AntiCorruption and Good Governance in Vanuatu: Challenges

1
Anti-Corruption and Good Governance in Vanuatu
Challenges Opportunities for Reform
Findings from the Global Integrity Report 2007
April 4, 2008 Melanesian Port Vila
2
Outline

• Introduction
• About Global Integrity
• 2007 Global Integrity Fieldwork
• 2007 Global Trends
• Analysis of Vanuatu Results
• Policy Considerations for Vanuatu

3
The Need

• One of the most significant challenges facing
  policymakers and advocates alike has been the
  difficulty in prioritizing governance weaknesses
  in a country or region.
• Difficult decisions must be made on how to spend
  limited financial and political capital on reform
  efforts.
  
• Often, the process has been a best guess
  effort.
  

4
The Challenge

• Virtually all existing governance/anti-corruption/
  corruption indicators are not suitable for
  cross-country comparisons or for tracking changes
  over time (Uses and Abuses of Governance
  Indicators, Arndt Oman, OECD 2006).
• Yet, existing toolkits are often misunderstood
  and misused despite explicit warnings about their
  limitations.
  
• Misuse of indicators, coupled with serious time
  lags inherent in most data, undercuts political
  will for reform why bother reforming if you can
  never catch up to a process you cant affect?

5
Global Integrity Approach

• By its nature, corruption is almost impossible to
  measure with any degree of accuracy difficult to
  measure what you cant see.
  
• It is however possible to assess the laws,
  mechanisms, and institutions that should curb,
  deter, or prevent abuses of power, including
  their implementation.
• The Integrity Indicators are an assessment of the
  national anti-corruption/national integrity
  architecture of a country. They measure the
  medicine, not the disease of corruption.

6
Outline

• Introduction
• About Global Integrity
• 2007 Global Integrity Fieldwork
• 2007 Global Trends
• Analysis of Vanuatu Results
• Policy Considerations for Vanuatu

7
Who We Are

• Global Integrity is an international nonprofit
  organization that works with in-country teams of
  experts to track governance and corruption trends
  around the world.

8
Our Mission

• As an independent information provider, we
• collect and disseminate credible,
• comprehensive and timely information on
• good governance and corruption.
• We produce original reporting and quantitative
• analysis to promote accountable and democratic
• global governance that is in the public interest.

9
Outline

• Introduction
• About Global Integrity
• 2007 Global Integrity Fieldwork
• 2007 Global Trends
• Analysis of Vanuatu Results
• Policy Considerations for Vanuatu

10
Global Integrity Report 2007

• In 2007, Global Integrity undertook its
• third major round of fieldwork, conducting
  journalistic reporting and data gathering in 55
  countries, including large aid recipients, the G8
  countries, and emerging markets.

11
The Global IntegrityReport 2007 How We Did It

• A compilation of country reports prepared by
  in-country experts that assess openness,
  government accountability, and anti-corruption
  mechanisms nationally.
• Team of 250 in-country journalists and
  researchers in 2007.
  
• Three roles for field experts lead researcher,
  lead reporter, or peer review.

12
2007 Countries (55)
Sub-Saharan Africa Burundi, Cameroon, Kenya, Libe
ria, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria,
Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia
South Central Asia Armenia, Azerbaijan, Banglad
esh, Georgia, India, Kazakhstan, KyrgyzRepublic,
Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan

Europe Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, France, Germ
any, Italy, Latvia, Moldova, Romania, Russia,
Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, UK
East, Southeast Asia, Pacific
China, Japan, Papua New Guinea, The Philippines,
Thailand, Timor-Leste, Vanuatu

North America Canada USA Latin America Argen
tina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Pe
ru

Middle East North Africa Algeria, Egypt, Jordan
, Lebanon

• Incomplete Data as of Jan 2008
• Notebook only, no scorecard
• Repeated from 2006

13
Country Selection Criteria

• Balance
• Budget
• Availability of experts
• Emphasis on large aid recipient countries
• Emphasis on G8 in 2007

14
Target Audiences

• Policy community donors and aid recipient
  governments alike
  
• In-country advocacy groups
• Local journalists
• Research community
• Investors, particularly large financial services
  firms

15
The Global Integrity Report

• COUNTRY REPORTS
• 1) Country Facts
• 2) Corruption Timeline
• 3) Reporters Notebook
• 4) Integrity Indicators
• Country Integrity Scorecards
• GLOBAL INTEGRITY INDEX
• Key Findings/cross-country comparisons

16
The Integrity IndicatorsWhat We Assess

• The existence of institutional mechanisms that
  prevent abuses of power (i.e. corruption)
  
• The effectiveness of those anti-corruption
  mechanisms
  
• The access that citizens have to those mechanisms
  to hold public officials accountable
  

