Entire nations caught bribing EU officials in expanding 'Qatargate' scandal

In what has become known as “Qatargate,” European Union (EU) lawmaker Marc Tarabella, a Belgian socialist, became at least the sixth European Parliament official, lobbyist or family member to be arrested in a cash-for-influence scandal, according to Reuters.

What's particularly newsworthy about the bribes, though, is their source: the governments of Qatar, Morocco, and Mauritania, which are accused of engaging in corruption, money laundering, and organized crime as state actors after being caught showering regional government officials with cash and gifts to influence decision-making.

Confessions

Francesco Giorgi, who was arrested in December together with his life partner former European Parliament Vice-President Eva Kaili confessed, shortly after his arrest, to receiving bribes from Qatari and Moroccan officials to influence the European Parliament's decisions. His confession explicitly implicated the involvement of former Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Pier Antonio Panzeri, current MEP Andrea Cozzolino and the newly arrested Tarabella in the scandal.

International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) General Secretary Luca Visentini followed Giorgi's confession with an admission that he received payments from Panzeri's non-profit organization Fight Impunity, ironically established to advocate for international justice and prevent crimes against humanity, but denied the payments were meant to “influence [ITUC's] position on Qatar."

In January, Panzeri pled guilty to his part in the corruption and promised to expose others involved. The Guardian reports:

[He] has pledged to inform investigators about how the fraud operated, including who was involved and the identity of people he admits to having bribed. In exchange, he will receive “a limited sentence”, which includes prison, a fine, and the confiscation of assets acquired through the fraud, estimated to be €1m.

More state actors

Der Spiegel was given access to over 1,300 documents from the Belgian investigation of this scandal and found that additional nation states were bribing EU officials:

Panzeri’s group was shockingly amateurish: They apparently received payment in cash, which they then stashed in private apartments; they held a conspiratorial meeting in a hotel that was full of surveillance cameras; and they made hundreds of telephone calls using unencrypted connections.

Nonetheless, the group was apparently able to operate undetected for several years, collecting bribe money not just from Qatar and Morocco, but also from Mauritania and perhaps even Saudi Arabia. . . .

There are many who find it hard to believe that Panzeri’s network is the only one of its kind in Brussels. "There are a number of countries that have systematically purchased influence over an extended period," says Green Party MEP Viola von Cramon. In addition to Qatar and Morocco, she says, the group includes Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Russia. "It must be comprehensively investigated," she says. “There is no less at stake than the credibility of European democracy.”

Growing opportunities

Small government advocates have long argued that more government revenues and regulations create more opportunities for individuals, groups and corporations to bribe government officials in order to get subsidies, tax breaks and beneficial regulatory changes. Fortune reported on a study of the correlation between the size of government and corruption:

[C]orruption is everywhere, in one form or another. And it’s costing U.S. citizens big time. A new study . . . estimates that corruption on the state level is costing Americans in the 10 most corrupt states an average of $1,308 per year. . . .

The researchers also found that for 9 out of the 10 of the most corrupt states, overall state spending was higher than in less corrupt states (South Dakota was the only exception).

Infrastructure projects are particularly vulnerable to corruption: 

[C]onstruction spending, especially on big infrastructure projects, is particularly susceptible to corruption. . . . Corrupt states also tend to . . . have more and better paid public servants, including police and correctional officers.

Center for Freedom and Prosperity Chairman Dan Mitchell concludes that big government is always problematic:

[A] smaller dumpster presumably means fewer rats and roaches. . . . I would even argue that a large bureaucracy, in and of itself, is a sign of corruption since it suggests featherbedding and patronage for insiders.

Mitchell even narrated a video entitled, “Want Less Corruption? Shrink the Size of Government.”

Democrats and Republicans alike have ignored Mitchell's message, with federal spending skyrocketing since World War II, as illustrated in this graph generated on a site that tracks government spending. 

Note: Not adjusted for inflation.

New layers of government

According to Mitchell's analysis, additional layers of government, such as regional governments like the EU, and, eventually, a world governing body, like the UN, overseeing those regional governments, are targets for corrupt actors attempting to purchase influence.

When, as with the EU, taxing, spending and regulatory authority are ceded to them, they become targets for bribery not just by individuals but by national governments which stand to gain by certain policy changes. Fighting corruption would thus entail preventing the UN from gaining taxation and regulatory powers while removing those powers from already existing regional governments.

Cede sovereignty to fight corruption?

The Biden administration, on the other hand, advocates for ceding additional powers to international governing bodies as a means of preventing corruption. The White House's December 2021 guidebook United States Strategy on Countering Corruption, specifically calls for international action in its fourth “strategic pillar”.

PILLAR FOUR: Preserving and Strengthening the Multilateral Anti-Corruption Architecture

The United States remains committed to strengthening the international architecture in which multilateral initiatives, agreements, and standards magnify and give legitimacy to anti-corruption efforts around the world. Only by doing so will we decrease the prevalence of corruption and lower rewards for engaging in corrupt behavior. By leading within existing institutions and, in consultation with partners, building new fit-for-purpose platforms, the United States will further strengthen the multilateral system’s approach to corruption as a global problem . . . Example LOEs [specific lines of effort] that will advance these strategic objectives include:

• Preserving and strengthening the international anti-corruption architecture in organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Organization of American States (OAS), and the United Nations, including through enhanced implementation of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC);
• Expanding NATO’s Building Integrity Program to target corruption in finance, acquisition, and human resources functions;
• Pushing the G20 and G7 to implement strong transparency and anti-corruption measures
  across all ministerial tracks; and,
• Reinvigorating U.S. participation in the Open Government Partnership and Extractive
  Industries Transparency Initiative [Emphases added].

NGOs like Transparency International agree with Biden, calling for the regional EU government, the very body whose vice president and other members are implicated in Qatargate, to fight corruption, including money laundering, one of the crimes at the center of the scandal:

Close international loopholes

Without access to the international financial system, corrupt public officials throughout the world would not be able to launder and hide the proceeds of looted state assets. . . .

The European Union recently approved the 4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which requires EU member-states to create registers of the beneficial owners of companies established within their borders. [Emphases added].