Ratification of the United Nations Convention against Corruption in Lithuania

1

• Ratification of the United Nations
  Conventionagainst Corruption in Lithuania
• A Review of the Compliance of the Lithuanian
  Legal and Institutional Framework Against
  Corruption
• Regional Community of Practice meeting
  Bratislava, 15-16 October 2007

2

• UNDP Lithuania project Facilitation of the
  Ratification of the UN Convention against
  Corruption
• Project initiated in 2005, carried out in 2006
• Objective to support country efforts aimed at
  ratification of the UNCAC through review of
  national legislative and institutional framework
  in light of its compliance to UNCAC.
• Financed by UNDP and private sector (Statoil
  Constructus)
• Partners TI Lit Chapter, Special Investigation
  Service

3

• Review background
• Lithuania has in place independent specialized
  anti-corruption bodies
• Anti-corruption strategic policy document
  elaborated
• Many aspects of the Lithuanian system lauded as
  examples of good practice
• UNCAC signed on Dec 10, 2003 (ratified on
  December 5, 2006)

4

• Review background
• Reforms being intense during accession to EU,
  stalled after joining EU
• CPI index 4.8 remains paralyzed for past three
  years
• Different corruption surveys reveal most corrupt
  areas
• Health sector
• Police (including traffic police)
• Courts
• Parliament, Government, Municipalities (public
  procurement, land regulation and management,
  construction permits)
• Political parties (financing of)
• Media

5
Opinion most corrupt institutions in Lithuania
(Map of corruption 2005)
Citizens (1009)
Heads of private companies (519)
Note According to their opinion, respondents
were asked to identify most corrupt institutions
in Lithuania
6
Corruption in certain public institutions Data
taken from Survey on Media Corruption, 2007
(502, Heads and representatives of different
private organizations)
In your opinion, how corrupt do you consider
these public institutions?
7

• Review methodology
• Report is based on
• Review of relevant national legislation
• Publicly available reports (GRECO, OECD, TI, EC,
  UNDP)
• Formal and informal meetings with representatives
  of national institutions (Special Investigation
  Service, Ministry of Justice, Prosecutors
  Office, District and Appeal Courts, State Tax
  Inspectorate, Public Procurement Agency), NGOs
  (TI Lit Ch, Free Market Institute, Human Rights
  Monitoring Institute, Civil Society Institute)

8

• Review Structure
• Section 1 Overview of Lithuanian anti-corruption
  legislative and institutional framework
• (a) Key elements of legislative framework
• (b) Key elements of operational framework
• (c) Key elements of institutional framework
• (d) Suppression of corruption
• (e) Prevention of corruption

9

• Review Structure
• Section 2 Analysis of the compliance of the
  legal framework in view of the provisions of the
  UNCAC
• (a) Preventive measure (UNCAC Chapter II)
• (b) Criminalization and law enforcement (UNCAC
  Chapter III)
• (c) International cooperation (UNCAC Chapter
  IV)
• (d) Assets recovery (UNCAC Chapter V)

10

• Review Structure
• Section 3. Procedural and institutional issues in
  the application of anti-corruption legislation
  and policies
• (a) Implementation of the National
  Anti-corruption Programme
• (b) Specialized anti-corruption bodies, their
  mandate, capacities and accountability
• (c) Procedural issues related to investigation
  and prosecution
• (d) Cooperation among national authorities

11

• Section 4. Conclusions
• Gaps and weaknesses that require further
  attention
• Strengthening criminal legislation (definition of
  nature of bribe, passive bribery, trade in
  influence, etc.)
• Strengthening the framework to facilitate
  reporting of corruption and protection of
  collaborators of justice (legislation on
  whistleblowers, incentives for collaboration with
  justice, etc.)
• Proceeds of crime (criminalising illicit
  enrichment, adopt a at least a partial reversal
  burden, streamlining regulations on handling of
  frozen, seized and confiscated assets, etc.)
• Procedural issues (streamlining internal
  procedures for the application of special
  investigative means, etc.)

12

• Section 4. Conclusions
• Strengthening institutional cooperation and
  exchange of information in investigation as well
  as in the implementation of the NACP
• Strengthening ethics in the public sector (Code
  of Conduct for politicians and high-level state
  officials, remove the provision of the Civil Code
  legalising the practice of accepting gifts in
  health and social care system , etc.)
• Good governance measures (streamline burdensome
  regulations on licensing, construction and land
  regulation procedures)
• Strengthening institutional capacities
  (strengthen the COEC, as well as preventive and
  in particular the education and public outreach
  sections of the SIS)

13

• Section 4. Conclusions
• Strengthening accountability of specialised
  institutions towards and cooperation with the
  civil society and in particular with the private
  sector
• Ensuring that dual criminality requirement in
  respect of (passive) bribery of foreign and
  international does not preclude extradition or
  hinder international cooperation
• Institutionalize involvement of the private
  sector in the elaboration of policies and
  legislation

14

• So what? or Whats next?
• Government Office on one side and NGOs and
  private sector one other side are blaming each
  other for being passive
• Government claims National anti-corruption
  strategy and action plan are being revised
• Government institutions requested to make risk
  self-analysis with an aim to identify gaps in
  combating corruption
• Government Office developed (?) methodology for
  such analysis
• Special Investigation Service still responsible
  for external assessment