EssayQuality唯一网址：https://www.essayquality.com/：PS申请信代写、Personal Statement代写、北美PS申请信代写、学期报告代写、Term Paper代写北美、英国课程作业代写、北美案例分析代写、mla格式代写、apa格式代写、网课代修代上、网课托管、作业代写、课程作业代写、quiz代考、exam代考、essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写、report代写....
(It is suggested the reasoning is somewhat circular!)
The court pointed out that the mischief aimed at by the modern statutes dealing with corruption is to prevent agents and public servants being put in positions of temptation.
A person does not have to show favour in consequence of having received a gift, the prosecution have merely to prove that a person received a gift as an inducement to show favour, for that gift to be corrupt (R v Carr (1957) 40 Cr App R 188). A person who accepts a gift knowing that it is intended as a bribe is guilty of an offence even if he does not intend to carry out what is expected of him (R v Mills (1979) 68 Cr App R 154 CA).
There is therefore, a considerable body of case law which clarifies the definition of corruption. However recent work in international fora, in particular the Council of Europe, has focused on attempting to define the behaviour which is corrupt. Though none of this work has yet been completed, one example of a possible definition is:
the intentional promise, offer, or gift by any person, directly or indirectly, of an advantage of any kind whatsoever to a person, as undue consideration for themselves, or for anyone else, to act or refrain from acting in the exercise of their functions, or the intentional request or receipt by a person, directly or indirectly, of an undue advantage of any kind whatsoever, for themselves or for anyone else, or the acceptance of offers or promises of such advantages to act or refrain from acting in the exercise of their functions.
The "mens rea" in this example is the intention to provide or receive an undue advantage. The assumption is that if, in the circumstances of the case, the advantage reaches a level where it might affect the actions of the person in question it is undue - and therefore corrupt. Trifling advantages such as small gratuities or Christmas presents, would not usually fall within the ambit of an offence described in this way.
But this definition is clearly related to bribery and does not include false documentation (covered by the 1906 Act) or improper influence. Separate definitions would be needed to cover these acts. Possibilities include, for false documentation:
- knowingly preparing or using an invoice which incorrectly describes a transaction, or reason for a transaction;
- knowingly failing to record a payment where there is a requirement to so record;
- knowingly preparing or using accounts which include false invoices or other records.
The concept known to several continental jurisdictions as trading in is perhaps better described in the United Kingdom as misuse of office. A possible definition of this offence might be:
