Overview
The Conference of State Parties (CoSP) to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) is the main policymaking body of the Convention. In other words, it is the main body that sets policies and oversees the implementation of the UNCAC Convention, which is a treaty.
The UNCAC aims to promote and strengthen measures to prevent and combat corruption more efficiently and effectively, by reviewing the implementation, making decisions, and setting the strategic direction for the Convention.
Once a country adopts the Convention, signatory states agree to be bound by its terms and obligations and must implement its provisions into domestic law.
The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) acts as the secretariat of the Conference, and, in return, the Conference gives guidance to UNODC to develop and implement anti-corruption activities. There are several subsidiary bodies that assist in carrying out the Conference’s tasks, which include the implementation review group, working group on prevention, asset recovery working group, and the expert meeting on international cooperation.
As part of the implementation efforts, the NWC, joined by numerous human rights defenders and non-governmental organizations, has prepared a formal Proposal to strengthen the ability of State Parties to enforce the UNCAC.
Continue reading to learn more about CoSP!
CoSP In a Nutshell
- Main Policymaking Body: The Conference of the States Parties (CoSP) is the primary governing body responsible for overseeing the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), the only legally binding universal anti-corruption instrument.
- Mandate & Oversight: Its main goal is to improve the capacity of States to implement the Convention, ensuring that signatories turn the treaty’s principles into enforceable domestic laws.
- Peer Review System: CoSP manages the Implementation Review Mechanism (IRM), a peer-review process where countries assess one another to identify gaps in their laws and determine where technical assistance is needed.
- Strategic Direction: Meeting biennially (every two years), CoSP sets the strategic direction for the Convention and provides guidance to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), which acts as its secretariat.
- Operational Structure: It is supported by subsidiary bodies—including the Implementation Review Group and Working Groups on Prevention and Asset Recovery—that advise the Conference on specific technical challenges.
History of CoSP
The Conference of the States Parties (CoSP) to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) was established by Article 63 of the Convention with a mandate to establish, if it deems necessary, any appropriate mechanism or body to assist in the effective implementation of the Convention.
Other purposes of the group include:
- To improve the capacity of States to implement the Convention;
- To enhance cooperation among States in achieving the objectives of the Convention; and
- To promote and review the implementation of the Convention.
The first session of the CoSP was convened by the UN Secretary-General and took place from December 10 to 14, 2006, at the Dead Sea, Jordan. This occurred about a year after the UNCAC itself entered into force in December 2005. CoSP agreed that it was necessary to establish an appropriate and effective mechanism to assist in the review of the implementation of the Convention (resolution 1/1).
The history of CoSP is the story of turning the UNCAC’s principles into practical, enforceable global anti-corruption policy, with a continuous focus on strengthening the mechanisms for prevention, criminalization, international cooperation, and especially asset recovery.
Key Milestones and Developments
| Session | Date & Location | Key Focus and Achievements |
| CoSP1 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | December 10-14, 2006 (Amman, Jordan) | States Parties agreed that an appropriate and effective mechanism was necessary to review the implementation of the UNCAC, leading to the creation of intergovernmental working groups to begin designing this mechanism. |
| CoSP2 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | Jan. 28–Feb. 1, 2008 (Nusa Dua, Indonesia) | Further discussions on the implementation review mechanism, emphasizing a balanced geographical approach and avoiding adversarial or punitive elements. |
| CoSP3 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | November 9-13, 2009 (Doha, Qatar) | Adopted the landmark Resolution 3/1, establishing the Implementation Review Mechanism (IRM). This mechanism allows States Parties to peer-review their national anti-corruption laws and institutions for compliance with the UNCAC. The session also established the Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group on Prevention. |
| CoSP4 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | October 24-28, 2011 (Marrakech, Morocco) | Focused on the progress of the IRM and the importance of addressing technical assistance needs identified through the review process. Established Expert Group Meetings on International Cooperation. |
| CoSP5 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | November 25-29, 2013 (Panama City, Panama) | Focused on the critical link between corruption and the post-2015 development agenda (pre-SDGs). The session placed a strong emphasis on international cooperation in law enforcement (adopting Resolution 5/1) and asset recovery. It also addressed the importance of the private sector in prevention and launched discussions that would eventually lead to the “Panama Declaration” by the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA) held in parallel. |
| CoSP6 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | November 2015 (St. Petersburg, Russia) | Passed resolutions urging States Parties to cooperate on asset recovery (returning stolen public funds) and to improve procedures for the seizure and restraint of assets. |
