Practical Measures Are Needed

Corruption watchdog Transparency Serbia has sent a 20-point proposal on fighting corruption to all parties taking part in the next general election. Organization representatives are hopeful that future MPs and cabinet members will include the measures described in the plan in their platforms, stressing that taking on corruption is one of their campaign promises.

Transparency Serbia program director Nemanja Nenadic tells us that campaigning for elections in Serbia is still predominantly based on general opinions and allegations, instead of approaches to solving problems. Nevertheless, he is hopeful that the political parties still have enough time to turn to more practical matters, adding that TI's proposal does not contain anything objectionable to any of the groups.

"I really don't think the parties have anything to object to, at least based on their platforms. To be honest, some principles did get questioned in the past. For instance, the Serbian Radical Party has opposed the creation of new, independent state bodies, but we hope they've realized how useful they can be," Nenadic adds.

Commenting on the role played by state institutions, Nenadic stresses that there have been many cases of failure to act.

"That's why we've included several points that are understood, such as that decisions made by the public information commissioner must be enforced, that reports of corruption must be followed up in a timely and fact-oriented manner. We have witnessed problems caused by the publication of documents related to the way public property is used (privatization and concession contracts)," Nenadic goes on to say.

Yet Nenadic also admits that some things are not easy to deal with even when adequate will is present. Such issues include judicial reform, developing internal supervisory mechanisms, and reporting of incidents of corruption.

Making Lobbies Public

One of Transparency Serbia's proposals, Nenadic says, is publicizing information on lobby groups, which would be a complete novelty in Serbia. He also adds that the 20-point plan is by no means complete, stressing that many more things can be done to tackle corruption.

"Some of these things are being discussed during the [election] campaign. For instance, Democratic Party and G17 Plus officials have mentioned the prosecution of officials who fail to submit asset reports. The Democratic Party of Serbia has proposed making public procurement entirely electronic, while the Liberal Democratic Party is paying special attention to reducing the public sector and curbing the influence parties have on the public companies. Others have remarked about actual manifestations of corruption: the Radical party has talked about small gifts, commissions and the like given to local officials," Nenadic explains.

TI wants to see a reduction in the number of executives in public companies subject to political appointment since they change after every election. Nenadic believes this is a problem for the parties themselves because people playing active roles in election campaigns often expect such positions as compensation for their efforts.

"We've seen that this issue was one of the biggest problems during the formation of the cabinet a year ago. However, we've grown accustomed to things changing at a very slow pace in this country and that even though something might be unthinkable at one point, it might be entirely normal the following year, especially if there's strong public pressure to limit the power that parties have in affairs that are not strictly related to the general welfare."

The Importance of Checks

The document from TI also calls for changes to party financing laws, emphasizing that existing anti-corruption measures need to be retained. According to Nenadic, many existing laws need improvement, although "criticism should not result in the elimination of elements that are beneficial from the standpoint of combating corruption."

"Supervision is by far the most important factor. Even current laws could have had very good results if there was adequate supervision. It is therefore necessary to entrust supervision to an independent body of experts," he adds.

In addition, Nenadic stresses that after the election officials need to decide whether that body will be the future Anti-Corruption Agency, State Auditing Institution, or some other body.

Some changes, he says, do not have to wait for the election of a new Parliament.

As an example Nenadic gives TI's initiative of several months ago for changes to the rules of conduct of the Election Commission. These amendments, he says, could provide enhanced publicity for campaign spending reports and supervisory activities.

"In the end the initiative was distributed to the commission's members, but was never discussed. Every member of the Election Commission has the authority to bring up the issues included in the proposal and every party can publicize its campaign spending data during the campaign even though it's not required by law to do so."

TI's proposal to Serbia's political parties was as follows:

Support to independent state bodies, administrative bodies, and working groups involved in the struggle against corruption (Public Information Commissioner, Committee for Resolving Conflicts of Interest, State Auditing Institution, Ombudsman, public procurement bodies, Anti-Corruption Council etc.) by:

(A) providing these institutions with adequate office space; (B) enabling them to hire adequate staff; (C) the recognition of their decisions and recommendations by the cabinet and Parliament and measures to encourage other bodies to do the same; (D) debate on these bodies' annual reports by the cabinet and Parliament; (E) the approval by the cabinet and Parliament of necessary funding based on activity proposals; (F) the appointment of officials to these bodies by Parliament.

