By Gillian Dell, Transparency International

The countdown to COSP4 continues. The Coalition Coordination Committee is holding regular planning phone calls and three Coalition working groups are busy with preparations. One of these groups focuses on the Coalition's statement on Article 13; one on the Coalition's statement on Asset recovery and anti-money laundering; and one on COSP-related "actions" which is planning, among other things, a flashmob in the main square of Marrakesh on the first day of COSP4. And then several Coalition members are busy preparing the programme for the Coalition side events, which will be spread over several days.

On the government side, there seems to be little momentum to use the COSP to advance the global anti-corruption agenda. The plenary agenda for the conference includes the usual items: review of implementation, technical assistance, prevention and asset recovery.

What's behind those titles? No-one is really clear. But what does seem to be clear is that there are no big initiatives planned, nothing to make COSP4 a landmark in a positive sense.

There is some behind-the-scenes government prep activity. The big issue is the admission of observers to meetings of the Implementation Review Group (IRG). (The IRG is the intergovernmental body that follows the UNCAC review process.) And then some sparks have been flying about the budget for the COSP Secretariat (UNODC). Last but not least, there's a little bit of movement on the subjects of asset recovery and international cooperation.

On the IRG observer issue, there's a fight in progress. COSP3 decided that the COSP Rules of Procedure apply for observers. (See Rule 2 of the COSP Rules of Procedure) This means that CSOs can participate in the IRG as observers, as can other entities that are not States parties. But ever since the IRG held its first meeting in June 2010, the Russians & co. have successfully manoeuvred to keep CSOs out of its meetings. (The Chinese reportedly asked what CSOs could add to the discussions about the review process.) And while they were at it they managed to keep all observers out of the IRG meetings, including Intergovernmental Organisations (like the World Bank) and representatives of countries that have not yet ratified the UNCAC (like Germany and Japan).

This controversy led the IRG to seek the Opinion of the UN Office of Legal Affairs last year and the August 2010 response was that CSOs should be allowed in unless the Conference of States Parties decides otherwise. (Which it didn't). (See COSP Rules 2 and 17 on this subject.) But even after that Opinion, the IRG continued to exclude CSOs. At the last IRG meeting in September 2011 there was a big showdown about this. The Russians offered a so-called compromise namely that instead of entering the IRG meeting as observers, CSOs should be provided with a briefing after IRG sessions. "Nyet!" said governments supporting CSO participation – they did not accept this proposal. The two sides then separated without the issue resolved. There were dire warnings made to the CSO-friendly side: "You won't get such a good offer in Marrakesh".

Until now, there's still no text in circulation on the observer issue, other than the failed draft text from September. In our conversations with CSO-friendly governments, we all agree it was a very bad start for the IRG to violate its own rules and disregard the general UNCAC objectives of "transparency" and "participation". Despite that, it the EU has not yet decided its bottom line. The motto among some friendly governments seems to be: "a poor compromise is better than an unresolved issue." The fact that IGOs and non-parties are kept out of the IRG does not help. We point out to them that the starting point is a favourable rule – COSP Rule 2—and that this should under no circumstances be revoked. Since the COSP operates on a consensus basis it won't be possible to remove that rule. On the other hand, if they revoke the rule, it will cast a cloud over the Marrakesh conference and call into question the commitment of governments to accountability.

Apart from the IRG observer issue, Egypt has circulated two draft resolutions, one on Asset recovery and one on setting up an Intergovernmental Working Group on International Cooperation. They first circulated drafts at the Intergovernmental Working Group on Asset recovery when it met back in August 2011 and have recently circulated revised drafts. Our Coalition working group has got hold of the first of these resolutions and is busy discussing proposed supplementary language now with targeted governments.

UNODC also advises that the Government of Morocco will sponsor a resolution on prevention -- but so far no governments we've talked to have seen it. Also, no sign so far of a US resolution on the COSP Secretariat (UNODC) budget which we heard might be submitted. There are some behind-the-scenes tensions about the UNODC budget.

It seems the Conference of States Parties could use some "sherpas" like the ones that prepare G20 meetings. It would help to achieve a more considered decision-making process if the 155 States parties had a better idea about what to expect in Marrakesh and made more use of the opportunities for international discussions.

Meanwhile, quite a lot of information has been posted about numerous side events that are being organised ahead of and during the COSP. The International Association of Anti-Corruption Agencies (IACA) is holding a two-day meeting ahead of the COSP and Global Compact is organising meetings beforehand and during the COSP. Many other organisations, including the Global Organization of Parliamentarians against Corruption (GOPAC) are also organising meetings during the Conference. The UNCAC Coalition has several panels lined up, though unlike the other side meetings ours will take place off the main conference site. We're concerned that government representatives may not find the CSO "ghetto". But we'll try to solve that problem once we're onsite.