| CoSP7 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | November 6-10, 2017 (Vienna, Austria) | Marked a significant expansion of the anti-corruption agenda into new sectors, specifically adopting a landmark resolution on safeguarding sport from corruption (Resolution 7/8). The session also focused heavily on strengthening mutual legal assistance (MLA) for asset recovery and international cooperation, as well as addressing the specific implementation challenges faced by Small Island Developing States (SIDS). |
| CoSP8 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | December 2019 (Abu Dhabi, UAE) | Adopted several resolutions, including those celebrating the tenth anniversary of the Implementation Review Mechanism and focusing on safeguarding sport from corruption and enhancing integrity in the public sector. |
| Special session of the Conference | May 7, 2021 (VIenna, Austria) | A focused procedural session held specifically to approve the draft political declaration titled “Our common commitment to effectively addressing challenges and implementing measures to prevent and combat corruption.” This declaration was subsequently transmitted to the General Assembly for formal adoption at the historic UNGASS 2021 in June. |
| CoSP9 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | December 2021 (Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt) | The first session organized in a hybrid (in-person and virtual) format due to the global context. Resolutions included a focus on new challenges related to international cooperation during times of emergencies and a resolution on beneficial ownership transparency to facilitate asset recovery. |
| CoSP10 Resolutions & Decisions Documentation | December 2023 (Atlanta, USA) | Concluded with the adoption of the “Atlanta 2023” resolution, which emphasizes integrity, accountability, and transparency. It also saw record participation from civil society and the private sector, and extended the Second Cycle of the Implementation Review Mechanism to June 2026. |
| CoSP11 Resolution (NA) Documentation | December 2025 (Doha, Qatar) | Coming in 2026. |
IWA and NWC’s Mission at CoSP11
IWA and NWC’s mission at CoSP11 is to raise awareness for the need for global anti-corruption enforcement that activates whistleblowers who have insights into the highly complex criminal activity.
The data is clear: whistleblowers report (a) when their identity is kept anonymous, (b) they are compensated for the value of their information, and (c) they know their tips can lead to enforcement action. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the Anti-Money Laundering Whistleblower Protection Act (AML WPA) use these procedures and have proven to be highly effective.
To properly implement the United Nations Convention Against Corruption the NWC is urging all State Parties to enact a Proposal to fully implement the FCPA and AML WPA under their domestic laws, to cooperate in prosecutions under these laws, and ensure that whistleblowers are fully incentivized and covered under these laws.
The NWC’s Proposal is not centered on protecting whistleblowers once they have been harmed (other resolutions address this issue); it is a proposal about how to activate whistleblowers as the key source for uncovering corruption, which requires protecting them from the start.
The NWC’s proposed resolution is based on the need to continue prosecutions under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Anti-Money Laundering Act under the U.S. laws that have proven to be highly effective, but also to expand the use of these laws to other State Parties.
The FCPA and AML WPA already include highly effective transnational whistleblower protections, including strong confidentiality provisions and the ability to obtain significant awards and compensation. Consequently, the NWC’s Proposal also urges urging all NGOs and Human Rights Defenders to join in an international educational campaign to ensure that whistleblowers know their rights and can use them where appropriate.
It is simply wrong for organizations engaged in anti-corruption efforts to be unable or unwilling to inform whistleblowers of the strong transnational anti-corruption laws that have been highly effective in protecting and compensating whistleblowers. These laws have already played the leading role in providing law enforcement agencies with the evidence they need to successfully prosecute corrupt actors.
Our goal is threefold:
- Encourage states to implement best practice whistleblowing and anti-corruption laws
- Urge states to educate whistleblowers about their rights abroad, and
- Work with State Parties, NGOs, investigative journalists, and human rights defenders to accomplish goals #1 and #2. This would include using an appropriate Implementation Review Mechanism (IRM) to ensure that these goals are met.
NGOs and Human Rights Defenders have a major role to play in these goals, particularly education and implementation, so we want to mobilize broad support amongst the CSO community.
When Does CoSP Meet?
CoSP meets biennially (every two years) and plays a central role in promoting and reviewing the Convention’s implementation. All parties and signatories to the Convention can take part in the Conference. Non-signatories, inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations can apply for observer status at its sessions.
Five Main Chapters of UNCAC
The United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) is structured around eight chapters, but it focuses on five main areas that serve as the pillars of the global fight against corruption.
Chapter II: Preventive Measures
Focuses on actively stopping corruption before it happens. Their key focus is on promoting integrity, transparency, and accountability in both the public and private sectors. For example, they may establish anti-corruption bodies, adopt codes of conduct for public officials, enhance transparency in public procurement (government buying), or ensure public access to information.
