By Richard Messick
One of brightest spots in the global fight against corruption has been the French turnaround. Once a laggard among developed nations in enforcing anticorruption laws, as former French Finance Minister Michel Sapin and Valentina Lana, Sciences Po lecturer told GAB readers in 2022 (here), over the past decade thanks to both domestic and international pressure numerous reforms have been approved. They include new laws increasing penalties for bribery and imposing stiff sanctions on companies without an anticorruption compliance program and the creation of an anticorruption agency.
The French Cour de comptes, the national audit agency, recently assessed the country’s progress in curbing corruption and what more needs to be done (report here, summary here). Not surprisingly, at least to GAB readers, the report emphasized the challenge of measuring corruption.
Thanks to Sophie Lemaître, host of the 1st podcast in French on corruption & tax evasion, for flagging the assessment on her LinkedIn page.
Highlights of the report:
Since 2013, the French legal framework for combating corruption has been significantly strengthened, notably with the laws on transparency in public life and the Sapin 2 law. This policy now involves numerous stakeholders, including independent authorities. It addresses essential democratic challenges: the integrity of public decision-makers and the proper use of public funds, which are fundamental to citizens’ trust in their institutions. It also responds to major economic imperatives, in terms of the attractiveness of the country, fair competition, and the competitiveness of French businesses.
These reforms have enabled France to meet international assessments and improve its position regarding public integrity. The system, however, remains complex due to the proliferation of institutions created through successive laws and reforms, and the difficulty of measuring progress due to a lack of reliable indicators.
Afa, (the French Anticorruption Agency) should strengthen the system for measuring and analyzing corruption, by consolidating existing data, making indicators more reliable and developing cooperation with research organizations.
Beyond the central role of the Afa, numerous actors contribute to preventing and detecting corruption, even if it is not their primary mission. This policy is also marked by a significant imbalance between the public and private sectors.
In the private sector, large companies subject to the Sapin 2 law have implemented prevention tools, although their deployment remains uneven. In the public sector, on the other hand, measures are still not widely disseminated or implemented, due to a lack of application of the regulatory framework and clear governance, particularly at the local level. Ethics officers report a feeling of isolation, a poorly understood role, and a need for support and networking opportunities.
Civil society also plays an important role: accredited associations can file civil suits for certain offenses and participate in monitoring public policies. Finally, since the early 2020s, several cases of so-called “low-intensity” corruption, linked to organized crime and drug trafficking, have led to the adoption of measures, most recently enshrined in the law of June 13, 2025, aimed at extricating France from the trap of drug trafficking.
The Court notably recommends strengthening the prevention and control of corruption by improving the accreditation of associations, effectively deploying ethics officers and whistleblowing mechanisms, and implementing measures tailored to corruption linked to organized crime.
The punishment of breaches of integrity remains a weak link in the fight against corruption. Disciplinary sanctions in the civil service are rare, inconsistent across employers, and poorly documented. Several authorities with oversight or sanctioning powers use them only to a limited extent.
The criminal justice system is also heterogeneous, lacks specialized expertise, and is understaffed to conduct lengthy and complex investigations. Apart from the most sensitive cases, which are referred to specialized courts, most cases are handled locally by generalist departments, which do not prioritize them. Judicial outcomes illustrate these difficulties: of the 504 decisions rendered in 2021-2022, 26% resulted in a full acquittal, nearly four times the average for criminal courts. Trial times are also very long: in 2019, a conviction was obtained on average after 6.1 years at first instance and 8.3 years on appeal.
The Court notes that breaches of integrity are struggling to remain a priority in criminal policy and that no dedicated circular has been published for over 10 years. It calls for the harmonization of prosecution and sentencing practices, based on consolidated monitoring of procedures entrusted to investigative services and on enhanced training and specialization for judges and investigators.
Despite a robust legal framework, the fight against corruption remains insufficiently embraced as a comprehensive strategy and suffers from poorly structured interministerial coordination. The Court calls for the deployment of a genuine national anti-corruption strategy, with clear objectives and indicators, championed at the highest levels of government, and endowed with strengthened governance.
Within this framework, Afa would play a pivotal role in coordination, data centralization, and evaluation, in conjunction with the High Authority for Transparency in Public Life (HATVP), government ministries, local authorities, businesses, and civil society. Such mobilization would bring coherence to the numerous existing mechanisms and enable a significant increase in the prevention, detection, and punishment of breaches of integrity, commensurate with the democratic and economic stakes involved.
