Landmark Censorship Injunction Issued, But Does It Go Far Enough To Be Effective In Protecting Global Free Speech? What About Enforcing LAWS AGAINST CORRUPTION???

Isn't the censorship industrial complex far wider than the defendants enjoined yesterday? Doesn't it go all the way up to WEF-UN-WHO, Pharma, Regulators, etc to CORRUPTLY EXPERIMENT on humanity?

Dear reader, we are going to present one solution for the America’s in this post. Please be aware we will be sending more laws & treaties for other parts of the world such as Australia, New Zealand and UK, etc. In our opinion it will take a multi prong approach to bring down the 7 headed beast of Babylon known as the Health Monopoly.

Anti Corruption Approach #1: Focus on The America’s First since USA is already judicially ruled to be evil censorship tyrants as of July 4, 2023

Remember, July 4, 2023 Judge Doherty ruled censorship tyrants down & humanity up! He confirmed USA looks pretty damn guilty of coordinating an attack on our rights to free speech.

USA is in “The America’s” right? Yes, so lets start there for our first remedy!

Are you readers aware that Canada, USA, Ecuador, etc are all in big trouble if we actually take the effort to enforce the LAW?

Today let’s learn about the relatively new: INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION

We only need one non corrupt State to come through, and trust us, that is going to happen - it’s in process, as you can see by yesterdays court ruling in humanities favor.

Censorship = Criminal Corruption

Don’t you think the lens of “anti corruption” is how we should look at the new censorship ruling, where corrupt US officials just became enjoined from essentially depriving rights under color of law and ordered to stop censoring social media bi proxy?

It sure looks and smells like corruption to us…

---

Which States signed the INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION?

Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas (Commonwealth of), Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chili, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica (Commonwealth of), Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Lucia. San Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela

Its time to call a spade a spade - the Censorship Industrial Complex is an illegal corruption cartel which is actionable under the following anti-corruption instrument (and many others):

Global censorship is corruption and a crime against humanity. Help us fight back. Make a generous donation as we launch stopglobalcensorship.org to help humanity stop the UN, WEF, WHO and their captured States from corrupt acts of censorship.

INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION

(B-58) Adopted at the third plenary session, held on March 29, 1996) PREAMBLE THE MEMBER STATES OF THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, CONVINCED that corruption undermines the legitimacy of public institutions and strikes at society, moral order and justice, as well as at the comprehensive development of peoples;

CONSIDERING that representative democracy, an essential condition for stability, peace and development of the region, requires, by its nature, the combating of every form of corruption in the performance of public functions, as well as acts of corruption specifically related to such performance;

PERSUADED that fighting corruption strengthens democratic institutions and prevents distortions in the economy, improprieties in public administration and damage to a society's moral fiber;

RECOGNIZING that corruption is often a tool used by organized crime for the accomplishment of its purposes;

CONVINCED of the importance of making people in the countries of the region aware of this problem and its gravity, and of the need to strengthen participation by civil society in preventing and fighting corruption;

RECOGNIZING that, in some cases, corruption has international dimensions, which requires coordinated action by States to fight it effectively;

CONVINCED of the need for prompt adoption of an international instrument to promote and facilitate international cooperation in fighting corruption and, especially, in taking appropriate action against persons who commit acts of corruption in the performance of public functions, or acts specifically related to such performance, as well as appropriate measures with respect to the proceeds of such acts;

DEEPLY CONCERNED by the steadily increasing links between corruption and the proceeds generated by illicit narcotics trafficking which undermine and threaten legitimate commercial and financial activities, and society, at all levels;

BEARING IN MIND the responsibility of States to hold corrupt persons accountable in order to combat corruption and to cooperate with one another for their efforts in this area to be effective;

and DETERMINED to make every effort to prevent, detect, punish and eradicate corruption in the performance of public functions and acts of corruption specifically related to such performance,

HAVE AGREED to adopt the following INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION

Article I Definitions For the purposes of this Convention:

"Public function" means any temporary or permanent, paid or honorary activity, performed by a natural person in the name of the State or in the service of the State or its institutions, at any level of its hierarchy.

"Public official", "government official", or "public servant" means any official or employee of the State or its agencies, including those who have been selected, appointed, or elected to perform activities or functions in the name of the State or in the service of the State, at any level of its hierarchy.

"Property" means assets of any kind, whether movable or immovable, tangible or intangible, and any document or legal instrument demonstrating, purporting to demonstrate, or relating to ownership or other rights pertaining to such assets.

Article II Purposes The purposes of this Convention are:

1. To promote and strengthen the development by each of the States Parties of the mechanisms needed to prevent, detect, punish and eradicate corruption; and

2. To promote, facilitate and regulate cooperation among the States Parties to ensure the effectiveness of measures and actions to prevent, detect, punish and eradicate corruption in the performance of public functions and acts of corruption specifically related to such performance.

