Esta es la versión HTML de un fichero adjunto a una solicitud de acceso a la información 'EU Anti-Corruption Report'.

Ref. Ares(2015)799245 - 25/02/2015
Brussels, 6 February 2015 
1. Opening by Matthias Ruete, HOME Director-General:  
• The Commission wishes to better involve Member States in the preparations for the next 
EU Anti-Corruption Report, while minimising administrative burden. 
• Contributions from national authorities are welcome, on a voluntary basis. While the 
Commission retains full responsibility for the report. Member States ownership is essential. 
• The priority is to deliver a quality second report, with added value for all concerned. 
Publication is envisaged in 2016; an exact date has not yet been set. Quality should not be 
taken hostage of a set deadline. Duplication with other processes should be avoided. 
• A corruption-free public administration is vital for the business environment; is a priority in 
the Europe 2020 Agenda for growth and jobs and in the European Semester of economic 
• The anti-corruption experience sharing programme is launched. 
2. Second EU Anti-Corruption Report: Methodology and Member State consultation   
, Organised Crime Unit, DG HOME: 
• An overview of the recent activities was presented as well as the prospects for follow-up. 
• This included comments on a possible EU institutions chapter and information regarding 
upcoming relevant event at the European Parliament and at the EESC. 
• Information was also briefly provided on the intention of having in the second report more 
horizontal chapters, in particular on public procurement and EU funds, healthcare sector 
and beneficial ownership. 
• Information is needed from the Member States on the implementation of the first report's 
recommendations. Member State contributions so far have been uneven. 


Commission response to Member State comments:  
• The Commission underlined again the main messages of the Director-General: the 
importance of anti-corruption policies for economic recovery and proper functioning of 
public administration; the fact that this is an exercise which is in the interest of all
starting with the Member States themselves. It is in their interest to provide the 
Commission with all information on the steps being taken in order to build their own 
(positive) case. 
• The Commission uses a variety of sources including local research correspondents, existing 
reports, and fact-finding contacts with national authorities. The European Semester 
exercise also contributes and encourages political will to fight corruption. It also helps 
identifying those priorities, which will afterwards be eligible for European Structural and 
Investment Funds. 
• Statistics have limitations but help paint the overall picture. Experience and perception data 
will remain, complemented by other available statistics. Reputable unofficial sources will 
continue to be used, clearly identified in the text.  
• While minimising administrative burden, the Commission invites MS contributions, which 
will help ensure equal treatment. In the first report, only minor errors have been brought 
to the Commission's attention. While the recommendations are justified, the Commission 
is available to provide further detail where necessary.  
• Council conclusions and other feedback pointed to the need to assess the EU institutions 
and the Commission is examining ways to include an evaluation in the next report. 
3. Panel on Transparency: A tool to prevent and fight corruption. Presentations and Q&A  
(PowerPoint presentation available): 
, Secretariat-General 
 Transparency International EU Liaison Office 
 Expert Forum Romania 

4. Anti-Corruption Experience Sharing Programme: Objectives and selection of topics 

The programme will include 4 to 5 workshops per year, over an initial period of 2 years. One-day 
workshops will focus on specific examples (positive and negative) and solutions, thus supporting 
MS in implementing strategies. Experts from the private sector, international organisations and 
civil society will also participate. A report on each workshop will be published. The first 
workshop is envisaged in Budapest in late April 2015. 
The Commission will finance the workshops and select topics and experts based on challenges 
identified in the first EU Anti-Corruption Report. Member States are welcome to express interest 


in particular topics listed (please see annex), or propose others and suggest experts. 
Member State delegates: 
The programme could share not only good practice but also lessons learnt from measures that 
failed (
 would be happy to host a workshop, others asked for time to react in writing. 
The Commission asked them to do so by 13 March 2015. 
5. Operational conclusions by the Commission:  

•  Cooperation with national contact points is essential to get the facts right, based on 
transparency, coherence, equal treatment, without unnecessary administrative burden.  
•  Consultations on early draft country chapters will take place by end-2015.  The exact 
timing will be announced in due course.  
•  The Commission will share an advanced draft country chapter (in PDF format) for fact-
checking in 2016, and invite written comments within 10 working days. The Commission 
is also open to bilateral meetings if necessary. 
•  The Commission retains responsibility for the content of the report. The conclusions and 
recommendations are not subject to prior consultation. 
•  Contact points are asked to provide timely information and involve other national 
authorities, which may be copied in correspondence with the Commission. An update, in 
a free format, would be appreciated by 29 May 2015 on the follow-up to "future steps" at 
the end of each country chapter.  
Potential topics for the experience sharing programme (non-exhaustive list) 
Corruption and public procurement  
•  internal and external control mechanisms and risk management tools at contracting 
•  corruption risk assessment and tailor-made strategies for regional and local 
•  procurement training for local government;  
•  tools to prevent and detect corruption in public procurement at national and local level;  
•  measures to enhance transparency of ownership for companies participating in public 
Integrity and transparency in public administration and elected bodies  
•  preventive measures and integrity programmes in the civil service;  
•  monitoring of declarations of assets and interests by elected and appointed officials;  
•  internal control tools to assess the application of ethical frameworks;  
•  parliamentary codes of ethics including oversight mechanisms and sanctions;