Corruption in Dominica

Corruption in Dominica has long been a subject of national conversation, shaping politics, economics, and public trust in institutions. Concerns range from everyday allegations of favoritism and patronage to broader debates about governance, transparency, and accountability. Public sentiment often reflects frustration at how corruption, whether real or perceived, affects opportunities, business confidence, and the delivery of social services. International reports, domestic audits, and civil society voices continue to place the issue at the center of Dominica’s national development agenda.

Corruption indicators and what they show

Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) gives Dominica a score of 60 out of 100 and a rank of 36th of 180 countries, an improvement of four points over the previous year. That position places Dominica among the highest-scoring states in the Caribbean, although CPI measures perceived public sector corruption rather than proven cases.

ditional governance datasets confirm this trend. The World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators feature a “Control of Corruption” index measuring percentile ranks over time. Users can review the series to see long-term trends in Dominica’s relative standing, which has generally clustered in the middle-to-upper percentiles compared with global peers. These indicators are not case counts, but they help benchmark institutional performance across years.

Citizen-focused regional polling paints a more cautious view. In April 2023, the World Justice Project reported that a majority of respondents across 14 Caribbean countries believed public officials are corrupt, highlighting gaps between legal frameworks and lived experience. While the report aggregates the region rather than isolating Dominica alone, its findings are relevant because they describe common pain points in procurement, policing, and service delivery experienced by Caribbean publics.

Laws, institutions, and disclosure obligations

Dominica’s central integrity law is the Integrity in Public Office Act, adopted in May 2003 and later amended. It created the Integrity Commission, introduced a regime of asset and interest declarations for covered officials, and provided a framework for addressing conflicts of interest and illicit enrichment. The Commission’s work continues to influence public debate, and international reports, such as the 2024 U.S.

Other statutes interact with corruption risks by targeting related financial crimes. The Proceeds of Crime Act (Chap. 12:29) sets out confiscation, forfeiture, restraining orders, and external recovery procedures when bribery or enrichment proceeds are identified. The Money Laundering Prevention Act and Money Laundering Prevention Regulations SRO 4 of 2013 require banks, credit unions, insurers, money services, and designated non-financial businesses to maintain customer due diligence, suspicious transaction reporting, and compliance officer functions. The Public Finance Management Act and the Finance and Audit Act of 1966 provide rules for government budgeting, expenditure, and independent audit, important safeguards against misuse of funds. The Companies Act and Companies (Amendment) Act, 2001 strengthen transparency by regulating beneficial ownership and company disclosures, while the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act and the Criminal Law and procedure Act provide legal tools for prosecuting bribery, Dominican, and corruption cases with domestic and international cooperation.

Institutions complement this legislative framework. The Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) analyzes suspicious transaction reports and coordinates with police and prosecutors. The Financial Services Unit (FSU) conducts inspections, imposes sanctions, and applies risk-based supervision across regulated entities. The Auditor General of Dominica issues performance and financial audits, often exposing weaknesses in procurement and expenditure controls that may indicate corruption. The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is mandated to pursue bribery and misconduct charges, supported by the Dominica Police Force under the Police Act. The Integrity Commission oversees the declaration process, investigates failures to comply, and makes public findings, which often fuel accountability debates. Collectively, these bodies demonstrate an interlinked system where corruption prevention, financial crime enforcement, and public financial management are aligned to reduce opportunities for abuse.

Procurement, oversight, and public debate

Procurement is a recurring focal point for civil society. Regional and global observers frequently urge Caribbean governments to publish open data on tenders, contracts, and beneficial owners. Publishing structured award data, standardizing documentation, and building complaint mechanisms can curb bid-rigging and collusion risks. Dominica’s integrity and audit institutions can leverage similar practices to sharpen transparency for large infrastructure and services procurement.

Public commentary and media coverage periodically revisit the effectiveness of the Integrity Commission, particularly around International Anti-Corruption Day, when statements from leadership draw scrutiny about enforcement powers, publication practices, and responsiveness to complaints. This discourse reflects a wider regional dynamic where citizens push for clearer outcomes from legally mandated disclosure systems.

Court cases, enforcement practice, and data gaps

A limited number of corruption-type cases reach reported judgments in regional court databases, so the public record is not a comprehensive barometer of prevalence. Case law repositories for the Eastern Caribbean often emphasize criminal matters such as trafficking or smuggling rather than bribery prosecutions, which can be complex and time-consuming to develop. This scarcity of easily accessible case statistics is one reason evaluators press for standardized, public annual reporting across agencies.

Evaluations also highlight that asset-recovery rules are strongest when paired with practical tools such as non-conviction-based forfeiture, management of seized assets, and mutual legal assistance agreements. Dominica’s participation in CFATF processes and adoption of proceeds-of-crime and AML statutes provide the legal spine, but consistent publication of outcomes would help the public see how these tools are used when corruption is suspected.

Recent signals and governance context

Macro-level governance reports from 2024–2025 show an improving fiscal position, gradual reforms, and continued emphasis on public-sector efficiency. These documents do not quantify corruption, but they set expectations for compliance and financial controls across ministries and state-owned entities, which indirectly affects corruption risk. IMF staff reporting in 2025 notes revenue measures and fiscal consolidation steps that typically require robust procurement and internal-control systems. Such measures tend to reduce opportunities for leakages when backed by audit follow-up and supervisory capacity.

Banks and regulators meanwhile have intensified public education against fraud and scams, which, while distinct from public-sector corruption, intersect with corruption risk through money laundering channels and conflicts of interest. The ECCB’s 2025 warnings and consumer-education content illustrate a trend toward prevention and early detection in the financial sector, supporting the broader integrity agenda.

Key dates, figures, and references at a glance

• CPI 2024: Dominica scores 60/100, ranked 36 of 180, up 4 points from 2023.
• Integrity in Public Office Act: adopted May 2003; establishes declaration and oversight regime for covered officials via the Integrity Commission.
• Investment Climate Statement 2024: reiterates declaration obligations and summarizes integrity safeguards relevant to investors.
• Worldwide Governance Indicators: long-run “Control of Corruption” time-series available for Dominica for benchmarking.
• World Justice Project 2023: majority in Caribbean surveys perceive public officials as corrupt; underscores regional demand for stronger integrity systems.
• Auditor General: annual reports trigger management responses, disciplinary action, and procurement improvements when weaknesses are identified.

What progress looks like in practice

Publishing up-to-date declarations from officials covered by the Integrity in Public Office Act, improving response times for public-information requests, and releasing machine-readable procurement data would materially raise transparency. In the financial sector, risk-based inspections by the FSU, stronger analytics within the FIU, and fully staffed compliance teams in banks and credit unions reduce laundering channels that could hide kickbacks or illicit enrichment. Over time, the combination of published audit follow-ups, public statistics on completed investigations, and clear case outcomes would help convert strong laws into visible results.

Dominica can also benefit from adopting regional open-contracting practices. Even if procurement rules already exist on paper, releasing standardized award data, supplier identifiers, and beneficial ownership information enables media and community groups to spot patterns such as repeated single-bid awards or related-party contracting. Neighboring reform programs show that data publication, procurement review panels, and whistleblower channels work best when paired with clear sanctions and a cadence of public reporting.