Chapter III: Criminalization and Law Enforcement
This chapter addresses the need to define and prosecute corrupt acts.They require countries to establish specific acts of corruption as criminal offenses under their domestic law. This might include criminalizing bribery (of national and foreign officials), embezzlement, money laundering, and obstruction of justice.
Chapter IV: International Cooperation
Recognizing that corruption is often a cross-border crime, this chapter focuses on how countries work together. It focuses on providing a framework for mutual legal assistance (sharing evidence/information), extradition of suspects, and cooperation between law enforcement agencies.
Chapter V: Asset Recovery
This is one of the Convention’s most innovative features, which makes the return of stolen assets a fundamental principle. Establishing rules and mechanisms to trace, freeze, confiscate, and return the proceeds of corruption to the country from which they were stolen.
Chapter VI: Technical Assistance and Information Exchange
This chapter supports the implementation of the entire Convention by encouraging developed countries to provide assistance (training, resources, and technical expertise) to developing countries to help them meet the UNCAC’s requirements.
The other three chapters of UNCAC are Chapter I (General Provisions), Chapter VII (Mechanisms for Implementation), and Chapter VIII (Final Provisions).
Working Groups
There are several subsidiary bodies that assist in carrying out the Conference’s tasks. These groups advise the Conference and make recommendations to ensure its mandate is carried out as per article 63, paragraph 7 of the Convention, which states that the Conference of the States Parties can establish any appropriate mechanism or body to assist in the effective implementation of the Convention. Below is a more comprehensive overview of each group:
Implementation Review Group (IRG)
This group is responsible for overseeing the implementation of UNCAC, and ensuring that State Parties follow through with Convention mandates once they’ve signed. They oversee peer-review processes, such as two State Parties reviewing another State Party’s compliance with various chapters of the UNCAC.
It manages the Implementation Review Mechanism (IRM). Established by the landmark Resolution 3/1 adopted at the third session of the CoSP (CoSP3) in Doha, Qatar, in November 2009, the IRM is the peer-review system established to promote and review the implementation of the UNCAC.
It is designed to be a non-adversarial and non-punitive process that focuses on finding solutions and identifying needs, rather than issuing punishments. The IRM manages the review process and compiles thematic reports from all country reviews. These reports are crucial for identifying global trends, common challenges, and good practices in implementation, all of which inform the technical assistance needs of countries.
What is the difference between IRG and IRM?
IRG is the subsidiary body directly responsible for overseeing and managing the IRM. The IRG ensures that State Parties follow through with the Convention mandates once they’ve signed. IRM on the other hand is is the process itself—the system that facilitates the actual review and knowledge-sharing.
The Peer-Review Process: How It Works
The IRM employs a rigorous peer-review system among State Parties:
- Selection: Each State Party under review is paired with two other State Parties to conduct the assessment.
- Review Scope: The two reviewing States assess the reviewed State Party’s compliance with various chapters of the UNCAC.
- Output: The process involves dialogue and results in a Country Review Report and a summary. These documents identify specific legislative, institutional, and practical gaps, as well as crucial areas where technical assistance is required.
Review Cycles and Focus
The IRM operates in cycles, with each cycle focusing on a specific set of UNCAC chapters:
| Cycle | Focus Chapters | Key Focus Areas |
| First Cycle | Chapters III & IV | Criminalization and International Cooperation |
| Second Cycle | Chapters II & V | Prevention and Asset Recovery |
The Second Cycle of the Implementation Review Mechanism was a key topic at CoSP10 (Atlanta, 2023), resulting in its extension to June 2026. This allows States Parties more time to complete the extensive peer-review process related to preventive measures and the challenging area of asset recovery. The 2024-2025 workplan is available here.
Working Group on Prevention
The Working Group’s primary job is to help and advise the main UNCAC body on how to put the prevention measures (found in Chapter II of the Convention) into action. Since it was created in 2009, the group has met once a year. These meetings allow participants to share effective strategies (“good practices”) and discuss current and new challenges related to implementing Chapter II.
The meetings cover a wide range of anti-corruption topics, including:
- Measuring how well anti-corruption bodies and policies work.
- Public awareness campaigns, education, and training on corruption.
- The role of national audit agencies (Supreme Audit Institutions).
- Handling and avoiding conflicts of interest.
- Promoting integrity within the justice system and in government purchasing (public procurement).
- Ensuring transparency and accountability in managing public money.
For more specific thematic compilation of prevention-related information, visit:
https://www.unodc.org/corruption/en/cosp/WGP/thematic-compilation-prevention.html
The 2024-2025 workplan is available here.
