1

Annex no. 1

Government Decision no. 231 from the 30th of March, 2005 Published in the OJ, Part I, no. 272 from April 1, 2005

Entering into force: April 1, 2005 On the approving of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2005-2007 and of the

action plan for the implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2005-2007

On the basis of article 108 from the Romanian Constitution, republished, The Romanian Government adopts the present decision: Art. 1.- it is approved the National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2005-2007, provided for in Annex 1. Art. 2.- it is approved the action plan for the implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2005-2007, provided for in Annex 2. Art. 3.- The Annexes 1 and 2 are integrated parts of the present decision.

2

Annex 1

NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION STRATEGY 2005-2007

A. BACKGROUND The National Anti-corruption Strategy 2005 - 2007 (hereinafter NACS II) reflects the unconditional political commitment for fighting against corruption. The mission of the present strategy is to prevent and counter corruption by refining and rigorously implementing the legal framework and by institutional strengthening of the entities with important tasks in the field. In the context of the accession negotiations, Romania and the European Union agreed upon several commitments with relevant implications for the fight against corruption: 1. To considerably step up the fight against corruption and, in particular, against

high-level corruption by ensuring a rigorous enforcement of the existing anti-corruption legislation and the effective independence of the National Anti-Corruption Prosecutors' Office (NAPO) and by submitting on a yearly basis as of November 2005 a convincing track-record of the activities of NAPO in the fight against high-level corruption. NAPO should be given the staff, financial and training resources, as well as equipment necessary for it to fulfil its vital function.

2. To conduct an independent audit of the results and the impact the National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2001 – 2004 has generated; to reflect the conclusions and recommendations of this audit in the new multi-annual anti-corruption strategy which should be one comprehensive document, in place no later than March 2005, accompanied by an action plan with clearly defined benchmarks to be reached and results to be obtained, as well as adequate budgetary provisions; the implementation of the Strategy and Action Plan should be overseen by one existing, clearly defined, independent body; the strategy should include the commitment to revise the protracted criminal procedure by the end of 2005 to ensure that corruption cases are dealt with in a swift and transparent manner, in order to guarantee adequate sanctions that have a deterrent effect. Finally, it should contain steps to considerably reduce the number of bodies which all have powers to prevent or investigate corruption by the end of 2005, so that overlapping responsibilities are avoided.

3

The independent audit of the National Anti-corruption Strategy 2001-2004, elaborated in the period January-March 2005 by Freedom House Washington Inc. shows that “ The last four years brought about the development of an impressive arsenal of legal instruments of transparency, accountability and anticorruption in Romania. Some of them seem to have recorded positive effects”. In the same time, major obstacles against an efficient fight against corruption were identified:

o The reduced implementation of the anti-corruption legislation; o The reduced use of the administrative instruments in countering

corruption; o Insufficient coordination between structures with control and criminal

investigation attributions in the field of corruption; o The lack of real independence of the prosecutors; o The legislative and institutional inflation in the field.

Also, both the above mentioned audit and the National Report on Corruption of the Romanian Association for Transparency note that improvements of the anticorruption legislation are needed, indicating the necessity to adopt some legislative clarifications, in what regards, for example the conflicts of interests, the mechanisms to verify the declarations of wealth and interests and the incompatibilities regime1. The present strategy defines the corruption as:

a. Systematic deviation from the principles of impartiality and equity, which should be at the basis of the public administration functioning, which suppose that the public assets are universally, equitably and equally distributed and

b. their substitution with practices that generate the allocation to certain individuals or groups of a disproportionate part of the public assets comparing to their contribution.