Article III Preventive Measures

For the purposes set forth in Article II of this Convention, the States Parties agree to consider the applicability of measures within their own institutional systems to create, maintain and strengthen:

1. Standards of conduct for the correct, honorable, and proper fulfillment of public functions. These standards shall be intended to prevent conflicts of interest and mandate the proper conservation and use of resources entrusted to government officials in the performance of their functions. These standards shall also establish measures and systems requiring government officials to report to appropriate authorities acts of corruption in the performance of public functions. Such measures should help preserve the public's confidence in the integrity of public servants and government processes.

2. Mechanisms to enforce these standards of conduct.

3. Instruction to government personnel to ensure proper understanding of their responsibilities and the ethical rules governing their activities.

4. Systems for registering the income, assets and liabilities of persons who perform public functions in certain posts as specified by law and, where appropriate, for making such registrations public.

5. Systems of government hiring and procurement of goods and services that assure the openness, equity and efficiency of such systems.

6. Government revenue collection and control systems that deter corruption.

7. Laws that deny favorable tax treatment for any individual or corporation for expenditures made in violation of the anticorruption laws of the States Parties.

8. Systems for protecting public servants and private citizens who, in good faith, report acts of corruption, including protection of their identities, in accordance with their Constitutions and the basic principles of their domestic legal systems.

9. Oversight bodies with a view to implementing modern mechanisms for preventing, detecting, punishing and eradicating corrupt acts.

10. Deterrents to the bribery of domestic and foreign government officials, such as mechanisms to ensure that publicly held companies and other types of associations maintain books and records which, in reasonable detail, accurately reflect the acquisition and disposition of assets, and have sufficient internal accounting controls to enable their officers to detect corrupt acts.

11. Mechanisms to encourage participation by civil society and nongovernmental organizations in efforts to prevent corruption.

12. The study of further preventive measures that take into account the relationship between equitable compensation and probity in public service.

Article IV Scope

This Convention is applicable provided that the alleged act of corruption has been committed or has effects in a State Party.

Article V Jurisdiction

1. Each State Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention when the offense in question is committed in its territory.

2. Each State Party may adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention when the offense is committed by one of its nationals or by a person who habitually resides in its territory.

3. Each State Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention when the alleged criminal is present in its territory and it does not extradite such person to another country on the ground of the nationality of the alleged criminal.

4. This Convention does not preclude the application of any other rule of criminal jurisdiction established by a State Party under its domestic law.

Article VI Acts of Corruption

1. This Convention is applicable to the following acts of corruption:

a. The solicitation or acceptance, directly or indirectly, by a government official or a person who performs public functions, of any article of monetary value, or other benefit, such as a gift, favor, promise or advantage for himself or for another person or entity, in exchange for any act or omission in the performance of his public functions;

b. The offering or granting, directly or indirectly, to a government official or a person who performs public functions, of any article of monetary value, or other benefit, such as a gift, favor, promise or advantage for himself or for another person or entity, in exchange for any act or omission in the performance of his public functions;

c. Any act or omission in the discharge of his duties by a government official or a person who performs public functions for the purpose of illicitly obtaining benefits for himself or for a third party;

d. The fraudulent use or concealment of property derived from any of the acts referred to in this article; and

e. Participation as a principal, coprincipal, instigator, accomplice or accessory after the fact, or in any other manner, in the commission or attempted commission of, or in any collaboration or conspiracy to commit, any of the acts referred to in this article.

2. This Convention shall also be applicable by mutual agreement between or among two or more States Parties with respect to any other act of corruption not described herein.

Article VII Domestic Law

The States Parties that have not yet done so shall adopt the necessary legislative or other measures to establish as criminal offenses under their domestic law the acts of corruption described in Article VI(1) and to facilitate cooperation among themselves pursuant to this Convention.

Article VIII Transnational Bribery

Subject to its Constitution and the fundamental principles of its legal system, each State Party shall prohibit and punish the offering or granting, directly or indirectly, by its nationals, persons having their habitual residence in its territory, and businesses domiciled there, to a government official of another State, of any article of monetary value, or other benefit, such as a gift, favor, promise or advantage, in connection with any economic or commercial transaction in exchange for any act or omission in the performance of that official's public functions. Among those States Parties that have established transnational bribery as an offense, such offense shall be considered an act of corruption for the purposes of this Convention. Any State Party that has not established transnational bribery as an offense shall, insofar as its laws permit, provide assistance and cooperation with respect to this offense as provided in this Convention.

Article IX Illicit Enrichment

Subject to its Constitution and the fundamental principles of its legal system, each State Party that has not yet done so shall take the necessary measures to establish under its laws as an offense a significant increase in the assets of a government official that he cannot reasonably explain in relation to his lawful earnings during the performance of his functions. Among those States Parties that have established illicit enrichment as an offense, such offense shall be considered an act of corruption for the purposes of this Convention. Any State Party that has not established illicit enrichment as an offense shall, insofar as its laws permit, provide assistance and cooperation with respect to this offense as provided in this Convention.

Article X Notification

When a State Party adopts the legislation referred to in paragraph 1 of articles VIII and IX, it shall notify the Secretary General of the Organization of American States, who shall in turn notify the other States Parties.

For the purposes of this Convention, the crimes of transnational bribery and illicit enrichment shall be considered acts of corruption for that State Party thirty days following the date of such notification.

Article XI Progressive Development

1. In order to foster the development and harmonization of their domestic legislation and the attainment of the purposes of this Convention, the States Parties view as desirable, and undertake to consider, establishing as offenses under their laws the following acts:

a. The improper use by a government official or a person who performs public functions, for his own benefit or that of a third party, of any kind of classified or confidential information which that official or person who performs public functions has obtained because of, or in the performance of, his functions;

b. The improper use by a government official or a person who performs public functions, for his own benefit or that of a third party, of any kind of property belonging to the State or to any firm or institution in which the State has a proprietary interest, to which that official or person who performs public functions has access because of, or in the performance of, his functions;

c. Any act or omission by any person who, personally or through a third party, or acting as an intermediary, seeks to obtain a decision from a public authority whereby he illicitly obtains for himself or for another person any benefit or gain, whether or not such act or omission harms State property; and

d. The diversion by a government official, for purposes unrelated to those for which they were intended, for his own benefit or that of a third party, of any movable or immovable property, monies or securities belonging to the State, to an independent agency, or to an individual, that such official has received by virtue of his position for purposes of administration, custody or for other reasons.

2. Among those States Parties that have established these offenses, such offenses shall be considered acts of corruption for the purposes of this Convention.

3. Any State Party that has not established these offenses shall, insofar as its laws permit, provide assistance and cooperation with respect to these offenses as provided in this Convention.

Article XII Effect on State Property

For application of this Convention, it shall not be necessary that the acts of corruption harm State property.

Global censorship is corruption and a crime against humanity. Help us fight back. Make a generous donation as we launch stopglobalcensorship.org to help humanity stop the UN, WEF, WHO and their captured States from corrupt acts of censorship.

Article XIII Extradition

1. This article shall apply to the offenses established by the States Parties in accordance with this Convention.

2. Each of the offenses to which this article applies shall be deemed to be included as an extraditable offense in any extradition treaty existing between or among the States Parties. The States Parties undertake to include such offenses as extraditable offenses in every extradition treaty to be concluded between or among them.

3. If a State Party that makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another State Party with which it does not have an extradition treaty, it may consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition with respect to any offense to which this article applies.

4. States Parties that do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall recognize offenses to which this article applies as extraditable offenses between themselves.

5. Extradition shall be subject to the conditions provided for by the law of the Requested State or by applicable extradition treaties, including the grounds on which the Requested State may refuse extradition.

6. If extradition for an offense to which this article applies is refused solely on the basis of the nationality of the person sought, or because the Requested State deems that it has jurisdiction over the offense, the Requested State shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution unless otherwise agreed with the Requesting State, and shall report the final outcome to the Requesting State in due course.

7. Subject to the provisions of its domestic law and its extradition treaties, the Requested State may, upon being satisfied that the circumstances so warrant and are urgent, and at the request of the Requesting State, take into custody a person whose extradition is sought and who is present in its territory, or take other appropriate measures to ensure his presence at extradition proceedings.

Article XIV Assistance and Cooperation

1. In accordance with their domestic laws and applicable treaties, the States Parties shall afford one another the widest measure of mutual assistance by processing requests from authorities that, in conformity with their domestic laws, have the power to investigate or prosecute the acts of corruption described in this Convention, to obtain evidence and take other necessary action to facilitate legal proceedings and measures regarding the investigation or prosecution of acts of corruption.

2. The States Parties shall also provide each other with the widest measure of mutual technical cooperation on the most effective ways and means of preventing, detecting, investigating and punishing acts of corruption. To that end, they shall foster exchanges of experiences by way of agreements and meetings between competent bodies and institutions, and shall pay special attention to methods and procedures of citizen participation in the fight against corruption.

Article XV Measures Regarding Property

1. In accordance with their applicable domestic laws and relevant treaties or other agreements that may be in force between or among them, the States Parties shall provide each other the broadest possible measure of assistance in the identification, tracing, freezing, seizure and forfeiture of property or proceeds obtained, derived from or used in the commission of offenses established in accordance with this Convention.

2. A State Party that enforces its own or another State Party's forfeiture judgment against property or proceeds described in paragraph 1 of this article shall dispose of the property or proceeds in accordance with its laws. To the extent permitted by a State Party's laws and upon such terms as it deems appropriate, it may transfer all or part of such property or proceeds to another State Party that assisted in the underlying investigation or proceedings.

Article XVI Bank Secrecy

1. The Requested State shall not invoke bank secrecy as a basis for refusal to provide the assistance sought by the Requesting State. The Requested State shall apply this article in accordance with its domestic law, its procedural provisions, or bilateral or multilateral agreements with the Requesting State.

2. The Requesting State shall be obligated not to use any information received that is protected by bank secrecy for any purpose other than the proceeding for which that information was requested, unless authorized by the Requested State. Article XVII Nature of the Act For the purposes of articles XIII, XIV, XV and XVI of this Convention, the fact that the property obtained or derived from an act of corruption was intended for political purposes, or that it is alleged that an act of corruption was committed for political motives or purposes, shall not suffice in and of itself to qualify the act as a political offense or as a common offense related to a political offense.

