Ref. Ares(2017)1569040 - 23/03/2017
Ref. Ares(2017)3855930 - 01/08/2017
EU ANTI-CORRUPTION ACTIVITIES
FOLLOW-UP TO THE FIRST REPORT AND WAY FORWARD
Note prepared for the meeting between CAB President, CAB First Vice-
President, CAB Avramopoulos
16/12/2016
Chef de File: HOME/D3
CONTEXT
T
The EU Anti-Corruption Report (ACR) was set up in 2011 by a Commission Decision
Establishing an EU anti-corruption reporting mechanism for periodic assessment.
Pursuant to article 4, the report, “
accompanied by country analyses for each Member State
including tailor-made recommendations shall be published by the Commission every two
years.” In February 2014, the first EU Anti-Corruption Report (ACR) highlighted challenges and
best practice, suggesting reforms tailored for each Member State.
Pressure has been mounting to release the second edition (due in 2016) in the European
Parliament: the European Parliament resolution on the fight against corruption and follow-up of
the CRIM resolution
(2015/2110(INI)) was adopted on the 25 October 2016 by a very large
majority (545 in favour, 91 against, 61 abstentions) and explicitly asked the Commission to
submit the Anti-Corruption Report as soon as possible (point 9). Many Member States,
international organisations such as GRECO, UNODC and OECD and civil society
organisations, including Transparency International have also inquired about the next
report.
On 20 October, FVP Timmermans told the LIBE committee that the Commission was
drawing conclusions and working on the implications of the first report, and that
Parliament would be informed by the end of 2016 on the way forward.
FOLLOW-UP TO THE FIRST ANTI-CORRUPTION REPORT The
June 2014 JHA Council conclusions on the EU Anti-corruption report (9969/14)
stressed that the report is a valuable tool to consolidate anti-corruption efforts and
promote high anti-corruption standards across the EU and that it should be seen as a next
step in advancing the establishment of an EU-wide area based on integrity values. They
also called on the Commission to
engage actively in close cooperation with the Member
States in a review of its methodology with a view to enhancing its political weight and
value: "Particular attention should be given to the prior involvement of the Member States
in the fact-finding stages of the procedure in order to collect objective and reliable data."
The conclusions invited Member States to make further efforts to encourage anti-
corruption prevention measures and effectively enforce anti-corruption laws and policies
at national level, while noting that the situation varies from one Member State to the other.
All Member States have engaged constructively in the follow-up
to the first report. They
each designated a
national contact point to provide updates on progress. In February
2015, the Commission organised the first meeting of the national contact points on
corruption (all 28 MS participated) in Brussels and engaged in a dialogue on how to
improve the Report. In 2015 and 2016, the Commission carried out a series of bilateral
1
visits to Member States, gathering information about progress from national authorities
and stakeholders.
Several Member States have undertaken significant
anti-corruption reforms in areas
identified by the first ACR. For example, Ireland adopted a cutting-edge law and the
Netherlands created an institution to protect whistleblowers; Spain enacted a wide-ranging
anti-corruption legislative package; the Czech Republic and Malta adopted a political party
financing law (where there was previously none); Slovakia adopted a rule-of-law action
plan, introducing a central registry of public contracts; France set up an agency to foster
transparency and integrity in public office, and introduced online asset declarations for
elected officials; Germany revised its Criminal Code and ratified the United Nations
Convention against Corruption (UNCAC); Luxembourg introduced Codes of Conduct for
both members of Parliament and members of government. In addition, Member States are
now actively transposing EU legislation on asset recovery, anti-money laundering and
public procurement which improves anti-corruption capacity.
Member States are also actively participating in a successful anti-corruption
experience-
sharing programme organised by the Commission (DG HOME) as a follow-up to the first
EU Anti-Corruption Report. In 2015 and 2016, over 200 national experts participated in a
total of
six workshops on asset disclosure, whistleblower protection, healthcare
corruption, local public procurement, private sector corruption, and political immunities.
Discussions in the workshops were constructive and open. The programme is meant to
offer anti-corruption practitioners a forum for exchanging views on challenges and policy
levers to address these and possibly seek inspiration from legislative reforms adopted or
under preparation at Member States' level. The next workshop in February 2017 will be on
corruption indicators.
There is increasing focus on the need for reliable quantitative data on corruption. Beyond
the Eurobarometer surveys on corruption carried out every two years since 2007, Member
States now participate, at the initiative of the Commission, in a unique
data collection on
criminal statistics on corruption. The collection reveals differences across countries in
the definitions of offences, indicators available, and methods for recording data. Gathering
credible data and measuring corruption remains a challenge, but using as many indicators
as possible improves the reliability of estimates.
Anti-corruption is an integral part of the
European Semester. Key findings of the first EU
Anti-Corruption Report have been taken up in European Semester country reports (HU, CY,
CZ, BG, HR, IT, LV, LT, PT, RO, SK, SI, ES) and in the economic adjustment programme for
EL. In 2016, the Council endorsed Country Specific Recommendations related to corruption
and transparency for nine MS (HU, CZ, HR, IT, LV, PT, RO, SK, ES). This is another way the
EU can exert pressure for targeted anti-corruption reforms. Anti-corruption is also a key
component of the programming of EU funding, including the European Structural and
Investment Funds, to help build institutional capacity and modernise public administration
in the Member States.
LOOKING AHEAD
2016 is a year of increased societal, political and media
attention to integrity issues. At the
international level, OECD, UNODC and the Council of Europe, but also G7 and G20 continue
efforts on countering corruption. The EU and other regional and international
organisations as well as individual Member States and other countries made a series of
high level commitments at the London Anti-Corruption Summit in May. The Panama Papers
2
prompted initiatives to enhance the legal framework for transparency. At the EU level, the
European Parliament, Ombudsman, EESC, and Court of Auditors have kept anti-corruption
high on the agenda. Member States themselves have undertaken key reforms (as
highlighted above).
A consistent policy line needs to be agreed at political level in the Commission on the
way forward on EU anti-corruption activities and the second EU ACR. As announced
by the First Vice-President, a response to LIBE should be sent before the end of the year.
On the basis of the considerations above, Cabinets' guidance is sought on the following
next steps:
3