The corruption deeds are those actions that hinder this universal and equitable distribution with a view to favour certain persons or groups. Law no. 78/2000 establishes as central element the use of public position as source of revenues, obtaining material advantages, or for personal influence, for himself or for other. This approach is similar with the definition of corruption used within the Global Program against corruption developed by United Nations: “the essence of the phenomenon of corruption consists in the abuse of power committed for the obtaining of personal profit, directly or indirectly, for himself or for other, in public or private sector”. B. PRINCIPLES Each action contained in the present Strategy will follow hereinafter principles, the respect of which is essential for achieving a modern judicial system: 1 According to the independent audit on the results generated by the NACS I elaborated by Freedom House and the National Report on corruption – the edition of 2005, elaborated by the Romanian Association for Transparency

4

o The principle of the rule of law, according to which it is consecrated the supremacy of the law, all the citizens being equal before it and which is based on the respect of the human rights and requires the separation of the state powers;

o The principle of the good governance, according to which the government must establish clear, effective actions, based on well established and quality objectives and have the capacity and flexibility to respond rapidly to the social needs;

o The principle of the responsibility, which imposes the obligation for the government to apply the tasks, to be responsible for them, to accept and bare the consequences of their non-observance;

o The principle of the prevention of the commission of the corruption acts, according to which the anticipated identification and the timely elimination of the premises of apparition of the corruption acts are imperative and of priority;

o The principle of efficiency in countering corruption, based on the continuously assessment of NAPO’s activity in what concerns the concrete results and institutional management

o The principle of the cooperation and coordination, according to which the institutions involved in preventing and countering corruption must cooperate closely, ensuring a coherent conception over the objectives which must be fulfilled and the measures which must be taken;

o The principle of the transparency, consultation of the civil society and social dialogue, which imposes, on one hand, the transparency of the decision-making process, and on the other hand, the consultation of the civil society;

o The principle of the public-private partnership, which recognises the importance of involving the civil society in the concrete activities of implementation of the measures of corruption prevention.

C. PRIORITY AREAS AND OBJECTIVES The reports on corruption in Romania, issued during the last years by the World Bank, Transparency International or Freedom House emphasis that the best practices are not yet institutionalized at the level of every day functioning of the administrative state apparatus, judiciary or police. This makes permanently inherent two simultaneous approaches, both important for the efforts against corruption. First regards the building of normality by instituting standards and establishing of best practices at the level of administration and other key sectors, like education, sanitary system, public order bodies, justice. This approach addresses the whole spectrum of activities regarding the preventing of corruption, creating a society which praises integrity and functions on the basis of recognized integrity standards. The other approach regards the suppressing of deviant behaviors from these standards and rules and includes the activities of countering corruption, also the completion of the institutional frame to allow an efficient countering of the phenomenon. These two are priority areas within the present strategy. Finally, the accomplishment of the activities within these two domains requires the enhancing of internal and international cooperation in the field of preventing and countering corruption, constituting the third area of activity.

5

PRIORITY AREA I: PREVENTING CORRUPTION, TRANSPARENCY, EDUCATION Objective 1. Increasing the transparency and integrity in the public administration One of the most important causes of the spreading of corruption phenomenon is the lack of transparency of the administrative system. Romania has adopted a series of regulations regarding the transparency of the administrative act and the use of the public funds. In what concerns Law no. 544/2001 on the access to information of public interest, also Law no. 52/2003 on decisional transparency in public administration, it may be observed on one hand, the partial implementation of the provisions, and, on the other hand, delays in revising the provisions which limit the access to information in order to be correlated with this law. Consequently, seems to be necessary, on one hand, the completion of legislative framework on transparency in public administration, and, on the other hand, continuation of the implementation of the existing provisions for developing transparency standards in public sector. In view to implement the mentioned objective, the following measures are proposed: 1. Adopting clear regulations regarding the granting of non-reimbursable financing

contracts from public funds; 2. Regulating the allocation of public funds for publicity; 3. Reviewing existing regulations on the financing of political parties; 4. Monitoring the publication of the list of donors and of sums granted to political

parties; 5. Elaboration and publication by the Court of Accounts of Audit Reports on the

financing of political parties and electoral campaigns; 6. Reviewing the regulations on public procurement to harmonise them with the

consolidated EU directives and with European best practices in this field; 7. Reviewing the legislation that restricts access to information of public interest (e.g.: Law 182/2002 on the protection of classified information, Law 16/1996 on the National Archives, Law No. 51/1991 on national security; Law No. 14/1992 on the Romanian Intelligence Service (RIS), Law No. 1/1998 on the Foreign Intelligence Service (FIS), the Criminal Code. 8. Monitoring the implementation of Law 52/2003 on transparency of the decision

making in public administration, and of Law 544/2001 on free access to information of public interest;