Article XVIII Central Authorities

1. For the purposes of international assistance and cooperation provided under this Convention, each State Party may designate a central authority or may rely upon such central authorities as are provided for in any relevant treaties or other agreements.

2. The central authorities shall be responsible for making and receiving the requests for assistance and cooperation referred to in this Convention.

3. The central authorities shall communicate with each other directly for the purposes of this Convention.

Article XIX Temporal Application

Subject to the constitutional principles and the domestic laws of each State and existing treaties between the States Parties, the fact that the alleged act of corruption was committed before this Convention entered into force shall not preclude procedural cooperation in criminal matters between the States Parties. This provision shall in no case affect the principle of non-retroactivity in criminal law, nor shall application of this provision interrupt existing statutes of limitations relating to crimes committed prior to the date of the entry into force of this Convention.

Article XX Other Agreements or Practices

No provision of this Convention shall be construed as preventing the States Parties from engaging in mutual cooperation within the framework of other international agreements, bilateral or multilateral, currently in force or concluded in the future, or pursuant to any other applicable arrangement or practice. Article XXI Signature This Convention is open for signature by the Member States of the Organization of American States.

Article XXII Ratification

This Convention is subject to ratification. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States. Article XXIII Accession This Convention shall remain open for accession by any other State. The instruments of accession shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States.

Article XXIV Reservations

The States Parties may, at the time of adoption, signature, ratification, or accession, make reservations to this Convention, provided that each reservation concerns one or more specific provisions and is not incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.

Article XXV Entry Into Force

This Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the date of deposit of the second instrument of ratification. For each State ratifying or acceding to the Convention after the deposit of the second instrument of ratification, the Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification or accession.

Article XXVI Denunciation

This Convention shall remain in force indefinitely, but any of the States Parties may denounce it. The instrument of denunciation shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States. One year from the date of deposit of the instrument of denunciation, the Convention shall cease to be in force for the denouncing State, but shall remain in force for the other States Parties.

Article XXVII Additional Protocols

Any State Party may submit for the consideration of other States Parties meeting at a General Assembly of the Organization of American States draft additional protocols to this Convention to contribute to the attainment of the purposes set forth in Article II thereof. Each additional protocol shall establish the terms for its entry into force and shall apply only to those States that become Parties to it.

Article XXVIII Deposit of Original Instrument

The original instrument of this Convention, the English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish texts of which are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States, which shall forward an authenticated copy of its text to the Secretariat of the United Nations for registration and publication in accordance with Article 102 of the United Nations Charter. The General Secretariat of the Organization of American States shall notify its Member States and the States that have acceded to the Convention of signatures, of the deposit of instruments of ratification, accession, or denunciation, and of reservations, if any.

Global censorship is corruption and a crime against humanity. Help us fight back. Make a generous donation as we launch stopglobalcensorship.org to help humanity stop the UN, WEF, WHO and their captured States from corrupt acts of censorship.

Signatories:

D = Declaration
RA = Ratification
AC = Acceptance
AD = Accession
R = Reservation
INFORMATION = Information required by the Treaty
*DECLARATIONS/RESERVATIONS/DENUNCIATIONS/WITHDRAWALS
TREATY REFERENCES: B-58. 

• Argentina

Pursuant to the provisions of Article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, the Government of Argentina appointed the Ministery of Foreigner Affairs, to serve as the Central Authority for the Republic of Argentina. (Washington, January 4, 2000)

On July 20, 2007, Argentina appointed the Dirección de Asistencia Judicial Internacional de la Dirección General de Asuntos Jurídicos del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Comercio Internacional y Culto as central authority according to article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

On May 23, 2008, Argentina informed the depository on the designation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Commerce and Worship / Directorate-General for Legal Affairs as the central authority.

On June 11, 2021, the General Secretariat received a Verbal Note on actions taken in accordance with article X of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption from the Permanent Mission of Argentina to the OAS, Note No. 118.

On April 26, 2022, the General Secretariat received a Verbal Note on actions taken in accordance with article X of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption from the Permanent Mission of Argentina to the OAS, Note No. 071.

• Belize

On July 29, 2011, Belize informed on the designation of the “Attorney General's Ministry” as the Central Authority for the purpose of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

• Bolivia:

Designation of Central Authority: November 3, 2007

On November 3, 2007, Bolivia appointed the Ministerio de Transparencia Institucional y Lucha Contra la Corrupción, as central authority for the purposes of article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

On June 15, 2011, Bolivia informed on the designation of the “Ministerio de Transparencia Institucional y Lucha contra la Corrupción” represented by Dr. Nardi Suxo Iturry as the Central Authority of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption. .  

• Brazil:

Brazil made a reservation to Article XI, 1, c. at the time of the deposit of the instrument of ratification.

