Crime And Corruption

Table of Contents

List of abbreviations 1 Introduction 2 Corruption in research 2.1 Theoretical foundation 2.2 State of the art 3 Fighting corruption 3.1 Measures against corruption 3.2 Ethical dilemma 4 Conclusions and outlook Bibliography.

List of abbreviations

Figure not included in this sample

1 Introduction

Corruption manifests itself as a multifaceted phenomenon that has already passed through all levels of contemporary society. In the media, not a day goes by without new cases of corruption and speculation. Corruption almost turns out to be a factor of entertainment and is now seen as an everyday phenomenon in many different areas of society.1 This is especially evident in the example of Greece and their bribe money. According to a recent study by Transparency International, Greek households paid a total of 787 million euros in bribes in 2009. Per year, each citizen pays an average of 1355 euros in bribes in finance, driving licenses, education and many other sectors.2 The threat of national bankruptcy will probably put an end to opportunistic corrupt behavior by citizens and consequently call for new rules. Greece is generally regarded as a prime example of everyday corruption.3 Another current and explosive topic is the threat of climate corruption, which can be triggered by the high investments on the part of the industrialized countries. The current climate protection demands a huge investment program and thus also an ever increasing danger of corruption. The sums of money are often used for own purposes and successfully concealed due to lack of transparency.4 Corruption is widespread and can be seen not only in companies but also in sports and politics. To what extent can corruption be minimized in today’s society and which ethical aspects are related to corruption. This problem shall be analyzed with the help of this research question. In particular, socio-economic and ethical aspects of corruption will be considered. The theo- retical framework of corruption shall serve for the general understanding and shall be the starting point for further considerations. The focus will be on the current state of research. The current state of research and the detailed literature review are points that are to be considered very important and fundamental for the course of this work. The theoretical foundation is therefore the starting point for the further analysis of possible measures to fight corruption. In particular, the ethical aspects will be examined and supported by current examples.

2 Corruption in Research

In today’s world, corruption has emerged as a very influential, multifaceted and, above all, socio-economic phenomenon, the effects of which are more or less known in research and for society.5 The term corruption will first be put into a theoretical framework in order to subsequently elaborate the meaning and effects of corruption. In addition, the state of research plays an essential role and will therefore be highlighted.

2.1 Theoretical foundation

From a scientific point of view, it is not really possible to speak about universally accepted stan- dards and definitions regarding corruption. The literature is very comprehensive and detailed, but does not give an elementary scientifically accepted definition that could cover all areas of society. As a result, the term “corruption” seems to be too complex to provide a global definition. Precisely because of the widespread interconnectedness in many different areas of the socio-economic environment, the term corruption must be subjected to a detailed and step-by-step analysis. A generally accepted and frequently cited definition of corruption is that of Nye (1967). According to Nye, corruption is defined as: “[…] behavior which deviates from the formal duties of a public role because of pri- vate-regarding (personal, close family, private clique) pecuniary or status gains […]”6 Public status and the associated formal duties to gain private benefits deviant behavior plays a significant role here.7 Accordingly, Nye’s definition is very fixated on public position and neglects ethical aspects such as public harm in society and the meaning or consequences of corrupt actions. A reference to the possible violation of public interests is not made by Nye, in contrast to other authors. For general understanding, an act of corruption logically always involves at least two actors.8 Besides Nye, Transparency International has published a generalized definition on the term corruption. According to TI, corruption is defined as: “[…] the abuse of entrusted power for private gain.”9 In contrast to Nye, TI uses the term power and is associated with corruption. Accordingly, there must be a positive correlation between power and corruption. In addition, TI distinguishes between “according to rule” and “against the rule.”10 Both forms of corruption will be described briefly. “According to rule” means that a bribe is paid for a preferential service that is permitted by law. The recipient of the bribe can legally perform or offer the preferred service without concern. Accordingly, this transaction would not violate the law.11 (e.g. medical care) “Against the rule” refers to a service that is prohibited by law. The recipient of a bribe in favor of a particular service will provide that service or service contrary to the law. Accordingly, the recipient would be breaking the law.12 (e.g. fake IDs) In both cases, a bribe is paid to obtain a specific service. Corruption can occur both according to the law and against the law.13 In general, definitions are more or less limited to essential aspects. Therefore, in the above two definitions only selected aspects of corrupt transactions have been analyzed, whereby corruption is not only used for its own purpose, but corruption can also be of different nature. In this context, corruption does not always have to be negative either.14 Svensson (2005) defines corruption as “[…] the misuse of public office for private gain.”15 Also in this definition, abuse is seen as an essential part of corruption. Abuse could be, for example, bribery or embezzlement of government money.16 Furthermore, it is evident that corruption is used exclusively for private gain. Accordingly, corruption would only be used for private purposes, in order to better oneself or to gain a higher status in society. However, corruption can have several reasons, some of which are still unexplored and are also often undesirable or even taboo. Corruption is often equated with egoism.17 For example, the king of Ton- ga (1993) once said “Wherever there are people, there is corruption. If they want to abolish corruption, they have to abolish people.”18 This quote is meant to show the greed of human nature and, more importantly, to show that corruption can be seen as perfectly human. The literature has shown how diverse corruption is defined and also analyzed. Overall, characteristics such as gaining a personal advantage, abuse of power and greed are dominant in describing corruption in more detail. Corruption can be divided into different dimensions and covers a broad field of research. To what extent research experts have exhausted the field of research on corruption and which research gaps still need to be filled will be the subject of the following considerations.