9. Assessing the need to generalise the practice of single desks in the public administration and introducing them where it is found that they are necessary;

10. Reviewing the legislation on public servants, in view of harmonising it with European legislation and best practices;

6

11. Conducting an independent analysis on the institutions that perform controls/inspections at economic agents, in view of suggesting among others solutions to avoid overlapping, (where necessary) taking over success models from UE. The analysis will include the re-analysis of limits of fines and financial incentives for the civil servants who have tasks of control.

12. Elaborating legislative amendments based on the proposals emerging from the analysis;

13. Developing by the administrative control entities in cooperation with NAPO of some control plans in various areas;

14. Developing the activities according to the adopted plans; 15. Elaborating an updated strategy and detailed action plans on the fight against

corruption in vulnerable public sectors. The strategies will include in particular the revising of the existing sectoral measures and the proposal of clearer integrity standards, periodically assessment means and indicators for the implementation of the integrity standards

16. Elaborating an updated strategy and detailed action plan on the fight against corruption at customs, covering at least the years 2005-2006.

Objective 2. Preventing corruption in the business environment This objective regards the creation of a business environment where the competition between state and private enterprises, on the one hand, and between private enterprises, on the other hand, to be equitable and complied to the same rules and the state to function as an impartial and effective arbiter for ensuring the respect of the regulations in force by the all economic agents. The analysis of the impact of NACS I by the independent audit reveals that there still are areas vulnerable to corruption regarding the business environment, reflected by ambiguities of the legislative provisions on bankruptcy and the procedure of granting exemptions and rescheduling for payment. An important role in preventing corruption in this area is reserved to the regulation with priority of the fiscal evasion and the harmonisation of legislation on money laundering with the acquis communoutaire and FATF recommendations. Concrete measures to accomplish this objective are:

1. Reviewing the legislation on bankruptcy; 2. Reviewing the legislation on rescheduling and exemptions from the payment

of taxes; 3. Elaborating the draft law on tax evasion; 4. Elaborating a draft law to amend Law 656/2002 for preventing and countering

money laundering, for harmonizing the legislation with the acquis communoutaire and FATF recommendations.

Objective 3. Information campaigns and educative measures This objective aims to increase the level of understanding of corruption mechanisms and to stimulate a civic anticorruption attitude, both for adults, tax payers and young

7

people. The implementation of the performance and integrity standards within the public administration is possible only with the support of the citizen who should play the role of a consumer of public services, aware of his rights and obligations and practical means to fulfill them, in other words, a civically competent citizen. Therefore, a fundamental component for preventing corruption consist in informing and raising awareness among the citizens on the legal obligations of the institutions and the public servants, as well as the legal and civic means to fight corruption which each citizen has at disposal. Observing that during 2001-2004 there were not enough efforts in what concerns the information of the various categories of citizens with regard to the causes, mechanisms and the consequences of corruption, the independent audit on NACS I recommends the developing of information campaigns, involving NGOs. The topics proposed by the report are transparency in decision making, deontological codes of the public servants, and raising awareness into the public opinion of the danger represented by corruption. In the same time, Romania committed towards EU to continue the efforts in raising awareness on the devastating effects of wide spread corruption. The proposed measures are: 1. Information and change of attitude campaigns; 2. Organising a pilot programme in view to modify the school curricula with regard

to anticorruption issues; 3. Amending the civic education curriculum by inserting modules on anti-corruption

issues according to the outcome of the pilot programme; 4. Continuing the professional specialised training on anti-corruption issues at the

National Institute for Magistrate (NIM), the National School for Court Clerks, the National Institute of Administration (NIA), the Diplomatic Academy, the Police Academy, and the National Institute for the Professional Training of Lawyers (NIPTL), the Romanian Intelligence Institute (RII).