Designation of Central Authority: April 21, 2006

On April 21, 2006, Brazil designated the Ministério da Justiça de Brazil as central authority for the purposes of assistance and international cooperation pursuant to article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against.

On August 19, 2016, Brazil informed the depository on the designation of the Department of Assets Recovery and International Legal Cooperation (DRCI) as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption. 

• Canada:

Statement of Understanding of Article IX, Illicit Enrichment:

Article IX provides that the obligation of a Stated Party to establish the offence of illicit enrichment shall be "Subject to its Constitution and the fundamental principles of its legal system". As the offence contemplated by Article IX would be contrary to the presumption of innocence guarenteed by Canada's Constitution, Canada will not implement Article IX, as provided for by this provision.

Designation of Central Authority:

On August 16, 2005, Canada appointed the following central authorities regarding the Inter-American Convention against Corruption:

a. For the chanelling of mutual legal assistance requests: General Counsel and Director, Department of Justice Canada, International Assistance Group, Criminal Law Branch/ Federal Prosecution Service, 284 Wellington Avenue, Room 2049, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0H8, Canada.

b. For the chanelling of technical assistance requests: Vice President, Americas Branch, Canadian International Development Agency, tel. 819-997-3291, fax 819-997-0077.

• Chile:

On November 16, 2012, Chile informed on the designation of the “Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores” as the Central Authority for the purpose of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On February 2, 2018, Chile informed the depository on the designation of the Unit for International Trade and Extradition of the National Prosecutor Office of the Public Ministry (Unidad de Comercio Internacional y Extradiciones de la Fiscalía Nacional del Ministerio Público) as the central authority for the following instruments:
- The Inter -American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters;
- The Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, and
- The Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.

• Colombia:

Designation of Central Authorities: August 30, 2012

On August 30, 2012, Colombia reported by note MPC/OEA No.1349/2012 the appointment by the Foreign Ministry of the "Procuraduría General de la Nación" as the central authority for the purposes of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption with the other entities that have been designated in the past.

Designation of Central Authorities: May 17, 2011

On May 17, 2011, Colombia informed of the designation of the "Ministerio del Interior y de Justicia", la "Fiscalía General de la Nación" and the "Contraloría General de la República" as the Central Authorities for the purpose of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

Ministerio del Interior y de Justicia
Carrera 9 Nº 14-10
Conmutador: 57 (1) 4 44 31 00
diana.garcoa@mij.gov.co
asuntos_internacionales@mij.gov.co
Bogotá D.C., Colombia Fiscalía General .

• Costa Rica:

Designation of Central Authority: June 21, 2006

On June 21, 2006, Costa Rica appointed the Procuradoría de la Ética Pública as the central authority foreseen in article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption for the purposes of international assistance and cooperation of the treaty.

• Dominican Republic

Designation of Central Authority: December 8, 2004

On December 3, 2004, Dominican Republic appointed the following central authorities pursuant to article 18 of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption:

1. Main Expert
Dr. Octavio Lister Henríquez, Director del Departamento de la Prevención de la Corrupción Administrativa
Tel. (809) 533-96066
Fax. (809) 533-4098
E-mail: Olisterh@hotmail.com
Address: Hipólito Herrera Billini esq Juan B Pérez, Palacio de Justicia del Centro de los Héroes de Constanza, Maimón y Estero Hondo, 3er piso, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana.

2. Lic. Hotoniel Bonilla García Sub-Director Departamento de Prevención de la Corrupción Administrativa
Tel. (809) 533-2621
Fax. (809) 533-4098
E-mail: hobo@hotmail.com
Address: Hipólito Herrera Billini esq Juan B Pérez, Palacio de Justicia del Centro de los Héroes de Constanza, Maimón y Estero Hondo, 3er piso, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana.

3. Lic. José René García Díaz Director División de Investigación, Departamento de Prevención de la Corrupción Administrativa
Tel. (809) 533-2621
Fax. (809) 533-4098
E-mail: Renegarciadiaz@yahoo.com
Address: Hipólito Herrera Billini esq Juan B Pérez, Palacio de Justicia del Centro de los Héroes de Constanza, Maimón y Estero Hondo, 3er piso, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana.

4. Lic. Carlos E. Pimentel F Director División de Prevención, Departamento de Prevención de la Corrupción Administrativa
Tel. (809) 533-3522 ext.402
Fax. (809) 533-4098
E-mail: CarlosPimentel@hotamil.com
Address: Hipólito Herrera Billini esq Juan B Pérez, Palacio de Justicia del Centro de los Héroes de Constanza, Maimón y Estero Hondo, 3er piso, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana.

