A couple of weeks ago, the BRICS leaders met in New Delhi for the 18th Summit with India taking Chair. The theme was “Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability.” Much of the coverage focussed on geopolitics, payments and trade. Member countries explicitly reaffirmed their commitment to preventing and combating corruption under the UN Convention against Corruption. The leaders highlighted the progress made on asset recovery and cross-border cooperation. There was discussion also on fraud, money laundering and illicit financial activity. There was also innovation regarding a formal Network of Law Enforcement Practitioners to better coordinate on tracing fugitives.
All of this is important for organisations conducting business across the BRICS markets (10 plus 1 countries). Why is this important for investigators? Financial (and non-financial) crime mitigation depends on a company’s ability to detect misconduct, investigate swiftly, act on what is found, and manage the country risk accordingly.
The Heads of ACi five key BRICS nations: Brazil, India, China, UAE and South Africa were asked and have each commented on how the investigations landscape is changing where they work. It is great to see professionals around the world rise to the challenge of facing financial and non-financial misconduct. And the ACi will continue to contribute to building investigation capability (Certified Corporate Investigation accreditation), global standards (co-drafters of ISO 37008 and more), and the community (in-person and webinar events) not just for BRICS nations, but globally as well.
Ashu Sharma, Chief Strategy Officer
Other views
India
Shanu Saksena, Head of ACi India
India’s rapid digitisation—from payments and identity systems to public services—has made AI-enabled corporate fraud and identity compromise the defining investigation risk for 2026–27. Organisations should prioritise coordinated, technology-driven fraud affecting high-volume digital transactions, particularly the UPI network, rather than treating incidents as isolated misconduct.
China
Zheng Yiju, Head of China
Chinese enterprises should put procedural compliance ahead of the desired conclusion. Investigations must apply the minimum-necessity principle to personal data, protect employee rights, observe restrictions on cross-border data transfers, and collect evidence lawfully for possible later proceedings. Independence, conflict management, standardised interviews and strict confidentiality are essential throughout.
United Arab Emirates
Charanjeet Bhatia, Head of UAE
The immediate concern is organised crime targeting financial-institution customers through fraud and mule networks. At the same time, financial-services organisations face increasingly proactive regulators, frequent circulars and notices, short implementation periods and meaningful penalties for non-compliance. Investigations and control frameworks must therefore respond quickly to both criminal threats and regulatory change.
Brazil
Dercio Carvahelda, Head of ACi Brazil
Brazil’s principal challenge is conducting effective corporate investigations without a dedicated regulatory framework, creating uncertainty over professional boundaries, methods and activities reserved for lawyers. Investigations are increasingly multidisciplinary, spanning anti-corruption, criminal, labour, privacy, cyber and ESG issues. Cross-border work must also account for Brazil’s BRICS role, its ties with the US and Europe, and potentially competing sanctions, export-control and regulatory expectations.