17
Integrity Indicators Conceptual Map
6 key governance dimensions23 sub-categories
IV. Administration and Civil Service
Civil Service Regulations Whistle-Blowing
Measures Procurement Privatization
V. Oversight and Regulation National Ombudsman
Supreme Audit Institution Taxes and Customs
State-Owned Enterprises Business Licensing and
Regulation VI. Anti-Corruption and Rule of Law
Anti-Corruption Law Anti-Corruption Agency
Rule of Law Law Enforcement
I. Civil Society, Public Information and Media
Civil Society Organizations Media Public Access
to Information II. Elections Voting and Citiz
en Participation Election Integrity Political
Financing III. Government Accountability Execu
tive Accountability Legislative Accountability
Judicial Accountability Budget Process
A focus on functional equivalence alternative
mechanisms captured
18
Integrity Indicators Nuts Bolts

• 304 discrete questions/country (15,000 data
  points in 2007)
  
• In law vs. In practice capturing the
  implementation gap
  
• Each indicator has a score, an explanatory
  comment and a supporting reference
  
• Ordinal scoring (0, 25, 50, 75, 100) anchored by
  unique scoring criteria
  
• Double-blind peer review comments for many
  indicators (15,000 in 2007)
  
• Margins of error introduced in 2007 for
  country-level scores
  
• 110 transparency all disaggregated scores,
  comments, references, and peer review comments
  published.
  

19
Integrity Indicators A Framework for Analysis
Integrity Indicators
Perceptions/Experiential Data
(Expert Assessments)
(Household/Firm Surveys)

• measurable
• actionable

• not measurable

• measurable
• less actionable

20
Integrity Indicators A Framework for Analysis

• The Integrity Indicators serve as an additional
  tool, another arrow in the quiver. They do not
  replace well-designed perceptions or experiential
  surveys.
• Effective inputs (laws exist and are
  implemented) dont necessarily translate to
  positive output lower perceptions of
  corruption. Inverse is also true.
• Example An effective, free press uncovers more
  scandals than oppressed media, depressing
  perceptions.

The key is country-specific analysis to understa
nd and tease out whether certain inputs and
outputs are or are not related, how, and why.

21
Integrity Indicators Points to Remember

• Scandals do not necessarily equate to
  ineffective or non-existent anti-corruption
  mechanisms.
  
• Scandals often reflect the fact that mechanisms
  exists and are indeed functioning well
  (detecting, prosecuting and punishing
  corruption).
• High-profile plans to fight corruption are
  difficult to implement instead, better to focus
  on incremental changes and reforms.

22
Using the Integrity Indicators

• The Integrity Indicators offer a toolkit to
  policymakers, advocates, and private sector
  actors by identifying strengths and weaknesses in
  a national anti-corruption structure.
• Armed with that insight, decision makers can make
  more informed decisions and address the greatest
  weaknesses (while supporting mechanisms that work
  well) in a system.
• Stakeholders can track progress in real-time to
  gauge effectiveness and ensure reform efforts
  remain on track.
  

23
Integrity Indicators A Powerful Diagnostic Tool
Philippines
Vanuatu
Timor Leste
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
Outline

• Introduction
• About Global Integrity
• 2007 Global Integrity Fieldwork
• 2007 Global Trends
• Analysis of Vanuatu Results
• Policy Considerations for Vanuatu

27
2007 Key FindingsGlobal Trends
Global Integrity Index Country Ratings
Scoring tiers Very Strong (90) Strong (80) Mo
derate (70)
Weak (60) Very Weak (below 60)

• Overall Ratings
• Very Strong 0 Countries
• Strong 8 Countries
• Moderate 10 Countries
• Weak 17 Countries
• Very Weak 13 Countries

28
2007 Key FindingsGlobal Trends
29
2007 Key FindingsGlobal Trends

• As first reported in the Global Integrity Report
  2006, poor regulation over political financing
  remains the most serious deficiency in
  anti-corruption systems around the world.
• Vanuatu has very weak political financing
  safeguards.

30
2007 Key FindingsGlobal Trends

• Poor ratings for government accountability across
  all countries in the executive as well as the
  legislative and judicial branches present
  serious dilemmas for aid agencies whose primary
  clients are the very same governments that may
  be hindering governance reforms in their
  countries.

31
Outline

• Introduction
• About Global Integrity
• 2007 Global Integrity Fieldwork
• 2007 Global Trends
• Analysis of Vanuatu Results
• Policy Considerations for Vanuatu

32
Quick poll areas of concern

• 11) Civil Service Regulations
• 12) Whistle-blowing Measures
• 13) Procurement
• 14) Privatization
• 15) National Ombudsman
• 16) Supreme Audit Institution
• 17) Taxes and Customs
• 18) State-Owned Enterprises
• 19) Business Licensing Regulation
• 20) Anti-Corruption Law
• 21) Anti-Corruption Agency
• 22) Rule of Law
• 23) Law Enforcement

• 1) Civil Society Organizations
• 2) Media
• 3) Public Access to Information
• 4) Voting Citizen Participation
• 5) Election Integrity
• 6) Political Financing
• 7) Executive Accountability
• 8) Legislative Accountability
• 9) Judicial Accountability
• 10) Budget Processes

Pick three areas in which good governance and
anti-corruption capacity is weakest.
33
Analysis of Vanuatu ResultsSnapshot

• Relatively strong ombudsman, elections, and solid
  asset disclosure requirements.
  
