Record Keepers, Not Investigators

Has the Committee for Resolving Conflicts of Interest done anything to look into the various allegations carried by the media?

The Committee does not deal with statements to the media in which politicians discuss their assets because it has copies of their signed asset reports. In other words, neither does the Committee have a special division to keep track of everything said during the election campaign, nor could it take action until there was some other indication that a politician's publicly reported assets differ from what he actually possesses.

Our job is not to conduct checks, but to keep records. The Committee can only take action in response to a motion filed by an individual or state body alleging a discrepancy between the official data and the actual state of affairs. In other words, the Committee doesn't have the authority to probe reports for omissions and mistakes, or trace the origin of assets.

Isn't there a new bill that proposes mandatory checks and investigations in cases involving controversial information?

A draft law on the anti-corruption agency does exist, but it was withdrawn from Parliament for reworking, which is a good thing. There was a public debate a little over a month ago and the fate of this legislation is questionable now that elections have been called. I'd rather not talk about it before it is presented as an actual proposal to Parliament.

Based on the Commission's work to date, would you say that there's any point to censure in a country like Serbia?

I have to tell that surprisingly, there was an effect. Many officials were respectful of the Committee, especially when they were at the beginning of their terms and needed to pay attention to their reputation. However, as time went by this diligence diminished. Yet even the measures we could take, which were strong reprimands, did produce results so you could say that we're content with how officials have responded to their obligation to report their assets, especially officials at higher levels of government. There have been significant problems at the local level, though. We're also satisfied with the fact that many officials have sought the Committee's opinion before accepting additional duties. There has been an effect and it would have been greater given different measures, such as introducing, as we have proposed, a requirement that officials give back all revenues derived from incompatible offices and pay administrative expenses. Giving the Committee the power to initiate an official's dismissal would, of course, be even better.

What has the response to the Committee's recommendations for dismissal been?

I have to say that we did run into a number of problems since some officials complied, while others either tried to evade or outright disregard the proposals. A small number simply ignored the Committee, while others would notify us they had resigned, after which it would turn out that the resignation was either rejected or never even considered. In other words, an offending official appeared to have complied with the Committee's recommendations, but was still in a conflict of interest.

Would you say that conflicts of interest now exist as a concept in Serbian politics? Are politicians acknowledging the importance of this law, at least to some extent? And what is your take on public awareness?

The politicians would already have to be aware of what constitutes a conflict of interest, especially since we have devoted attention to education. The Committee has published two brochures with interpretations of the law and a compilation of past decisions. Seminars have been organized in a number of Serbian municipalities. In other words, those who were willing had the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the law without actually reading it, but by reading our brochures and going to seminars. However, there is still the question of how these regulations affect politicians and whether they see conflicts of interest as something that is undesirable, and I think they do. Unlike the public, which supports efforts to prevent conflicts of interest, many officials have an ingrained desire to oppose such constraints.

What were the Committee's biggest problems and biggest achievements?

I'd say the problems were largely the ones I described, that is, latent resistance from some politicians that manifests itself in several ways. There is a constant tendency to enter conflicts of interest. As for the Committee's achievements, I would highlight its success in reducing this tendency to an acceptable level. Additionally, the public, politicians included, has come to recognize that this is a powerful tool in the fight against corruption.