Tatra Trucks A.S.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the CEO or Chair of the Board have published a statement that promotes the company’s ethics and anti-corruption agenda.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the CEO or Chair of the Board demonstrate a strong personal, external facing commitment to the ethics and anti-corruption agenda of the company.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company’s CEO demonstrates a strong personal, internal-facing commitment to the ethics and anti-corruption agenda of the company.

Based on public information, there is evidence that the company’s Quality Policy states that company managers commit to creating relationships based upon ethical principles, honesty, trust and co-operation amongst all co-workers. However, this does not appear to be a commitment for all employees and the document does not explain what is meant by these principles or how they are applied. TI has found no further evidence of a statement of values or principles representing high standards of business conduct.

Based on public information, there is evidence that the company is a member of the Defence and Security Industry Association of the Czech Republic, which is a member of the AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD). However, there is no readily available evidence that the company has signed up to the ASD Common Industry Standards. TI has found no readily available evidence that the company belongs to further national or international initiatives that promote anti-corruption or business ethics with a significant focus on anti-corruption.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has appointed a Board committee or individual Board member with overall corporate responsibility for its ethics and anti-corruption agenda.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has appointed a person at a senior level within the company to have responsibility for implementing the company’s ethics and anti-corruption agenda.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence of regular Board level monitoring and review of the performance of the company’s ethics and anti-corruption agenda.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence of a formal, clear, written plan in place on which the review of the ethics and anti-corruption agenda by the Board or senior management is based, and no evidence of improvement plans being implemented when issues are identified.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a formal process for review and where appropriate updates its policies and practices in response to actual or alleged instances of corruption.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a formal anti-corruption risk assessment procedure implemented enterprise-wide.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a formal anti-corruption risk assessment procedure for assessing proposed business decisions, with clear requirements on the circumstances under which such a procedure should be applied.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company conducts due diligence that minimises corruption risk when selecting or reappointing its agents.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has contractual rights and processes for the behaviour, monitoring, control, and audit of agents with respect to countering corruption.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company makes clear to contractors, sub-contractors, and suppliers, through policy and contractual terms, its stance on bribery and corruption and the consequences of breaches to this stance.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company explicitly addresses the corruption risks associated with offset contracting.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company conducts due diligence that minimises corruption risk when selecting its offset partners and offset brokers.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has an anti-corruption policy that prohibits corruption in its various forms.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has an anti-corruption policy that prohibits corruption in its various forms.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has an anti-corruption policy that prohibits corruption in its various forms.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has an anti-corruption policy that prohibits corruption in its various forms.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has an anti-corruption policy that prohibits corruption in its various forms.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a policy on potential conflicts of interest.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a policy on the giving and receipt of gifts.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the giving and receipt of hospitality is controlled so as to ensure that such transactions are not corrupt.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence of a policy that prohibits facilitation payments.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company prohibits political contributions, or regulates such contributions in order to prevent undue influence or other corrupt intent.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence of a clear policy on engagement in lobbying activities.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company prohibits charitable contributions, or regulates such contributions in order to prevent undue influence or other corrupt intent.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the ethics and compliance agenda is fully explained to employees through the use of written guidance.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a training programme that explicitly covers anti-corruption.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a training programme that explicitly covers anti-corruption.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a training programme that explicitly covers anti-corruption.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a training programme that explicitly covers anti-corruption.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has a clear and formal process by which employees declare conflicts of interest.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company is explicit in its commitment to apply disciplinary procedures to employees, Directors and Board members found to have engaged in corrupt activities.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has multiple, well-publicised channels that are easily accessible and secure, to guarantee confidentiality or anonymity where requested by the employee, to report concerns or instances of suspected corrupt activity.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has whistleblowing channels available to all employees.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has formal and comprehensive mechanisms to assure itself that whistleblowing by employees is not deterred.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence that the company has well-publicised resources available to all employees where help and advice can be sought on corruption-related issues.

Based on public information, there is no readily available evidence of a commitment to non-retaliation for bona fide reporting of corruption.