Corruption is a major problem in many countries around the world. It is frequently a source of social tension and political contention. In an attempt to combat corruption, many governments have established anti corruption agencies. A two day conference hosted in Jakarta by the Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission has agreed on a set of principles, which is hoped will make these bodies work more effectively around the globe. Nico Prins reports from Indonesia.Indonesia, the current chair of the G20 Anti Corruption Working Group, hosted a two day conference in Jakarta aimed at strengthening the effectiveness of anti-corruption bodies in the prevention and fight against corruption. In total 38 states sent delegations from Anti Corruption bodies. Other attendees included anti corruption experts and practitioners as well as representatives from the United Nations Development Programme and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. A key focus of the conference was the independence of corruption eradication bodies. In an attempt to promote and safeguard the independence of such bodies, delegates agreed to a set of principles on how Anti Corruption Bodies should operate. The independence of Anti Corruption Agencies is important because they are often tasked with investigating corruption cases that involve government officials. This set of principles is seen as a key document that builds upon initiatives ratified in several international treaties. However, many anti corruption bodies will be forced to adapt or omit some of the principles that were agreed upon in the meeting. Issues that will effect adoption include the legal system they operate in and the mandate they were given. Of course after they come back to this country they will evaluate implementing based on the domestic law and which principles can't be implemented In the past two decades the issue of corruption has become a serious concern for an increasingly educated global populace. At present there are 130 anti-corruption agencies around the world tasked with combating corruption. While some anti corruption bodies are seen as rigorously undertaking their mandate others are viewed with suspicion. In some countries they are seen at best as being ineffective and at worst as tools that ruling political parties use to destroy their political opponents.