Asset Recovery Working Group
The Asset Recovery Working Group tackles the issue of recovering stolen public funds and returning them to the victimized country, which is the central to UNCAC Chapter V. The group consists of experts and practitioners who address legal and logistical challenges of tracing, freezing, confiscating and returning laundered assets that cross borders.
This group produces non-binding guidelines, tools, and recommendations aimed at simplifying and expediting the complex, multi-jurisdictional process of asset recovery, ensuring that the proceeds of corruption are returned to benefit the populations harmed by the crime.
Topics of discussion often include the following:
- Developing effective mechanisms for mutual legal assistance and extradition.
- Improving the management and disposal of frozen/seized assets.
- Addressing legal complexities like non-conviction-based confiscation.
- Promoting beneficial ownership transparency to unmask those hiding illicit funds behind shell companies.
The workplan for 2024-2025 is available here.
Expert Meeting on International Cooperation
The Open-ended Intergovernmental Expert Meeting to Enhance International Cooperation, often shortened and referred to as Expert Meeting on International Cooperation (EMIC) assists and advises CoSP in the implementation of its mandate on international cooperation under chapter IV of the Convention. This group meets once per year (since 2012) and information on best practices and emerging challenges related to chapter IV are presented to the Conference.
Topics of discussion include:
- Extradition: Examining legal and practical barriers to extraditing persons accused of corruption offenses.
- Mutual Legal Assistance: Discussing how to provide the widest measure of assistance in investigations, prosecutions, and judicial proceedings related to corruption. This includes the exchange of evidence and the identification and freezing of illicit assets.
- Law Enforcement Cooperation: Facilitating direct and informal cooperation between law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies, including the use of joint investigative teams and special investigative techniques.
- Technical Assistance: Identifying the capacity-building and technical assistance needs of States Parties to effectively meet their international cooperation obligations.
The group works closely with the IRG and the Asset Recovery Working Group to ensure a holistic approach to tackling the transnational elements of corruption.
The workplan for 2024-2025 is available here.
CoSP and the Role of Civil Society/NGOs
Public participation is key to promoting international accountability and transparency. One of the ways private citizens can make their voices heard is through civil society and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
International civil society is a network of citizen-led social organizations that work collaboratively towards their goals. Civil society organizations (CSOs) include research and academic groups, advocacy organizations, human rights defenders, humanitarian and philanthropic groups, foundations and charities, independent media outlets, and non-governmental organizations.
This network is vital to the creation and maintenance of good global governance.
Recent attacks on civil society organizations, such as the suppression of independent media, can have devastating effects on anti-corruption agents worldwide.
Through these organizations, citizens can provide valuable on-the-ground information regarding corrupt actors to law enforcement; and, in states that do not comply with the UNCAC, CSOs can give objective reports that would otherwise go suppressed.
This is why support for the NWC Proposal is critically important. Without on-the-ground information explaining how whistleblowers under existing transnational anti-corruption laws can report money laundering and foreign bribery confidentially, and obtain compensation if their information results in a successful prosecution, is urgently needed.
In fact, many CSOs have greater and more immediate access to public information and opinion than do state governments or agencies. It is thus more urgent than ever that CSOs are protected and given a voice on the world stage.
One way to give civil society and non-governmental organizations a platform is to encourage participation in public fora and conferences, including the CoSP to the UNCAC. The 2023 CoSP 10, which was held in Atlanta, Georgia, United States, had record high participation from civil society and private sector organizations.
To participate in the upcoming CoSP 11, organizations must register on the official CoSP website. To register, CSO representatives need a letter from their organization nominating them.
CoSP and the Need for International Transparency
International transparency cannot be accomplished when whistleblowers are being suppressed. Whistleblowers are the key civil society actors who have the actual evidence of corruption that puts teeth into transparency as to how governments and multinational corporations act.
The first step towards true international transparency is to ensure that those who have the evidence of corrupt activities can do the following:
- Report these crimes confidentially;
- Have the full support of NGOs, journalists, and human rights defenders (including attorneys) when they seek out information and representation on how they be best protection;
- Understand their rights under current laws to file confidential and anonymous claims and to qualify for awards and compensation.
The National Whistleblower Center and International Whistleblower Advocates demand, in the strongest possible terms, that any campaign advocating for international transparency or implementing of the UN Convention Against Corruption, include educating whistleblowers about their current rights under the FCPA and AML WPA. Laws, policies, and advocacy that ignore the most effective weapons in the war against corruption do not serve the public interest.