2.2 State of Research

In 1975, since the publication of “The Economics of Corruption”, Susan Rose-Ackerman opened the investigations in economic corruption research. Since then, many corruption researchers have studied corruption in the field of economics.19 Corruption becomes a popular topic and a main part of current research in many industries. As a result, the current state of knowledge is spreading and opening up new research potential, especially in the field of social sciences. In addition, an international organization called Transparency International was founded in 1993.20 was founded. An organization dedicated to the fight against corruption. Since the founding of TI, numerous publications have been published, including the most cited “Corruption Per- ceptions Index”.21 Overall, research has already dealt in great detail with the problems surrounding corruption and has also analyzed many topic areas. Nevertheless, research experts do not really agree on an adequate definition and the most effective and efficient modeling of the term corruption.22 In general, research faces a conflict of classification between the public and private sectors. Furthermore, there is no unambiguous agreement on the fact that corruption exclusively stands for private benefit.23 In addition, there is a moral conflict about the possible effects and causes of corruption. The extent to which corruption can be interpreted as positive or negative remains an explosive question among research experts. Overall, however, there is consensus on the need to include ethical aspects in the study of corruption.24 As discussed in the previous chapter, TI has provided the most meaningful definition for research. A definition that includes both the public and private sectors. […] 1 Cf. Yolles, Maurice/Sawagvudcharee, Ousanee (2010), p. 127f. 2 Cf. Hassel, Florian (2010), n.d. 3 Cf. Jessen, Corinna (2010), n.d. 4 Cf. Brenner, Jana (2011), p. 1f. 5 Cf. Boerner, Kira/Hainz, Christa (2009), p. 214f. 6 Nye, Joseph S. (1967), p. 419. 7 Cf. ibid., p. 419f. 8 Cf. Graeff, Peter (2002), p. 293. 9 Transparency, International (2011), FAQ, n.d. 10 Cf. ibid. 11 Cf. Yolles, Maurice/Sawagvudcharee, Ousanee (2010), p. 126. 12 Cf. ibid. 13 Cf. ibidem, p. 126f. 14 Cf. Graeff, Peter (2002), pp. 293ff. 15 Svensson, Jakob (2005), p. 20. 16 Cf. ibid., p. 20f. 17 Cf. Graeff, Peter (2002), pp. 293ff. 18 Taufa’ahau, Tupou IV (1993), p. 1. 19 Cf. Rose-Ackerman, Susan (1975), p. 189f. 20 TI’s motto: “the global coalition against corruption”. 21 Cf. Hodgson, Geoffrey M./Jiang, Shuxia (2007), pp. 1043f. 22 Cf. ibid. 23 Cf. ibid. 24 Cf. Cuervo-Cazurra, Alvaro (2006), pp. 808f.