• Ecuador:

Reports: Pursuant to the provisions of Article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, that was signed in Caracas on March 29, 1996, the National Government has appointed our Attorney General, Dr.Milton Alava Ormaza, to serve asthe Central Authority for the Republic of Ecuador, and will be responsible for drafting and receiving the requests for assistance and cooperation contemplated in that inter-American instrument. (Washington, D.C., August 14, 1997. Note 134/97 MPE/OEA)

Designation of Central Authority: February 27, 2003
Comisión de Control Cívico de la Corrupción pursuant to article 18 of the Convention

On May 26, 2009, Ecuador updated information and appointed the "Consejo de Participación Ciudadana y Control Social Transitorio" as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On June 2, 2009, Ecuador updated the information and appointed the "Consejo de Participación Ciudadana y Control Social" as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On August 2, 2019, Ecuador informed the depository on the designation of the Secretaría Anticorrupción de la Presidencia de la República as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On February 4, 2020, Ecuador informed the depository on the designation of new authorities to the Secretaría Anticorrupción de la Presidencia de la República, the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On December 21, 2020, Ecuador informed the depository on the designation of the Secretaría General de la Presidencia as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

• El Salvador:

Designation of Central Authority: December 3, 2007

On December 3, 2007, El Salvador appointed the Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, through the Dirección General de Asuntos Jurídicos y Derechos Humanos, as central authority for the purposes of article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

On January 6, 2021, El Salvador informed the depository on the designation of the Unidad de Asuntos Legales Internacionales de la Fiscalía General de la República as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On July 26, 2021, El Salvador informed the depository on the designation of the Dirección de Asuntos Internacionales as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On February 16, 2022, the Permanent Mission of El Salvador to the OAS informed the depository on the designation of the central authority with contact information regarding the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption and the Inter-American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters.

• Guatemala

Designation of Central Authority: February 23, 2004

On February 23, 2004, Guatemala appointed the Comisionado Nacional por la Transparencia y contra la Corrupción, Mr. Carlos Vielman, for the purposes of article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption. E-mail: comisionadoptc@yahoo.com; Telephone: (502) 239-0000 ext. 2583 y 2585.

• Guyana

Reservation: 02/15/01

"The Cooperative Republic of Guyana does not consider itself bound to extend the actions of seizure under Article XV of the present Convention to the extent that such actions violate the provisions of Article 142(1) of the Constitution of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana."

04-11-2011 REMOVAL OF RESERVATION

Designation of Central Authority: June 16, 2011

On June 16, 2011, the Republic of designated the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as its Central Authority, in accordance with the provisions of article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

On July 11, 2022, the Permanent Mission of Guyana to the OAS, informed the depositary of the designation of the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance as the central authority for the purpose of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

On October 11, 2022, the Permanent Mission of Guyana to the OAS, informed the depositary of the designation of the central authority for the purpose of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

• Honduras

Designation of Central Authority: August 21, 2003

Tribunal Superior de Cuentas presidido actualmente por el abogado Renán Sagastume, para formular y recibir las solicitudes de asistencia y cooperación.
Telephone: (504) 233-1669 / 5332
Fax: (504) 233-5555
Email: rsagas@hotmail.com

Licenciado Rigoberto Córdova Laitano, para los asuntos de comunicación y enlace
Telephone: (504) 233-1669 / 5332
Fax: (504) 233-5555 
Email: rclaitano@yahoo.com.

• Jamaica

Designation of Central Authority: September 15, 2005

On October 26, 2005, Jamaica informed the depository of the designation of the Minister responsible for Justice, the Director of Public Prosecutions for mutual legal assistance, and the Minister of Justice and the Director of Public Prosecutions for mutual technical cooperation, as the central authorities required by article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

• México

Designation of Central Authority: October 25, 2004

On October 25, 2004, Mexico appointed as central authority Minister Ernesto Céspedes Oropeza, Director General para Temas Globales, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores.
Tel. (52 55) 50 62 30 30
Fax. (52 55) 91 57 42 51
dgtglobales@sre.gob.mx

Lic. Sandra Elisa Hernández Ortiz, Directora General de Asuntos Jurídicos, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores
Tel. (52 55) 91 57 21 27
Fax. (52 55) 50 63 30 28
dgajuridicos@sre.gob.mx

Lic. Guillermo Hernández Salmerón, Director de Cooperación Internacional en la Prevención del Delito, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores
Tel. (52 55) 50 62 30 30
Fax. (52 55) 91 57 42 51
ghsalmeron@sre.gob.mx

and Dr. José Luis Delgado Crespo, Subdirector de Cooperación Internacional en la Lucha contra el Narcotráfico y la Corrupción, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores
Tel. (52 55) 50 62 30 30
Fax. (52 55) 91 57 42 51
jdelgado@sre.gob.mx.

• Nicaragua

Designation of Central Authority: July 21, 2003

Oficina de Etica Pública de la Presidencia de la República and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.

Designation of Central Authority: June 19, 2007

Procuraduría General de la República for the purposes of assistance and cooperation based on article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

• Panamá

DECLARATION: "It is the interpretation of the Republic of Panama that application of the present Convention does not alter its rights under the conventions in force in the area of asylum".

