Corruption Thrives Where Power Is Unchecked and Voices Are Silenced
The International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA) hosted a webinar on 6 March 2026 titled “Beyond Legislation: How Corruption Impedes Women from Exercising Their Legal Rights.” Organized as part of IACA’s activities to commemorate International Women’s Day, the event formed part of the Academy’s broader efforts to promote dialogue and research on emerging challenges in anti-corruption policy. Bringing together experts from academia, international organizations, and civil society, the webinar provided a platform to discuss how corruption can undermine women’s ability to access justice and exercise their legal rights.
The event was organized against the backdrop of growing international recognition that corruption and gender inequality are closely intertwined. While significant progress has been made over recent decades in developing legal frameworks that promote gender equality and protect women’s rights, the existence of such laws does not necessarily guarantee their effective implementation. In many contexts, corruption within institutions responsible for delivering public services or enforcing legal protections can prevent women from accessing justice and exercising their rights in practice.
Corrupt practices may occur in a wide range of sectors, including law enforcement, judicial systems, healthcare services, education, land administration, and social welfare programs. These practices can take different forms, such as demands for informal payments, favoritism in legal proceedings, or manipulation of inheritance and property rights. Such dynamics often disproportionately affect women, particularly those from marginalized or economically vulnerable communities.
Against this background, the webinar aimed to shed light on the intersection between corruption and women’s access to legal rights. The discussion focused on how corruption functions as a structural barrier to gender equality and explored possible strategies for integrating gender considerations into anti-corruption policies and reforms.
The panel discussion was moderated by Drago Kos, Interim Dean of the International Anti-Corruption Academy, who opened the event and guided the discussion on the relationship between corruption, gender inequality, and access to justice. Lara Scarpitta, Senior Adviser on Gender Issues at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and Head of the Gender Issues Programme in the Office of the Secretary General, contributed insights from the perspective of international policy and governance, drawing on her work to integrate gender equality considerations into institutional frameworks and international cooperation efforts. Nika Kovač, Director of the Institute 8th of March and Coordinator of the European citizens’ initiative My Voice, My Choice, provided the perspective of civil society and grassroots mobilization, highlighting the importance of civic engagement, democratic participation, and advocacy in advancing women’s rights and accountability. The panel also included political scientist Ina Kubbe (Tel Aviv University), whose contribution examined the role of social norms and gendered power relations in shaping how corruption is experienced and sustained across different institutional contexts.
Building on this perspective, the discussion turned to the broader question of how social norms and gendered power hierarchies influence both the experience and tolerance of corruption. Participants emphasized that corruption should not be understood solely as a legal or administrative violation, but also as a phenomenon embedded in broader social and institutional power relations. From this perspective, corruption can be seen as both a symptom and a mechanism of unequal power structures, which shape how individuals interact with institutions and influence who can challenge the abuse of authority.
One analytical perspective discussed during the webinar concerns the power asymmetries that characterize many public institutions. Women often interact with institutions that remain male-dominated, including law enforcement bodies, courts, land administration offices, and other bureaucratic structures responsible for granting access to rights and services. In such settings, officials may exercise significant discretionary authority over administrative decisions, creating opportunities for corrupt practices. These institutional arrangements are particularly problematic where transparency and accountability mechanisms are weak, as discretion combined with limited oversight increases the likelihood of abuse of power.
The discussion also emphasized the importance of social norms and informal expectations in sustaining corrupt practices. In many contexts, norms of deference toward authority, particularly male authority, can discourage individuals from challenging officials, even when corrupt behavior is suspected. As a result, corruption may persist not only because of institutional weaknesses but also because individuals perceive resistance as costly or socially inappropriate. This highlights the role of collective expectations in shaping behavior: when individuals assume that others expect compliance, corrupt practices can become normalized and difficult to challenge.
Another analytical dimension addressed during the webinar concerns structural inequalities in access to resources and power. Women often have fewer financial resources, less access to influential networks, and lower levels of representation in political and administrative decision-making structures. These inequalities can limit their ability to resist corrupt demands, pursue legal remedies, or mobilize institutional support. In this sense, corruption does not merely reflect existing inequalities but may also reinforce them, as those with fewer resources face greater obstacles in navigating systems where access to services can be informally negotiated.
The panel also examined forms of corruption that disproportionately affect women, including sexual corruption, sometimes referred to as “sextortion.” This occurs when officials demand sexual favors instead of monetary payments in exchange for providing services or granting access to rights. From an analytical perspective, such practices illustrate how corruption can intersect with gender-based power relations and social vulnerability. Because these forms of corruption involve stigma, fear of retaliation, and institutional barriers to reporting, they are often significantly underreported. This invisibility further complicates efforts to address them through conventional anti-corruption frameworks.
Closely related to these dynamics is the role of informal payments and administrative discretion in shaping unequal access to public services. Women often rely more heavily on public institutions in sectors where petty corruption is common, including healthcare, social protection programs, education, and civil registration systems. At the same time, economic inequalities mean that women may have fewer financial resources available to respond to bribery demands. When frontline officials control access to essential services—such as land registration, welfare benefits, migration permits, or legal protection—the combination of discretion and limited oversight can generate conditions in which corruption reinforces existing gender inequalities.
The discussion also touched on the broader political context in which debates about corruption and gender equality are currently taking place. Participants noted that in several regions of the world, concerns have been raised about a recent decline or stagnation in women’s rights, particularly regarding access to justice, reproductive rights, and political representation. This trend was discussed in relation to broader processes of democratic backsliding, the resurgence of conservative political movements, and the weakening of institutional safeguards for gender equality. In such environments, corruption can further undermine women’s rights by eroding accountability and enabling abuses of power to remain unchallenged. When institutions responsible for enforcing legal protections are weakened by corruption or political pressure, formal rights may exist on paper but remain difficult to exercise in practice. The discussion therefore highlighted that addressing corruption is also crucial for safeguarding the broader institutional conditions necessary for protecting women’s rights and ensuring equal access to justice.
In addition to these structural and institutional dimensions, the discussion briefly referenced high-profile cases involving powerful actors, including the Epstein files, which have drawn international attention to the intersection of power, exploitation, and accountability. While the webinar did not analyze these cases in depth, they serve as illustrative examples of how informal power networks and institutional failures can shield abuse from scrutiny. Such cases highlight the broader analytical point that corruption is not only a matter of financial misconduct but can also involve systems of influence and impunity that enable gendered forms of exploitation to persist.
Taken together, the discussion underscored the importance of approaching corruption from a gender-sensitive and structurally informed perspective. Rather than viewing corruption solely as an issue of individual misconduct, the webinar emphasized the need to examine the institutional arrangements, social norms, and power structures that shape how corruption operates in practice. Integrating gender perspectives into anti-corruption research and policy can therefore contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of how corruption affects access to rights and justice. Strengthening accountability mechanisms, improving reporting systems, and increasing transparency in public administration were identified as important steps toward addressing these challenges.
At the same time, it should be emphasized that addressing corruption and gender inequality should not be understood as competing policy priorities. On the contrary, integrating gender-sensitive approaches into anti-corruption strategies can generate mutually reinforcing benefits. Reducing corruption can improve women’s access to justice, public services, and economic opportunities, while strengthening gender equality can contribute to more transparent and accountable institutions. In this sense, tackling corruption and gender inequality represents a “win–win” approach in which progress in one area supports progress in the other. Participants also highlighted the importance of continued collaboration between academia, civil society, international organizations, and policymakers. Sustained partnerships and interdisciplinary dialogue will remain essential for developing effective strategies and ensuring that legal rights translate into meaningful access to justice in practice.