  • Problems of Law Enforcement
  • Germany lagged behind for a long time
  • Initiatives that set an example
  • Whistleblowers are the be-all and end-all

Problems of the prosecutors

There is no corruption paragraph in German criminal law. Offenses that fall under corruption are listed in the Criminal Code under the headings “bribery of voters,” “bribery of members of parliament,” “accepting and granting advantages,” or “bribery and corruptibility in business transactions,” among others. Since the consequences of corruption are often unquantifiable and there is often no directly injured party, the term “victimless offense” is used. In many cases, criminal proceedings are discontinued or terminated in exchange for a fine. In addition, offenses with a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment become time-barred after five years. This is very short for the often complex offenses of white-collar crime. Many offenses only come to light when, for example, employees leave companies and talk about corruption in their company after the fact.

Germany lagged behind for a long time

In 2003, the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) became the first global treaty to combat corruption. It includes requirements for hiring administrative officials, prosecuting corruption, proposals for dealing with corruption profits and calls for an independent judiciary. To date, 186 countries have ratified this convention (as of 2020) – Germany only did so in November 2014. A contentious issue for a long time was the bribery of political representatives, which has only been punishable in Germany since 2014 thanks to a stricter law.

Initiatives that set an example

To curb bribery in public administration, numerous municipalities issue anti-corruption concepts as a set of guidelines for their employees. The concept of the bribery-ridden city of Wuppertal often serves as a model. A network of companies, politicians, media and church representatives had systematically plundered the city’s non-profit housing association (GWG), causing damages of 50 million deutschmarks. To prevent such a thing from happening in the future, the city of Wuppertal in 2003 was one of the first cities to write down concrete instructions for action against corruption. A year later, North Rhine-Westphalia passed an anti-corruption law that included the creation of a register of corrupt companies. This is intended to prevent corrupt companies or individuals from obtaining public contracts. There is a dilemma with all anti-bribery laws: corruption is a control offense. Law enforcement agencies can only detect what they have controlled. Where rope-a-dope formation is not perceived as wrongdoing, no suspicion of corruption is reported. And if there is no suspicion, there is no control. That is why those fighting corruption are focusing on education and raising awareness: It must be anchored in the general consciousness that corruption is not a trivial offense, but criminal behavior that harms the general public. It is also important that processes that take place in secret become transparent. This applies to donations, sponsoring and, above all, to work within public authorities.

Whistleblowers are the be-all and end-all

In order to fight corruption, law enforcement agencies rely on whistleblowers who drag corrupt behavior out of the dark in the first place. Such whistleblowers are also known as “whistleblowers” (roughly: someone who blows the whistle like a referee). Without whistleblowers, corruption could not be uncovered because it is a secretive crime that only those involved and people in their immediate vicinity know about. By reporting wrongdoing in his organization, party or company, a whistleblower often takes considerable personal risks. He can be punished for violating his duty of confidentiality about company secrets, and as a “fouler of the nest” and “denunciator” he must expect mobbing or even the loss of his job. This is why many people do not dare to report corruption. Whistleblowers must therefore be supported and protected. Many municipalities and companies have ombudsmen for this purpose. An ombudsman is a kind of trusted person, if possible an impartial outsider (often a lawyer or a former judge), to whom suspected cases can be reported and who should then deal with them accordingly. He or she must be discreet and protect whistleblowers. Some companies also refer to their ombudsmen as “compliance officers” who watch over that the company’s ethical principles are being adhered to – a position between internal audit and the complaints office. There are now also technical systems that enable anonymous reporting of incidents of corruption. The State Criminal Police Office of Lower Saxony, for example, has set up a reporting system on its website through which people can report anonymously if they have the impression that something is going wrong in a company or public authority. (First published: 2011. Last updated: 10.07.2020)

After corruption allegations in mask procurement: deputy bribery to become a crime

