circle of family members whose wealth appears in the disclosure form, plus relatives to the second degree. Article 20 deals with appointing relatives and with what a filer must do once a conflict is established. Both rules are explained on conflict of interest for public officials.

Asset recovery

Alongside the recovery department, Law No. 9 of 2012 established the Iraq Funds Recovery Fund, linked to the Council of Ministers and chaired by the head of the Integrity Commission. It aims to recover Iraq's financial rights obtained unlawfully by others in the sanctions and oil-for-food era, and may bring civil and criminal claims inside and outside Iraq.

Reporting

Anyone can set a corruption file in motion, and officials who come across such an offence in their work carry a duty to do so. The Criminal Procedure Law names the places where a report can be lodged and gives the reporter some protection for serious offences. Those rules are laid out on reporting a corruption offence.

Challenges

Decisions taken during the investigation and judgments at trial each have their own route of challenge and their own deadline, and the Commission itself may challenge in cases its investigators did not handle. Because those deadlines are short, they are gathered on challenging procedures in integrity cases.

Which body handles which question

People often go to the wrong door first. As a rough guide drawn from the texts above:

A question about whether an act is a corruption offence at all: this turns on the list in the first article of the Commission's law, and in a dispute it is the courts, not the Commission, that decide.
A summons from the Commission: it rests on a judge's decision, so the investigation papers and the judge's name are the starting point.
A disclosure form or an observation on it: this is handled by the Commission's prevention side, and it runs on its own deadlines separate from any criminal file.
A request to trace funds moved abroad: this falls to the recovery department and, for sanctions-era rights, the Funds Recovery Fund.
A dispute over a judge's decision: this goes up the court ladder, not back to the Commission.

Deadlines that recur in these files

Several time limits come up again and again, and missing one of them changes the file:

Ninety days to file the disclosure statement after taking up or leaving a post, plus the annual January filing.
Ninety days for a filer to prove lawful sources once the investigative judge asks.
Thirty days to challenge an investigative judge's decision or a trial judgment, each counted in its own way.

Situations that come up often

Questions in this area tend to start from a single piece of paper:

An official who has received a summons: the first question is the capacity in which he or she is called, as an accused, a witness or someone asked for information, because that shapes what to bring and what to say. The summons is read alongside the judge's decision behind it.
An official who has left the post: the duty to file within ninety days of leaving remains, and the file with the prevention department does not close simply because he or she has gone.
A citizen with information about corruption in a department: usually asks where to go and whether his or her name will be revealed; the answer lies in the general reporting rules of the Criminal Procedure Law.
A private company owner: may assume the integrity law does not concern him or her, while the amendment covers private-sector bribery where the dealings are connected with the public sector.
The family of an accused person who has died: asks what happens to illicit gain; the answer is in the fourth paragraph of article 19.

What to bring to a review

It saves time to bring whatever papers exist: the summons or the judge's decision, a copy of the latest disclosure statement for filers, documents showing the sources of wealth such as property deeds, sale contracts, account statements and inheritance deeds, and any correspondence with the Commission or the employing department. These are the papers on which an assessment is built.

Topics in this area

How the office reviews a file

Review starts with the legal description of the act, because whether it falls within the definition of a corruption case determines the investigating body and the court. Next comes the person's status: a filer under article 16, an ordinary official, or someone from the private sector. Then the investigation papers, the investigative judge's decisions and the deadlines for challenging them are reviewed, together with the filing dates and the deadline for answering the Commission's observations. To arrange a review, the office can be reached on +964 770 848 7526 or at alibaltaae@gmail.com.

Legal basis and sources

Frequently asked questions

Can the Integrity Commission detain someone on its own?

The Commission investigates under the supervision of the investigative judge and uses investigative tools and summonses only by decision of the competent judge, under article 12.

Is every offence by an official an integrity case?

No. A corruption case is limited to the offences listed in the first article; others follow the ordinary criminal route.

Does the law cover the private sector?

It covers domestic and foreign private-sector bribery in dealings connected with the public sector, bribery of foreign officials, and corruption in the organisations and unions named in the first article.

Is the disclosure statement confidential?

The ninth paragraph of article 17 prohibits disclosing any information, documents or examination steps relating to the form to anyone not legally authorised, and the sixth paragraph of article 19 penalises anyone who discloses them through his or her post.

Does the accused person's death stop recovery of illicit gain?

No. The fourth paragraph of article 19 provides that the end of the criminal case by death does not prevent enforcement of the order to return the value of the illicit gain.

Topics in this area

Always check the text in force and its amendments in the official source.

To ask about your matter

Call +964 770 848 7526 WhatsApp Email