Brazil, corruption, and the 2016 Olympics.

Author:Ruiz Machado, Leonardo
Position:Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law: Adapting to a Rapidly Changing World

This panel was convened at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, April 9, by its moderator Shaun Freiman, a student at the University of Richmond School of Law, who introduced the panelists: Bernardo Weaver of the Inter-American Development Bank; Chris Gaffney of the University of Zurich Department of Geography; and Leonardo Ruiz Machado of the law firm Machado, Meyer, Sendacz e Opice Advogados. *


The fight against corruption is a worldwide trend. In Brazil, companies are more and more aware that in a global economy where businesses relocate from country to country and borders are no longer the barriers they once were, they need to attend to certain requirements and comply with worldwide standards.

In this context, there is a negative side to the increase in international transactions. The impacts and consequences of corruption have to be analyzed with a deeper perspective. Furthermore, the methods used to combat corruption on a global level will be the object of more debate, strengthening the possibilities of worldwide cooperation and the advancement of international systems to fight such corruption.

In Brazil, corruption is a historical problem and more recently it has become a major issue. In recent years it has been a focal point of discussions, whether among the people in general or within corporations. This is a direct reaction to the strengthening of both the legislation and institutions responsible for investigating corruption cases. In fact, the matter has become more important to the daily lives of people and has been the subject of more discussion and reflection in society. One of the milestones is the approval in 2013 of Law No. 12,846, the Clean Company Act. This bill is the result of global efforts to address crimes against foreign governments. Also, there was a belief that the laws prior to the Clean Company Act were not as focused as necessary to penalize companies, rather than just the individuals, responsible for misconduct. The sanctions introduced by the Clean Company Act are far more effective in discouraging companies from being too lenient regarding employees willing to bend the rules to obtain better results for their employer.

This process, of course, has the effect of generating an increase in the calculated amount of corruption. There is no way to objectively determine whether this increase is the result of better tools for detection or if corruption has actually grown in recent years...

To continue reading