Priority Area II: COMBATING CORRUPTION Objective 4. Increasing the integrity and resistance to corruption of the judiciary system The integrity of the judiciary is crucial for the success of the corruption efforts. Every report on the Romanian progresses issued by the European Commission identifies the judiciary as an area of which dysfunctions may have a major impact on the efficiency of the anticorruption fight. Romania made progresses on strengthening the independence of the judiciary towards to politics, but there are still required measures to conduct to high performance and integrity standards for magistrates. The new self-control and responsabilisation mechanisms should be activated and enhanced.

8

For the prosecutors, the independent audit on the impact of NACS I underlines the vulnerabilities of the position of the prosecutor in relation with the hierarchically superior prosecutor, identifying the premises of certain systemic problems. An important role for enhancing integrity within the judiciary is paid by the respect of the provisions on wealth declarations and declarations of interest by the magistrates.2 In order to remediate these dysfunctions, there are proposed the following measures: 1. Amending the legislation to ensure the independence of public prosecutors and the

application of the principle of continuity also at the stage of criminal prosecution by:

i.Establishing objective criteria for the assignment of cases to public prosecutors;

ii.Restricting the possibilities for cases to be reassigned or taken over hierarchically to situations expressly and exhaustively provided in the law, while introducing provisions on sanctions for failure to observe the law. Introducing the public prosecutor’s option to object to measures of reassignment ordained by hierarchically superior public prosecutors to the SCM within the procedure of checking the conduct of magistrates;

iii.Introducing court control on all the acts of invalidation adopted by the hierarchically superior public prosecutors upon request from the public prosecutors who perform the investigations;

iv.Expressly regulating the public prosecutor’s option to object to the SCM, within the procedure of checking the conduct of magistrates, the actions of the hierarchically superior public prosecutors when they intervene in any manner in the course of criminal prosecution or in the adoption of decisions.

2. Adopting the updated Deontological Code of the magistrates; 3. Debate campaigns of the updated Deontological Code of the magistrates in the 15

Courts of Appeal, with the participation of magistrates from other countries; 4. Enhancing the effective and direct control of the public prosecutor on the work of

investigation and research performed by the judiciary police, inclusively by amending the legislative provisions if necessary;

5. Ensuring direct access by public prosecutors who deal with cases of organised crime and corruption to all the databases containing information required by their inquiries, including that held by intelligence and investigation structures. In this context, it is to be mentioned that, until the end of the year, the Information Community will be established, in order to coordinate all structures competent in intelligence gathering.

In what concerns the control of magistrates, in general, the independent audit of the National Anticorruption Strategy 2001 – 2004 emphasizes that “too many members of SCM in the end hold also administrative positions in the judiciary”. Also, a report of

2 The new detailed forms for wealth declarations and declaration of interests were approved by GEO no. 14/3 March 2005

9

the Romanian Association for Transparency related to the corruption shows that “A negative aspect is the nonpermanent character of the SCM’s members3, who can also perform as magistrates, fact which may obstruct the efficiency and the coherence of the institution in a critical period - the starting period of its functioning”4. In this respect, the audit recommends “that the control body of the judiciary itself, the Superior Council of Magistracy, should be put beyond any conflicts of interest through the introduction of a more rigorous system of incompatibilities and its enforcement”. In what concerns the seniority conditions for appointments in the judiciary, the Audit mentions that “seniority should also be revised [...] as requirements were inexplicably increased with the new 2004 legislation”. In this respect, it is proposed: 6. Elaborating the amendments to the 3 laws on the reform of the Judiciary, regarding among others:

i.changing the procedure of appointment in leading positions in courts and prosecutor’s offices;

ii.establishing incompatibilities between the position of member SCM and a leading position in a court or a prosecutor’s office;

iii.instituting permanent status for the SCM members; iv.transparency in the evaluation of the magistrates; v.changing the structure of the directing council and the establishment upon

its decision of the structure of the sections and panels based on the principle of specialisation;