RESERVATION: "The Republic of Panama does not consider itself bound to extend the actions of seizure of forfeiture of property envisaged under Article XV of the present Convention, to the extent that such actions violate the provisions of Article 30 of the Constitution of the Republic, wich prohibits the seizure of property as a penalty". (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Panama City, July 20, 1998)

Designation of Central Authority:

On February 12, 2004, Panama designated the Sala Cuarta de Negocios Generales of the Supreme Court of Justice, chaired by Judge César Pereira Burgos, in his condition of President of the Court, as central authority for the purposes of international assistance and cooperation of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

On September 9, 2021, Panama submitted to the depository up-to-date information on the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

• Paraguay

Reports that it designates as the central authority responsible for making the requests for cooperation referred to in the Convention, as specified in Article XVIII, the Office of the Attorney General (Fiscalia General del Estado). (Asuncion, March 20, 1997. Note 46/97, received on April 21, 1997).

On February 12, 2013, Paraguay updated the central authority and designated the Secretaría Nacional Anticorrupción (SENAC), entity under the Presidency, as Central authority responsible for making the requests for cooperation referred by the Convention, in accordance with Article XVIII. (Asuncion, December 27, 2012. Note 52/13 received on February 12, 2013).

On March 29, 2021, Paraguay submitted to the depository up-to-date information on the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption

• Perú

Designation of Central Authority: Ministry of Justice (June 10, 2003).

• San Kitts y Nevis

Reservation: (Made at the time of the Ratification)

“In the area of extradition, in order to be fully cognizant of the extent of its obligations, the Federation of Saint Christopher and Nevis maintains the position as mandated by its laws that there must be specific treaty arrangements with a requesting or requested State.

The Federation is strongly of the view that this is the only real way in which it can remain fully cognizant of all its obligations on this issue. The Federation does not agree in principle with Article XIX, which as worded, seems to tread too closely to the realm of retroactivity. If it is not the intend of the Convention to affect or interfere with the principle of non-retroactivity, then the Federation does not see the utility of Article XIX and indeed is uncomfortable with the idea of providing cooperation to States parties for acts of corruption that were committed before the Convention itself was even in force.”

• United States of America:

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

President of the United States of America

TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME, GREETING:

CONSIDERING THAT:

The Inter-American Convention Against Corruption ("The Convention"), was adopted and opened for signature on March 29, 1996, at the Specialized Conference of the Organization of American States (OAS) at Caracas, Venezuela, and was signed by the United States at Panama on June 27, 1996; and

The Senate of the United States of America by its resolution of July 27, 2000, two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein, gave its advice and consent to ratification of the Convention, subject to the following understandings:

(1) APPLICATION OF ARTICLE I.--The United States of America understands that the phrase "at any level of its hierarchy" in the first and second subparagraphs of Article I of the Convention refers, in the case of the United States, to all levels of the hierarchy of the Federal Government of the United States, and that the Convention does not impose obligations with respect to the conduct of officials other than Federal officials.

(2) ARTICLE VII ("Domestic Law").--

(A) Article VII of the Convention sets forth an obligation to adopt legislative measures to establish as criminal offenses the acts of corruption described in Article VI(1). There is an extensive network of laws already in place in the United States that criminalize a wide range of corrupt acts. Although United States laws may not in all cases be defined in terms or elements identical to those used in the Convention, its is the understanding of the United States, with the caveat set forth in subparagraph

(B), that the kinds of official corruption which are intended under the Convention to be criminalized would in fact be criminal offenses under U.S. law. Accordingly, the United States does not intend to enact new legislation to implement Article VII of the Convention. (B) There is no general "attempt" statute in U.S. federal criminal law. Nevertheless, federal statutes make "attempts" criminal in connection with specific crimes. This is of particular relevance with respect to Article VI (1) (c) of the Convention, which by its literal terms would embrace a single preparatory act done with the requisite "purpose" of profiting illicitly at some future time, even though the course of conduct is neither pursued, nor in any sense consummated. The United States will not criminalize such conduct per se, although significant icts of corruption in this regard would be generally subject to prosecution in the context of one or more other crimes.

(3) TRANSNATIONAL BRIBERY.--Current United States law provides criminal sanctions for transnational bribery. Therefore, it is the understanding of the United States of America that no additional legislation is needed for the United States to comply with the obligation imposed in article VIII of the Convention.

(4) ILLICIT ENRICHMENT.-- The United States of America intends to assist and cooperate with other States Parties pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article IX of the Convention to the extent permitted by its domestic law. The United States recognizes the importance of combating improper financial gains by public officials, and has criminal statutes to deter or punish such conduct. These statutes obligate senior-level officials in the federal government to file truthful financial disclosure statements, subject to criminal penalties. They also permit prosecution of federal public officials who evade taxes on wealth that is acquired illicitly. The offense of illicit enrichment as set forth in Article IX of the Convention, however, places the burden of proof on the defendant, which is inconsistent with the United States constitution and fundamental principles of the United States legal system. Therefore, the United States uderstands that it is not obligated to establish a new criminal offense of illicit enrichment under Article IX of the Convention.

(5) EXTRADITION.-- The United States of America shall not consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition to my country with which the United States has no bilateral ixtradition treaty in force. In such cases where the United States does have a bilateral extradition treaty in force, that bilateral extradition treaty shall serve as the legal basis for extradition for offenses that are extraditable in accordance with this Convention.