(c) – Anna ART From the mask affair around the former Union deputies Löbel and Nüßlein the GroKo wants to draw consequences and plans various law tightenings – among other things in the StGB. However, legal experts doubt whether this of all things will have any effect. The coalition apparently has considerable doubts that the current law can effectively combat corruption by members of the Bundestag. As the SPD parliamentary group told LTO the SPD parliamentary group in the Bundestag confirmed that the relevant criminal offense of bribery of elected officials (Section 108e of the German Criminal Code) has been upgraded to a felony with a minimum term of imprisonment of one year. On this point, the Union signaled to LTO agreement. What seems to be legally required from the point of view of the Social Democrats after the bribery allegations of the past days against members of the Union parliamentary group, the SPD parliamentary group has now listed in a “draft of a law to increase parliamentary transparency and to combat parliamentary corruption”. The draft is available LTO in front of it. In addition to a tightening of Section 108e of the Criminal Code, the proposal provides for various amendments to the Members of Parliament Act (AbgG) and the Political Parties Act (PartG). The parliamentary transparency rules of the MP Act are to be “significantly” tightened. Among other things, a ban on accepting donations from members of the Bundestag is to be introduced in Section 44a (2) AbgG. So far donations to MdB are in principle permitted. That is to change. In the draft from the SPD parliamentary group it is called: The delegate remuneration is adequate in its height. For the acceptance of donations from third parties, there is therefore no reason.”

SPD: No more paid consultancy work for members of parliament

In order to create clarity and transparency, the SPD proposes that the rules of conduct for members of the Bundestag, which have so far only been contained in an annex to the Rules of Procedure of the Bundestag (GO-BT), be transferred to the AbgG. This would anchor all transparency rules for members of the Bundestag “in a legally secure way in a single law and thus make them clear”. The current set of rules is so convoluted that it creates more intransparency than transparency, they say. In detail, the Social Democrats have in mind the following changes in addition to the StGB amendment:

  • Paid consulting activities that are directly related to the representation of interests in the legislative process in addition to the mandate are to be inadmissible in the future – as is the acceptance of donations for members of parliament.
  • Shareholdings in corporations and partnerships are to be subject to notification and publication requirements in the future if they exceed five percent of the voting rights. Income from such shareholdings would also have to be reported and published. Options on company shares will be treated in the same way as income. They, too, are to be subject to notification and publication requirements – irrespective of whether they have a quantifiable value. Members of the Bundestag are to be completely prohibited from setting up companies.
  • From now on, the SPD also wants MPs to provide more precise information on the scope of their sideline activities. This is intended to reveal whether the mandate is still the focus of their work. All additional income of members of the Bundestag is to be published in future in exact amounts (“in euros and cents”). The previously applicable tier system for ancillary income, according to which the degree of disclosure obligation depends on the respective profit or extent of the participation, is to be abolished.
  • A new annual limit of 100,000 euros per donor is to be introduced in the Political Parties Act. In future, party donations will have to be published from as little as 2,000 euros instead of the previous 10,000 euros. In the balance between transparency and bureaucratic effort for the parties’ treasuries, this is an “appropriate solution”.
  • Finally, the draft also provides for rules to ensure transparency in the area of so-called party sponsorship. So far, this has not been explicitly regulated in the PartG. Sponsoring takes place in local associations and subdistricts, for example, when a local sponsor supports a summer festival with contributions in kind.

Criminal law experts: Section 108e StGB remains in need of reform

The extent to which most of these points, which are particularly close to the SPD’s heart, will ultimately become reality, however, remains to be seen. Negotiations within the coalition were still continuing on Friday. Negotiators said there was still resistance from the CDU/CSU on a number of points, including the comprehensive disclosure requirement for shareholdings in corporations and partnerships demanded by the SPD. In addition, the CDU and CSU rejected the idea of publishing the exact amount of additional income. The CDU/CSU, however, signaled its agreement with regard to the criminal law amendment: upgrading Section 108e of the German Criminal Code to a felony is “sensible and good,” explained the deputy chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, Thorsten Frei, to LTO. Also the legal policy spokesman of the Union, Jan-Marco Luczak, welcomed in an interview with LTO the step: “Bribeable mandate carriers damage the confidence in the unkäuflichkeit of the mandate exercise. That is absolutely unacceptable, they damage thereby the reputation of the parliament and the entire representative system. Bribery of members of parliament must therefore be severely punished. The high protection good of the standard justifies and requires to go here on a minimum punishment of one year. “* Whether this change in the StGB is at all suitable, if not at the same time also the range of application of the regulation is extended, doubt lawyers, like for instance the Augsburger criminal lawyer Professor Michael Kubiciel. He has been working intensively on the issue of bribery of members of parliament for years. “There are no objections to increasing the range of punishment,” says Kubiciel. However, Section 108e of the Criminal Code contains a number of loopholes. These include, for example, the requirement that the mandate holder must act “on behalf or on the instructions” of the benefactor. According to the university lecturer, this could lead to major problems of proof in individual cases. The negotiator for the SPD parliamentary group, Matthias Bartke, meanwhile expressed confidence on this point: “The upgrade to a crime is drastic and will have a deterrent effect,” he said in an interview with LTO.

