Independence Policy

Whether we investigate, publish, update, correct or keep following a matter is settled by our evidence, editorial and legal standards.

Wealth, status, connections, commercial weight or threats to take business elsewhere play no part in an editorial outcome.

The same rules apply to a private individual, a free-zone company, a listed group, a government official or any other organisation.

We never accept money, gifts, services, favours or any other benefit in return for:

• Taking a record down
• Concealing evidence
• Holding back publication
• Hiding an important source
• Changing a grade without new evidence
• Deleting an accurate adverse finding
• Toning down accurate reporting
• Dropping an investigation
• Publishing a favourable conclusion

No employee, writer, investigator, lawyer or contractor acting for Dubai Scammers may negotiate any arrangement of this kind.

Anyone can challenge a record without paying us a dirham.

Where reliable evidence shows a material statement is wrong, incomplete or out of date, we may correct, clarify or update it under our Corrections Policy.

Members do not jump the queue, and non-members are never turned away from a genuine correction.

We may charge for Research Membership, professional research tools, access to Lens and related services. Those fees pay for what the member receives, and nothing more.

Membership gives no right to:

• have a record removed;
• direct an investigation;
• sign off what we write;
• change an evidence grade;
• stop publication;
• require favourable coverage; or
• obtain a correction the evidence does not support.

Members may send documents or ask for a record to be reviewed. Their material is held to exactly the same standard as anyone else’s.

Where membership includes legal research or professional support, that service is kept separate from our independent editorial decisions.

A professional may help a member understand a record, gather supporting documents or present a properly evidenced correction request. That help does not mean we will accept the member’s position or change what we published.

If Dubai Scammers or a related service has a financial or professional relationship with someone named in a record, that relationship has no bearing on what the record says.

Material conflicts are identified, recorded internally and managed. Where necessary, anyone involved in the relationship is removed from editorial decisions on that matter.

Sources, whistleblowers, victims, complainants and litigants do not own the investigation that follows. Nobody who gives us information can require us to:

• adopt their account;
• leave out important contrary evidence;
• present allegations as findings;
• pursue someone else;
• disregard a subject’s reply; or
• choose when or how we publish.

We weigh the evidence ourselves.

Funders, sponsors, members, donors, suppliers and partners have no influence over individual investigations or their conclusions because of the money involved.

If a financial relationship creates a material conflict on a particular record, we consider disclosure, recusal or other safeguards.

Anyone working on research, investigations, legal review or editorial decisions must not seek or accept gifts, hospitality, benefits or favours that could compromise their independence on a matter, or reasonably appear to.

Any attempt to influence reporting through personal benefits is reported internally.

Our people must not request, agree to or accept any improper advantage in exchange for using their editorial or investigative role in a particular way.

Where the circumstances warrant it, suspected bribery or improper influence may be documented, escalated internally and referred to legal counsel or the appropriate authorities, under [APPLICABLE ANTI-BRIBERY LAW] and any other law that applies.

Not every offer, negotiation or removal request is bribery, and this policy does not say otherwise.

We receive demands, lawyers’ letters, commercial pressure, threats of legal action and other objections.

Every genuine legal or factual challenge is considered on its merits. Pressure by itself is not a reason to remove reporting — or to keep it.

A real error gets corrected. Where the evidence still holds, pressure does not change the evidence.

We do not treat a legal demand as evidence that we got something wrong. Nor do we dismiss one because it comes from a subject or their lawyer.

Legal notices, court orders and formal demands are assessed on their substance, the applicable law, the evidence and our obligations. Binding orders from courts and competent authorities are dealt with as the law requires.

Writers, investigators, editors, legal reviewers and others must declare any interest that could reasonably affect their independence, such as:

Safeguards can include stepping aside, reassignment, independent review or disclosure.

Read the conflict register

Where practical, people who handle memberships, subscriptions or partnerships do not control editorial decisions on records involving those relationships.

Commercial staff can pass a member’s or subject’s factual request or evidence to the editorial team. They can never say:

Nobody representing Dubai Scammers has authority to make such a promise.

We may consider a request to remove, correct or amend a record when it raises legitimate grounds, for example:

The identity, wealth, status or membership of the person asking makes no difference to the standard applied.

Where appropriate, significant corrections and amendments are shown in an update notice or the version history.

We will not quietly change a material conclusion to satisfy private pressure. Minor spelling, formatting or other non-substantive edits may not be flagged the same way.

Any suspected attempt by our people to sell, trade or improperly influence an editorial outcome should be reported internally and will be looked into. Depending on the findings, consequences can include:

The response will be proportionate to the facts.