Transparency Maldives (TM), is seeking a Reviewer to critically examine the complete
draft report of the research carried out by TM on all institutions of the country that are
involved in fighting corruption.
Download/view the full TOR.
Transparency Maldives is a non-partisan organization that endeavours to be a
constructive force in society by promoting collaboration and discussion on corruption,
transparency, and accountability. Our organization seeks to engage with stakeholders
from all sectors (government, business, political and civil society, among others) to raise
awareness of corruption’s detrimental effects on development and society, improve
transparency and accountability in governance, and eliminate corruption from the daily
lives of people. Transparency Maldives (TM) received formal government registration
in 2007, and is the National Contact of Transparency International (TI) in the Maldives.
II. National Integrity System (NIS) Assessment
The NIS Assessment looks at 13 key institutions of the country that are relevant to
fighting corruption and analyses the strength of the legal framework in which these
institutions operate in and also evaluates how well they perform their functions with
regards to fighting corruption. This study is expected to detail out what steps are
necessary to curb corruption in the country, both by government and NGOs (more
information on NIS assessments is available at
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/nis). TM commenced its research on the NIS
of Maldives in 2012, funded by AUSAID. The report is now drafted and in final stages of
checks and verification.
III. Reviewer’s assignment:
To review the complete draft report of the National Integrity Survey report for Maldives
and provide documented comments based on the following points.
ï‚§ Facts and key developments:
To your knowledge, are the names, dates and figures
used in the report correct? Has the author given sufficient weight to the principal
developments in corruption and the fight against it in the country? Should the
presentation or the balance between them be altered? Do you feel that any other
developments or trends should be included?
Is the message coming through in the study consistent across
sections? Are there any facts or analysis in the details of the report that contradict
the conclusions made elsewhere in the report? Importantly, does the Executive
Summary reflect and truly summarise the report overall?
Are statements and analysis supported by sufficient evidence? Are
quoted sources reputable and reliable, or might there be a significant bias?
ï‚§ Contentiousness / controversy:
Are the statements and interpretations widely
accepted or are they controversial? If assertions are controversial, are they appropriately backed by facts and sources? Please keep in mind that the report is
not intended to be investigative, but rather to provide analysis of information that is
already in the public domain.
Has the author avoided unsubstantiated allegations of
corruption against named persons, companies or governments? Has the author
avoided naming names where there is no sourcing from public domain documents
(newspapers, agency reports, etc.)?
As the report is in draft form, there is no need for Reviewer to thoroughly comment on
spelling, grammar or style except in a general way.
The Reviewer should also provide an overall assessment as to the overall quality of the
NIS report by answering the following question:
How would you rate the NIS report in terms of its overall
quality as an assessment of the country’s anti-corruption
system in law and in practice?
Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor or Very Poor?
To write a feedback report presenting detailed comments on the NIS report in the form
of a stand-alone report (3-4 pages) with clear page references to relevant material in
the NIS report, based on the above points.