Transparency International criticizes “frothing at the mouth”.

Like criminal lawyer Kubiciel, however, the anti-corruption organization Transparency International (TI) doubts that the planned toughening of penalties will have any effect until the offense itself is changed. “Merely raising the punishment level is foam hammering,” criticized TI chairman Hartmut Bäumer in an interview with LTO. In order to create transparency, the lawyer sets rather on a comprehensive lobby register – without exceptions and with an executive as well as legislative footprint. Only in this way would it be clear in the future who has lobbied for what purpose and when. According to Bäumer, every member of parliament will then have to consider whether he or she is risking his or her mandate and the reputation of his or her party for the sake of financial gain. Parts of the opposition criticized the planned amendment to the German Criminal Code to LTO also criticized the planned amendment to the Criminal Code to LTO: “An offense that is virtually impossible to fulfill does not improve if you make it a crime,” said the legal policy spokeswoman for the Greens, Katja Keul. Keul’s counterpart in the FDP, legal policy expert Jürgen Martens, suggested making a change in the provision, especially for serious cases of bribery. Martens rejects an upgrading to a crime. AfD legal politician Stephan Brandner described the coalition’s efforts in general as “actionist.” In case of doubt, no code of conduct, no lobby register and no amendment to the German Criminal Code will be able to prevent a “rogue” from completing his illegal work, for example when it comes to raking in large six-figure sums. Friedrich Straetmanns, a politician from the Left Party, called for effective tightening of criminal law in line with the recommendations of the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO). According to Straetmanns, however, the Union had rejected these in the Council of Elders. *Editor’s note: Quote added on 12.03.2021, 16.35.

