February 11, 2003
Mr. Anton Stankov, Minister of Justice, Chairman,
Anti-Corruption Coordination Commission
Ladies and gentlemen, Your Excellencies! Corruption
is one of the most dangerous phenomena under the conditions of
transition. A particular public hazard are the corrupt practices
involving as key actors magistrates and representatives of
law-enforcement and control authorities. That is why we initiated
legislative changes criminalizing a wide range of possible acts of
corruption and of abuse of office, including organized crime as the
most dangerous part of the vast zone of illegal practices.
The Government of Simeon II National Movement has
made it a priority to toughen the sanctions not just against
corruption-related crimes in general, but particularly in the cases
involving magistrates, lawyers, or arbitration court judges. At the
same time, we have been equally concerned with limiting the
objective preconditions for bribery.
In this connection, it is high time we dispelled the
popular assumption that corruption is a minor price that societies
in transition, in particular, pay for the accelerated
transformation of ownership.
In the course of our integration in NATO and the
pre-accession Euro-integration processes there emerged the threat
of transferring corrupt practices to the sphere of international
relations and security. Therefore, the primary focus of the
activity of the government commission coordinating anti-corruption
efforts, which was established in early 2002 and which I have the
honor of chairing, is on those very corrupt practices that impair
the mechanisms of statehood, undermine our national security, and
serve for the purpose of criminal redistribution of our national
wealth.
The present discussion on the possibilities to
enhance the institutional framework for curbing corruption advances
different ideas about restructuring of existing, and creation of
new, mechanisms to counter this type of crime. We should not take
too lightly the risk of a misguided quest for some kind of
Archimedes' lever outside the existing political system. Rather,
the problems that now paralyze the individual units of the
judiciary, for example, need to find a rational and publicly useful
solution. Looking for solutions outside this system would only
increase state bureaucracy without guarantees for enhanced
efficiency.
As regards the tackling of these problems and
meeting the expectations of Bulgarian society, parliament is still
falling behind. I'm referring to the delay of the ombudsman law.
This figure, which is a traditional institution in some European
countries and which nowadays plays an important role in the
exercise of civic control of the administration in almost all of
the countries from the European Union, would facilitate the work of
both the government commission and the specialized anti-corruption
units.
I would like to point out that, in view of the great
magnitude of corrupt practices, as well as the fact that their
limitation calls for a change in public attitudes and perceptions,
the role of civil society is extremely important. I don't think it
would be an exaggeration if I say that the Ministry of Justice has
managed to create a permanent mechanism for consultations and joint
activity with a number of non-governmental organizations, and
especially with the Center for the Study of Democracy and the other
organizations within the frames of the anti-corruption initiative
Coalition 2000. Our presence here today is evidence that the
institutions of government and civil society realize the need for
ongoing constructive partnership in the efforts to crack down on
corruption and to foster a new, modern civic awareness that rejects
the corruption model and upholds the rule of law.
Thank you for your attention and thank you to the
organizers of this meeting!
|