Changes to the Law on Political Party Financing that would keep all primary anti-corruption mechanisms. The amendments would need to specify a deadline for the submission of financial reports, accurate limits on campaign spending, alter the way in which state funding is allocated, impose stricter limits on campaign funding collection for local elections, place an independent, expert body in charge of supervision, ensure that funding data is available during campaigning, and condition the approval of state funding and verification of seats won on the submission of financial reports.

Continued public procurement reform: the passage of legislation on public procurement prepared by the outgoing cabinet along with amendments needed to ensure adherence to EU standards, establishing an independent appeals commission, accurately defining the role of the Public Procurement Office, reducing arbitrariness in bidder selection for sensitive contracts, providing effective protection of the public interest, and punishing state bodies and bidders who flout the law.

Ensuring the availability of information on the activities of the cabinet, MPs and caucuses by: publishing conclusions reached by the cabinet except in cases where confidentiality is necessary; publishing information on lobbyists seeking to sway the cabinet, ministers, caucuses, and political parties; publishing agreements and contracts made by the cabinet together with all related documentation; publishing information on the actions of MPs and caucuses such as proposed amendments, voting records, attendance records etc.; providing access to transcripts of cabinet meetings except when confidential matters are discussed; publishing justifications for appointments and dismissals.

Ensuring the availability of information on the activities of the ministries and better communication with society by: organizing public debates on draft legislation, providing detailed answers to comments, objections, queries, and initiatives related to draft legislation; publishing of up-to-date information brochures on ministry activities in line with orders from the information commissioner, as well as the presentation of important information on websites.

The cabinet and other state bodies need to react in a timely manner and with adequate justification in cases where there are indications of corruption or similar violations of the law, especially when such allegations are published in reports from other state bodies, the Anti-Corruption Council, NGOs, international organizations, and investigative journalists.

Information on state property and government spending should be public, including data on property owned by the Republic of Serbia, the sale of stock, land leasing, as well as property rented for official use and similar arrangements.

Better supervision of the budgeting and spending of state money should be ensured by: taking suggestions from citizens into consideration; publishing the financial plans of certain bodies; basing the budget on a specific program; publishing periodical reports on spending; auditing of every budget spending report.

Conditions conducive to the reform of the courts and prosecutors' offices need to be provided. This includes ensuring adequate funding, security, and independence, proper evaluation of judges and prosecutors, and effective legal sanctions for lack of expertise and effectiveness.

Conditions should be created to facilitate the use of specialized investigative techniques to uncover corruption after the Criminal Procedure Law takes effect.

Internal supervision needs to be improved in state bodies and inspection services.

The system by which parties divide up paid offices in public companies needs to be eliminated by introducing public competitions for managers. In addition, a single party should not be allowed to completely dominate a government portfolio.

The legal system needs to be completed on the basis of ratified conventions (U.N. Convention Against Corruption, the Council of Europe's Criminal and Civil Law Conventions on Corruption) in order to ensure that victims of corruption can collect damages and the protection of people who report corruption.

Recommendations issued by the Commission for Resolving Conflicts of Interest need to be honored and an effective system created for checking the validity and completeness of reports filed by officials on their assets and income.

Officials accused of corruption should lose their immunity from prosecution and the law changed to disallow immunity in cases involving allegations of corruption.

The system by which permits are issued needs to be simplified and made transparent to prevent extortion and corruption.

A mechanism needs to be devised to prevent corruption and collect reports on corruption in public services (health care, education), public administration, and local government as these forms of corruption are particularly detrimental for the poorest segments of the population.

An effective means of keeping track of the implementation of the Anti- Corruption Strategy needs to be instituted and officials failing to meet their obligations as specified in this document and international treaties need to be held accountable. These obligations include the passage of the Law on the Anti-Corruption Agency.

The effectiveness of new and proposed legislation and its adherence to the Anti-Corruption Strategy needs to be gauged.

Identical situations need to be treated identically and the public needs to be notified regardless of the person or organization involved.