(6) PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.-- The United States of America shall exercise its rights to limit the use of assistance it provides under the convention so that any assistance provided by the Government of the United States shall not be transferred to or otherwise used to assist the International Criminal Court agreed to in Rome, Italy, 3n July 17, 1998, unless the treaty establishing the Court has entered into force for the United States by and with the advice md consent of the Senate, as required by Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, William J. Clinton, President of the United States of America, ratify and confirm the Convention, subject to the aforesaid understandings.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument of ratification and caused the Seal of the United States of America to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington this fifteenth day of September in the year of our Lord two thousand and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred twenty-fifth.

By the President: William J. Clinton Madeleine Albright Secretary of State _______________

Designation of Central Authority:

On June 1, 2005, the United States designated the Permanent Representative of the United States to the OAS to serve as the central authority for the purposes of channeling requests for mutual technical cooperation in accordance with the provisions of articles XIV(2) and XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

On June 14, 2005, the United States informed the depositary of the designation of the Office of International Affairs of the Criminal Division of the United States Department of Justice as its central authority for purposes of mutual legal assistance pursuant to article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

Address: Office of International Affairs Criminal Division,
US Department of Justice 1301 New York Avenue, 8th floor
Washington, D.C., 20005
Telephone: 202-514-0000
Fax: 202-514-0080 

• Uruguay

PERMANENT MISSION OF URUGUAY TO THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

099/2001

The Permanent Mission of Uruguay presents its compliments to the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States and has the honor to refer to the Inter-American Convention against Corruption, adopted in the city of Caracas, Venezuela, on March 29, 1997.

In that regard, it is noted that:

1. On the occasion of its signing, the delegation of Uruguay made the following declaration:

"The delegation of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay declares

First: That it is joining in the consensus that was achieved with difficulty by the Specialized Conference on the Draft Inter-American Convention against Corruption, following considerable efforts made by the OAS member states, in particular by the Government of the Republic of Venezuela, through its Minister of Foreign Affairs, His Excellency Dr. Miguel Angel Burelli Rivas.

Second: That it is a matter of great concern to the Government of Uruguay that a convention like the present one that is essentially criminal in nature not include a law and order clause—a provision that essentially provides guarantees--which has been embodied in such important conventions as the 1988 United Nations convention on drug trafficking and the Inter-American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, both of which are in force, as well as several other bilateral conventions between the OAS member states."

2. On August 12, 1997, Uruguay initiated legislative formalities in connection with the Inter-American Convention against Corruption, which became national law. Uruguay therefore enters an "express reservation to resorting to law and order when the cooperation requested specifically, seriously, and patently contravenes the rules and principles that underlie Uruguay’s distinctive legal character."

Since this reservation was not included on the occasion of notification by the competent authorities of my country, and taking into account the indivisible nature of the reservation with regard to the body of the text of the Convention when it became law in Uruguay, it is hereby requested that said reservation be duly formally included for all appropriate purposes.

The Permanent Mission of Uruguay to the Organization of American States avails itself of this opportunity to reiterate to the General Secretariat the assurances of its highest consideration.

Juan Fisher Embajador,
Representante Permanente ante la OEA
Washington, D.C., August 7, 2001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Designation of Central Authority: December 8, 2003

On December 8, 2003, Uruguay designated the Advisory Services Central Authority for International Legal Cooperation under the Office of International Legal Cooperation and Justice of the Ministry of Education and Culture to facilitate mutual assistance, as set forth in Article XIV.1

Director: Dr. Eduardo Tellechea Bergman
Address: 18 de julio 1377 piso 1, Montevideo, Uruguay
Telephone: (598 2) 901.30.90 / 901.16.33
Fax: (598 2) 901.78.85
E-mail: tellechea@mec.gub.uy

It also designated the Advisory Board on Economic and Financial Matters of the State to facilitate mutual technical cooperation, as set forth in Article XIV.2.

Chair: Jorge A. Sambarino Carmine
Address: Rincón 528 piso 8, Montevideo, Uruguay
Telephone: (598 2) 917.04.07
Fax: (598 2) 917.04.07 erno 15
E-mail: secretaria@jasesora.gub.uy.

On September 27, 2021, Uruguay informed the depository on the designation of the Autoridad Central de Cooperación Jurídica Internacional as the central authority for the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

• Venezuela

Designation of Central Authority: February 06, 2004

On February 6, 2004, Venezuela appointed the National Ethics Council (Consejo Moral Republicano del Estado Venezolano), made up of the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic, the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic, and the Office of the Ombudsman, as the central authority responsible for following up on assistance and cooperation pursuant to Article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.

On March 27 2015, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela informed on the adoption of legislation referred to transnational bribery pursuant to articles VIII, IX and X of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption.

---

Global censorship is corruption and a crime against humanity. Help us fight back. Make a generous donation as we launch stopglobalcensorship.org to help humanity stop the UN, WEF, WHO and their captured States from corrupt acts of censorship.