Bribery Corruption causes great economic damage © dpa / picture-alliance Wolfgang Hetzer in conversation with Nana Brink – 09.12.2015 Officially, there were more than 20,000 corruption offenses in Germany in 2014. The number of unreported cases is likely to be higher, as corruption is “typically designed to be secretive,” says corruption expert Wolfgang Hetzer. Effective reporting systems are needed to fight it. The definition of corruption reads quite soberly: it is the abuse of a public office, a function in business or even a political mandate for personal gain. According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, Germany ranks twelfth in the world, which means that a lot is being done in Germany to fight corruption – but more could certainly be done. This could be seen again recently at Volkswagen. In 2014, 20,263 cases of corruption were registered by the police in Germany. Wolfgang Hetzer, former head of department at the European Anti-Fraud Office OLAF, said on the occasion of International Anti-Corruption Day on Deutschlandradio Kultur: “Look at the big companies that have managed to ruin Germany’s reputation, Made in Germany, with their business practices. The expectation that you act lawfully, that’s been disappointed, for example, with the Siemens company, but also with many other big companies.” Corruption, he said, is an overarching social phenomenon – and should by no means be regarded as a kind of peccadillo, because corruption is “also a common crime, because the consequences are passed on to people who have nothing to do with it. In the case of corruption, one’s own egoistic advantage has a socially corrosive and damaging effect. You have to understand that corruption is not about committing a so-called victimless crime, but that all bystanders have to bear the consequences of this selfish action in one way or another.” Hetzer advocates preventive reporting systems – for the establishment of so-called compliance functions within companies and organizations. However, he believes that corruption can be truly combated not only through criminalization and punishment, but above all through a far-reaching change in awareness in all parts of society. The interview in full: Nana Brink: Corruption has many faces. They range from a small civil servant who cobbles together a job for a friend, to the alleged murder of 43 Mexican students by police and drug cartels, or the deaths of 50 disco-goers in a recent fire in Bucharest because corrupt officials simply ignored fire safety regulations. And there’s nothing wrong with putting one’s own house in order – Germany only ratified the UN Convention against Corruption in April 2014. And cases of corruption are also making the rounds in Germany. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index – now that’s a somewhat complicated term, but it’s a very interesting list; it’s compiled by Transparency International – Germany ranks twelfth behind Denmark and Switzerland, but ahead of the United States. So we are using today’s World Anti-Corruption Day as an opportunity to ask how corruption works and how it can corrode and impair a society. One person who knows a lot about this phenomenon is Wolfgang Hetzer, who was head of department at the European Anti-Fraud Office until 2013, and before that also worked at the German Chancellor’s Office as head of department. Good morning, Mr. Hetzer! Wolfgang Hetzer: Good morning, Ms. Brink. Brink: Can we define corruption again? Hetzer: Yes, you can do that, very abstractly: Corruption is about the abuse of, say, a public office, a function in business, or even a political mandate for the benefit of one’s own advantage, to which one has no legal claim. Brink: But when you say politics and business, so it’s not a solely criminal phenomenon, but a social one? Hetzer: Yes, of course. The criminal laws only apply to specific, concrete behavior, to a so-called act, but corruption, the actual act, if you will, of handing over money or granting an advantage, is preceded by a number of things, namely agreements that often take place in secret or regularly take place in secret. There is a certain willingness to take and give something that the law does not provide for. That means you have contacts, you communicate, you understand each other, you have the same interests, and that results in a huge apron that you simply cannot capture with the means of criminal law. The numbers reflect a fraction of the actual cases Brink: Now we have just formulated this in a very abstract way. Let’s be more specific and look at Germany. Is there corruption there, and if so, to what extent and scale? Hetzer: Yes, of course there is corruption in Germany as well. In 2014, we had about 20,263, to be precise, corruption offenses registered by the police. Of course, this does not relate to the so-called dark field. Corruption is typically designed to be clandestine, so of course these figures only reflect part of the actual delinquency. Brink: Now we see in African countries, for example, what corruption does to these countries, how difficult it is to actually put a society on a democratic footing. What are the causes of corruption in Germany, what are the effects of corruption in Germany? How do they affect us, our actions? Hetzer: It leads, of course, to the fact that, in a sense, the legal consciousness either rots, if that wasn’t the case before. One believes that one is entitled to an advantage, although that is not the case. So one is willing to be guided by unobjective, selfish motives. This naturally has consequences for trustworthiness in dealings, for the appropriateness of services. Competition is distorted, and a climate of insinuations, of taking advantage of one another without regard for who then has to bear the consequences, and, above all, is directed toward gaining one’s own advantages. “We need a change in consciousness” Brink: You’ve already indicated that this is a social phenomenon, including in Germany. Can you also name names? Hetzer: Look at the big companies that have managed to ruin Germany’s reputation, Made in Germany, with their business practices. The expectation that you act lawfully, that has been disappointed, for example, with the Siemens company, but also with many other large companies, this trust. Brink: If we can’t get anywhere now with criminal law, can’t get anywhere on our own, what is to be done? Hetzer: We have to make sure that there is a change in awareness. It is indeed the case that corruption is also a common crime because the consequences are passed on to people who have nothing to do with it. In the case of corruption, one’s own egoistic advantage has a socially corrosive and damaging effect. You have to understand that corruption is not about committing a so-called victimless crime, but that all bystanders have to bear the consequences of this selfish action in one way or another. One has to understand that. You have to understand that indispensable foundations such as trust are destroyed, that development opportunities, that democratic processes, that controllability, all of that disappears in the interest of these corruptly acting people, but also companies. Brink: What do we do then? That is, so to speak, a plea to stop it. But by what means? Hetzer: The important thing, of course, as with any criminal act, is to try to take preventive action. That means setting up reporting systems, establishing so-called compliance functions. The public must be educated to provide information, for example, because corruption is a crime of control. As I have already indicated, it takes place in complete secrecy. So the fight against corruption depends crucially on getting qualified tips, because these are clandestine structures that do not, so to speak, offer themselves up publicly. Information must flow, an apparatus must be created that can then follow up on this information. The laws must be adapted. We have had the case that the so-called useful expenses in Germany were structurally tax-deductible, so to speak, so that the state was involved in a certain way and the economy in the whole big game in a strange way. That has changed in the meantime, thank goodness. So, legislation, educating the public, a change in awareness in companies, setting up whistleblower systems, having enough staff to follow up, all of that is needed. Brink: Wolfgang Hetzer, corruption expert. Thank you very much for your assessments. Today is World Anti-Corruption Day. Thank you for talking to us! Crime And Corruption.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *