February 11, 2003

Dr. Maria Yordanova, Director of Law Program, Center for the Study of Democracy

Ladies and gentlemen! I have the challenging task of outlining in a few short minutes the analysis and general evaluation of the corruption situation in this country over the past year, of the achievements and failures in the fight against corruption. A number of specific proposals concerning anti-corruption measures have been formulated on this basis, many of which will, I hope, provoke a productive discussion.

Those who are more closely familiar with Coalition 2000 know that for the fourth consecutive time the Corruption Assessment Report adheres to the structure of the Anti-corruption Action Plan adopted at the first Policy Forum of the Coalition in 1998, and namely:

First of all, the conclusion about the persistent high rate of corruption as one of the gravest problems faced by Bulgarian society is based on the findings of the corruption monitoring system of Coalition 2000 and more specifically, the analysis of the corruption indexes updated on the basis of the quarterly empirical surveys.

Under the first group of indicators, which concern corrupt behavior and actual involvement in corrupt practices, the period 1998-2002 has been marked by a steady, if insignificant, decline in personal involvement in corrupt practices. Although the rate of corruption did not increase in 2002, in absolute terms the number of instances of corruption remained alarming - a monthly average of about 130,000 actual offers of money, gifts, or services in order to have some personal problem addressed.

The indexes concerning the spread of corruption reflect popular evaluations of the corruption-related image of the institutions of power or the persons exercising such power. While public expectations regarding the addressing of the corruption problem remained relatively high they increasingly focused on the need for a clear-cut political strategy and truly effective government policies and mechanisms to curb corruption.

Secondly, the section of the report dealing with the establishment of a general legal-and-institutional environment for counteracting corruption analyzes both the achievements and the unsolved problems in the sphere of administrative reform and the control of the activity of the administration, the poor interaction between state institutions, on the one hand, and between the state and society, on the other. The analysis has led to the conclusion that there lack any lasting positive results in terms of curbing corruption in the sphere of public administration and administrative services. Proposals have been formulated for enhancing the transparency and accountability in the work of the administration; for development of effective internal control mechanisms supplementing the external control exercised by the established specialized authorities: Audit Office, Financial Intelligence Bureau, Internal State Financial Control; for adoption of new mechanisms and instruments with anti-corruption control potential.

As the problem was duly noted already, I will not deal with the question of the unjustified delay of the legislative regulation of the ombudsman institution. I would just like to mention the yearlong efforts of civil society to draft legislation and establish local institutions of this type in cooperation with the municipal authorities. This has revealed considerable anti-corruption potential, as evidenced by the first studies and summary reports on the cases handled by these institutions.

Also set in the context of the establishment of a legal and institutional environment discouraging corruption, are the more general problems concerning the need to improve the quality of the legislation and generally enhance the legislative process based on greater stability and internal harmonization between the adopted laws and regulations; on improved intra-institutional dialogue and coordination of the efforts to curb corruption and to establish a democratic balance of powers and democratic mechanisms of overcoming any arising conflicts among them. In this respect the report asserts the need for parliament to assume a leading role in this process.

A favorable evaluation has been given to the development of the legal anti-corruption instruments and particularly the amendments to the Penal Code with a direct bearing on the prevention and punishment of corruption in line with international standards. Yet the need has also been noted to improve the procedural mechanisms and enhance the law-enforcement capacity in this sphere.

Thirdly, emerging with particular urgency are the problems of the judicial reform considered in the context of the debatable practical dimensions of the reform in 2002, as well as the persistent negative attitudes on the part of different social groups to the basic units of the judiciary and the magistrates and officials working there. The lack of a comprehensive conception of the reform of the structure and management of the judiciary, and most notably, of consensus between the different branches of power and between the individual units of the judiciary itself, as well as the absence of agreement on the long-term priorities of the reform lead to fragmentation of the problems, inconsistency, and even obstruction, of the efforts to implement the reform. It is imperative to address this problem before we can seriously consider any change within the existing constitutional model or any future constitutional amendments regarding the judiciary.

Along with the role of the courts, prosecution, and investigation for the exposure and punishment of corruption, the analysis also considers some other institutions outside the judicial system but with closely related activity, such as the police, the bench, and others.

An important element are the recommendations made in the report for adoption of unified indicators, coherence, and greater transparency in keeping the statistics concerning the detection, investigation, and punishment of corruption-related crime in the individual units and bodies of the judiciary and the executive; on the need to put into operation an integrated information system to fight crime. Other related proposals include setting up a special unit within the structure of the prosecution with the authority to investigate grave cases of corruption; to adopt the institution of the independent prosecutor appointed by, and subordinate to, the Supreme Judicial Council and which is to investigate corruption-related offenses committed by magistrates, and other ideas that are in the process of elaboration and will be subject to future discussion. Reforming the court administration and improving the infrastructural facilities and financial provision for the judiciary could tangibly contribute towards countering corruption.

Fourthly, the evaluation of anti-corruption efforts in the economy in 2002 does acknowledge the numerous anti-corruption initiatives, including more transparent procedures, but it also notes their, as yet, minor practical impact. On the whole, the regulatory intervention of the administration in the economy remains inconsistent and non-transparent, which sustains the persistently high share of the gray sector and the related corruption. The analysis considers the spheres most susceptible to corruption, which need to be closely monitored in the future: the spending of budget funds and funding under European Union funds; concessions and the implementation of large-scale infrastructural projects; the remaining privatization deals; municipal finances; public procurement; competition policy; the financing of political parties and organizations.
Regarding the recommended measures in the context of the judicial and economic reforms it is worth noting the proposed reform of the existing registration system and gradual adoption of a central registry of legal entities and electronic registry center outside the courts, which would not only be in position to meet the rising demand, and not only relieve court activity, but would significantly restrict the opportunities for corrupt practices and pressure over business entities and private individuals.

In the fifth place, the report considers the role of anti-corruption public-private partnership and particularly of the intensified civic control not only at the stage of anti-corruption goal formulation, but also of the actual activity of the respective state institutions. At the same time it outlines the problems and challenges facing civic organizations, the poor coordination between them, the persistent tendency for the non-governmental sector to generate corruption, etc. The analysis duly acknowledges the role of the media and of investigative reporting in terms of exposing corruption, but also in drawing public attention to the all too limited impact of a number of anti-corruption initiatives. Recommendations have been made to improve the professional skills and knowledge of journalists and improve interaction between the media, state institutions, and non-governmental organizations.

Last but not least, the report presents the international anti-corruption monitoring and international evaluations of anti-corruption efforts in Bulgaria. For yet another consecutive year Bulgaria has improved its indicators in the Transparency International ranking. In fact, while it held the 66th place in 1998, in 2002 it was ranked 45th out of 102 countries, overtaking the Czech Republic, Latvia, and others. Yet, the findings under the other international anti-corruption monitoring mechanisms, such as the annual reports of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, of the European Commission, and GRECO point to the persistence of the corruption-generating factors in this country.

Bulgaria's anti-corruption efforts have enjoyed considerable international support and the country has fulfilled a number of its international commitments related to the fight against corruption.

In conclusion I would like to express the opinion of the participants in the Coalition 2000 process, and namely that the globalization of the problems of crime, and specifically of corruption-related crime, and its ever closer association with global security issues pose a great challenge. It can only be met with the concerted efforts of the state and of society, as well as with regional and international cooperation. In other words, a task that can only be taken on by a broad anti-corruption coalition.
Thank you for your attention.