For the first time a multinational company operating in a developing country has been convicted of corruption by Lesotho. SA, which has greater resources, cannot boast the same success.

Legal experts believe the major stumbling block facing SA is the deeply flawed Corruption Act, which makes it difficult to convict people of corruption.

The flaws were raised in 1999 at the first anticorruption conference, when government undertook to address the problem.

According to Darryl Balid, chairman of Transparency SA, the act allows only for the prosecution of a person who accepts a bribe and not the person who initiates it.

There are plans, however, to rectify the problem in the form of the Prevention of Corruption Bill, expected by the end of the year.

The bill sets out a wide-ranging set of offences and criminalises engagement with them. It also outlines offences related to tenders and the bribery of foreign public officials abroad.

Parliament's justice committee is considering a clause that blacklists corrupt businesses and their leaders and excludes them from bidding for state contracts.

Similar laws passed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development make it possible for people such as European Aeronautic and Space Company chief Michael Woerfel to face prosecution in Germany for the discount on a Mercedes Benz he gave to former African National Congress chief whip Toni Yengeni in return for support for Woerfel's company's arms deal bid.

German authorities are arguing, however, that a lack of co-operation from SA has made it difficult to prosecute Woerfel.

Yengeni was not convicted of corruption, but for misleading Parliament, and charges against Woerful were dropped in the Commercial Crimes Court.

The cases against Yengeni, Woerfel and Deputy President Jacob Zuma, who was investigated for allegedly trying to solicit a R500000 bribe from arms contractor Thomson CSF, show how difficult it can be to make a successful case.

Last week national directorate for public prosecutions head Bulelani Ngcuka said he was unable to press charges against Zuma because of a lack of evidence against him.

Balid says that in letting Woerfel off the hook, SA will never know who the 20 officials were who received discounted vehicles from him.

Only five have been identified and the question of whether Woerfel attempted to corrupt South African officials with the knowledge of DaimlerChrysler has never been answered.

Balid says many multinationals enjoy protection from their countries of origin because their governments often have a sizeable interest in the company.

"Until about three years ago, German and French companies budgeted for bribes, and German companies could claim it back from the taxman," he says.

Prof Andre Thomashausen, director of the Institute of Foreign and Comparative Law at the University of SA, says that a lack of political will and the difficulty in proving causality are preventing convictions involving the controversial arms deal.

"The auditor-general made the point that it was difficult to prove that the end decision was directly influenced by the bribe because of the complicated nature of the deal," he says.

"If there is influence it obviously won't be minuted.

"The bottom line is that the German civil code and other agreements hold that a contract that came about as a result of undue influence should be considered null and void."

"The risk is that in uncovering too much information, someone may suggest pulling the plug on the agreement," he says.

When offenders reside in another country, a successful conviction on corruption charges is difficult, says Thomashausen.

The fact that Acres International, recently convicted for corruption in Lesotho, was operating in that country made it a lot easier for prosecutors.

But Hennie van Vuuren of the Institute for Security Studies says the possibility still exists that Zuma will be prosecuted. "People will be watching the Schabir Shaik trial with great interest to see what evidence emerges.

"Ngcuka has made it clear that the case against Zuma can be reopened if new information emerges ."

Transparency International released a report on corruption yesterday, saying the fight against corruption is bearing fruit and that Africa in particular is likely to see a series of regime changes in the next year.

Peter Eigen, head of Transparency International, says the pressure for change in government is often due to public anger at corruption .

Balid says SA has a good reputation internationally with regard to its stance on corruption.

"SA is rated about 30 out of 100 countries and government is seen to be forthright in dealing with corruption," he says.

With acknowledgements to Chantelle Benjamin and the Business Day.