• Relatively weak judicial accountability, access
  to government information, inconsistent internal
  auditing, and no oversight of political financing.

34
Vanuatu AnalysisWhats Working Well

• Ombudsman
• Despite the 1998 repeal and forced removal of the
  ombudsman, system remains relatively intact.
  
• But additional authorities (that the ombudsman
  once enjoyed) would help bolster its
  effectiveness.

35
Vanuatu AnalysisWhats Working Well

• Elections
• Despite poor regulation over political financing,
  elections generally free from intimidation,
  violence, or overt coercion and fraud.
  
• Electoral Commission would benefit from increased
  resources costs of campaigns also high enough to
  discourage candidates.

36
Vanuatu AnalysisWhats Working Well

• Asset Disclosure Requirements
• Required in the executive and legislative
  branches.
  
• Disclosures publicly accessible through the
  Gazette.
  
• Accessibility to citizens outside of Port Vila
  still a challenge, as is lack of random auditing
  of such disclosures.

37
Vanuatu AnalysisWhats Not Working Well

• Judicial Accountability
• No asset disclosure requirements for judges
  (unlike other branches of government).
  
• No explicit gifts and hospitality regulations.
• Judicial Services Commission does not appear to
  have a strong track record of investigating
  alleged misconduct.

38
Vanuatu AnalysisWhats Not Working Well

• Access to Government Information
• No Freedom of Information/Right to Information
  mechanism apart from vague Constitutional right.
  
• Public records/archives generally in poor
  condition.
  

39
Vanuatu AnalysisWhats Not Working Well

• Internal Government Auditing
• Audit agency reports are often well-behind
  schedule.
  
• Reports, when finally published and submitted to
  Parliament, are often not easily accessed by the
  public.
  
• Unclear whether government responds to audit
  report recommendations.

40
Vanuatu AnalysisWhats Not Working Well

• Political Financing
• Vanuatu unfortunately boasted the worst data in
  2007 for all 55 countries on political
  financing.
  
• Virtually no regulations in place.
• Must be acknowledged as a major gap in the
  countrys anti-corruption architecture.

41
Outline

• Introduction
• About Global Integrity
• 2007 Global Integrity Fieldwork
• 2007 Global Trends
• Analysis of Vanuatu Results
• Policy Considerations for Vanuatu

42
Vanuatu Policy ConsiderationsKey Themes

• Challenges to reform seem to be a mix of resource
  constraints lack of political will or political
  consensus.
  
• Resource constraints likely affecting poor access
  to government information and inconsistent
  internal auditing.
  
• Lack of political will (or political
  prioritization) a more likely cause of weaknesses
  in judicial accountability and political
  financing.

43
Vanuatu Policy ConsiderationsA Mix of
Constraints

• While adopting a formal access to information
  regime requires political will, implementing such
  a mechanism would require an investment of
  financial and human resources.
• Similarly, a commitment to enhance internal
  auditing would require not only additional
  resources and training but also a political
  commitment to respond to audit reports.

44
Vanuatu Policy ConsiderationsBut Political Will
Still Key

• Despite limited resources, reforms such as asset
  disclosure requirements for judges can be
  accomplished cheaply.
  
• Political financing a classic example relatively
  cheap to implement, but politically costly.
  

45
Vanuatu Policy ConsiderationsBut Political Will
Still Key (cont.)

• Given the countrys offshore banking industry,
  the lack of any formal regulation over the
  financing of parties and candidates is of
  particular concern.
• Likelihood of undue influence (read
  corruption) high.
  

46
Issues to Consider for Working Groups

• Clearly many challenges remain. Which reforms
  should be prioritized and tackled first?
  
• Do certain reforms need to take place first
  before others can follow?

47
Issues to Consider for Working Groups (cont.)

• What political and economic factors present
  roadblocks to reform?
  
• For reforms where political will is the missing
  ingredient, how can Vanuatu stakeholders
  stimulate a demand for reform?
  
• What cultural factors can either accelerate or
  delay reform?

48
Issues to Consider for Working Groups (cont.)

• Given the limited resources available (financial
  as well as human), what can realistically be
  accomplished in 12, 18, or 36 months?
  
• Where can we find additional resources from
  non-traditional sources? Can the private sector
  be engaged to support governance reforms in
  Vanuatu? If yes, how?

49
Now, onto the group discussion
Global Integrity910 17th Street, NW Suite
1040Washington, DC 20006 USAPhone 1
202.449.4100Email info_at_globalintegrity.orgWebsi
te http//www.globalintegrity.org
Join the conversation http//commons.globalintegr
ity.org