What Organisations Need to Know

Transparency International’s release of the 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) highlights a continued global slide, noting that “as corruption worsens globally, a decline in bold, accountable leadership is undermining reform."¹ The global average score has edged down again, falling from 43 to 42².

In the Asian region, Singapore held third place globally³ and remains the only Asian country to ever appear in the CPI top 10 since the index’s inception in 1995. It is also the only Asian country ranked in the global top 10 from the 2025 results.

Closer to home, Australia’s score dropped one point, moving it from the top 10 to a tie for 12^th place globally. In 2024, Australia re-entered the top 10 for the first time in almost a decade.

Prior to 2024, Australia’s ranking was declining after falling out of the top 10, to its lowest point around 18^th place in 2021. This decline was widely attributed to concerns about political integrity, weak federal-level safeguards, and slow reforms on foreign bribery and anti-money laundering. 

Of particular concern is the commentary in the report that since 2012, 150 journalists around the globe have been murdered while covering corruption related stories. This follows the 2024 CPI, which revealed that since 2012, over 1,000 environmental defenders have been murdered globally. The majority of these murders occurred in countries with lower CPI scores.

What Is the Corruption Perceptions Index?

The CPI is the leading global indicator of public sector corruption, ranking 180 countries by perceived corruption levels on a 0-100 scale (0 as highly corrupt, 100 as very clean). Annual CPI rankings have been released since 1995. The CPI measures perceptions of public‑sector corruption, including both high‑level abuses of power and everyday administrative corruption.

How Can Organisations Use the Corruption Perceptions Index?

The CPI can be used as a practical risk-management tool for organisations operating or planning to operate overseas. It can assist organisations in assessing their exposure to corruption and identifying where to focus risk-management resources. 

For example, if an organisation operates in a jurisdiction with a lower CPI ranking i.e., below 50, this indicates a higher risk of bribery, fraud, or regulatory manipulation. This should be considered when making business decisions, such as market entry, supply-chain choices, and the level of due diligence applied to suppliers and agents.

Organisations can also use the CPI rankings to determine where stronger controls are needed. For example, this could involve enhanced due diligence for suppliers, more frequent audits or monitoring, and additional staff training. 

Australia’s Results

Australia’s decline in this year’s CPI comes as little surprise. The country is still in the early stages of rebuilding an integrity framework, which largely plateaued over the past decade. While the specific causes of the decline are never reported by Transparency International, factors that could adversely impact the Australian score may include:

• Widely reported revelations of the activities of the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union⁴.

• The NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption’s widely covered Operation Wyvern investigation of $345 million in alleged corrupt contracts⁵.

• The lack of criminal prosecutions for corruption matters.

• Investigations into whistleblowers.

• Delays in a range of corruption prevention initiatives including failure to prevent foreign bribery, Anti-Money Laundering/Counter-Terrorism Financing reforms, and transparency in political donations.

Momentum is now shifting, and several significant reforms are poised to strengthen Australia’s anti-corruption architecture in the years ahead. These include the expansion of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Act 2024, the adoption of enhanced foreign anti-bribery provisions, and the maturation of the National Anti-Corruption Commission.

Yet, meaningful change rarely has an immediate impact. Legislative reforms take time to embed, and the investigative and prosecutorial outcomes that shape public confidence and ultimately CPI scores will emerge only gradually. The coming years will be pivotal in determining whether Australia can reverse its long‑term downward trend or whether incremental progress gives way to further drift.

Takeaway for Organisations

The CPI is just one measure organisations can use to assess perceived exposure to corruption. Other tools we recommend are fraud and corruption risk assessments (e.g., exposure to foreign bribery), supplier due diligence frameworks, whistleblower frameworks, and governance indicators. These tools can help organisations build a comprehensive, evidence-based view of integrity across operations. 

Contact A&M for further details on how we can help improve risk management across your organisation. 

Learn more about how A&M can assist with investigating and managing the risk of corruption here.