"Citizens consider that corruption increased, the perception on corruption after joining EU did not register a notable improvement, legislative progress were most of the times made at foreign pressure, anti graft prosecutors and the national integrity agency were saved by internal and external pressures, and internal integrity is not a priority at all", some of the conclusions of an audit on anti-corruption strategies in 2005-2010, set up by two independent experts at the recommendation of the latest EC report in July 2010 reads.
Experts praise the strategy of former Justice minister Monica Macovei for 2005 -2007 and criticize the strategy of incumbent Justice minister Catalin Predoiu, saying that it was not based on a credible evaluation of the reasons and conditions of corruption in Romania.
The independent audit, conducted by experts Drago Kos and Constantine Palicarsky touches upon the legal and institutional framework including the progresses made in the fight against corruption in 2005-2010 in Romania.
Here are the most interesting conclusions
- Justice strategies for 2005 -2007 and 2008-2010 were implemented to a great extend and an important number of anti-corruption measures were taken in a short time spam.
- Measures to answer each field initially identified were taken There was no notable improvement on the population’s perception on corruption after Romania joined the EU despite efforts to react to corruption in those vulnerable sectors in Romania
- Legislative frameworks were taken most of the times at external pressures and resolved some problems but not all of them and sometimes even managed to create supplementary ones
- Citizens consider that corruption increased despite objective data that proves the contrary.
- One of the main reasons of such a situation is that absence of impact indicators, which creates the overwhelming impressing that nothing was done
- The 2008-2010 Justice strategy was not based on a credible evaluation of reasons and conditions of corruption in Romania Another problem related to the 2008-2010 strategy is the passivity of the two state powers: the legislative and the judiciary The biggest and most important anti corruption institutions in Romania, anti graft prosecutors and the national integrity agency faced several attempts to have their efficiency limited and internal and external pressures were needed to allow the government not to interfere
- The national integrity agency is still denied to take part in the trials related to goods confiscation.
- Romania does not implement an important instrument related to the fight against corruption that would allow all institutions related to implement fictive bribe in all penal procedures. Currently just police officers are allowed to implement this method. Any modification of the anticorruption legislation and related legislation is associated with a major rick that planned changes might be used to diminish the efficiency of the anti corruption system
The most important recommendations
- To carefully plan future anti corruption measures, give up the emergency state strategy in this sector and ensure a coordinated long term approach regarding the implementation of planned measures based on real national willingness to prevent and counter corruption irrespective of Romania’s international obligations
- To approach the prevention of corruption in a comprehensive manner, in the vein of the 2005-2007 justice strategy
- To consolidate the rule of law and counter corruption more effectively in all sectors in Romania by decentralization of anticorruption efforts
- All institutions should be compelled to ensure professional training on ethics, consolidation of existent disciplinary rules, ethics and conflict of interest management as part of daily management tasks
- To ensure the stability and clarity of the national anticorruption legislation
- To consolidate the position of the national integrity agency and its place in courts