vi.limitative enumeration of the situations when the structure of the sections and panels may be modified;

vii.reconsidering the role of the inspectors; viii.introducing the SCM obligation to present an report regarding its activity;

ix.introducing the liability of the SCM members. Regarding the instruments for the strengthening of the integrity of the judiciary, starting with 2005, all institutions in the country are beneficiaries of an IT and software system specialized for the performing of the random assignment of cases to the judgment panels. A report of the Ministry of Justice from February 20055 emphasizes that there were difficulties in the effective implementation of this system, which were improved by 1st of March 2005. Currently, the random distribution of cases is implemented within all the courts. For the procedural incidents, unsolved by automated systems, the random distribution is performed according to the SCM

3 Fact notified many times also by the Romanian Association of Magistrates 4 The national report on corruption – edition 2005, Romanian Association for Transparency 5 Report presented to the Superior Council of Magistracy .

10

decision no. 71 from 9th of March 2005. This decision provides also for the continuity of the judgment panels and of the judges within the panels. The proposed measure:

1. The permanent monitoring of the random assignment of cases by the courts, including the application of the principle of continuity of panels/judges in solving the cases.

The Country Report for 2004, issued by the European Commission points out the existence, within the Ministry of Justice, of the Directorate General for Protection and Anticorruption, underling that: « The motive of the existence of this militarized security service within the MoJ still has to be demonstrated ». Also, Romania has committed towards the European Union to reform the Directorate General for Protection and Anticorruption in the sense that this currently militarized service to be turn into a modern and accountable internal investigation unit at the level for MoJ staff, avoiding the impression that this service is also used for overseeing the activities of magistrates. This measure will be accomplished inclusively by redefining its competencies and creating efficient control mechanisms. Objective 5. Reducing the number of structures that have tasks in the fight against corruption The commitments of Romania towards EU provide for the “adoption of measures to considerably reduce the number of authorities competent in corruption prevention and investigation until the end of 2005, so that to be avoided the overlapping of competencies”. The analyses conducted by the Minister of Justice, also the external reports, reveal that the anticorruption activity suffers from overlapping of competencies of different structures, mostly of fragmentation. The Romanian administrative capacity makes difficult any attempt of coordination, mostly an operation that involves investigation activities and confidential data. To respond to these problems, two types of measures are proposed: 1. Elaborating an analysis to establish the exact number, redefine and clearly delimit

the tasks of authorities and public institutions that currently hold competences in the field of combating and/or preventing corruption;

2. Adopting normative acts to allow the strengthening of structures that have tasks in the fight against corruption, based on the conclusions of the analysis.

Objective 6. Strengthening the institutional capacity of the NAPO The commitments of Romania towards EU provide for the necessity to ensure the strict application of the anti-corruption legislation in force and of the effective independence of NAPO. It is also demanded the “submitting on a yearly basis as of

11

November 2005 a convincing track-record of the activities of NAPO in the fight against high level corruption”. In this context, “NAPO should be given the staff, financial and training resources, as well as equipment necessary for it to fulfil its vital function”. The independent audit on the NACS I underlines the necessity to reorganise the NAPO to be better integrated with the rest of the anticorruption effort and to increase its efficiency, as well as the necessity to improve the human resources policy of NAPO. The proposed measures to enhance the institutional capacity of NAPO are the following:

1. Assessing the need to expand the competence of the NAPO in combating organised crime, also for extending the SCM opinion for the investigation of the magistrates regarding the acts connected to their work duties ;

2. Reviewing the existing normative framework with a view to: i. Enhancing the independence of NAPO;

ii. Reorganise the NAPO; iii. restricting the competence of the NAPO to high-level corruption,

material and personal competence; iv. the periodical analysis of the NAPO activity and of the General

Prosecutor of NAPO, inclusively on performances in administering the institution and concrete results, following that the same solution to be applied to the General Prosecutor from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to HCCJ;

v. the recruiting system for the public prosecutors of the NAPO will be done on the basis of certain objective criteria;

vi. amending and completing the provisions regarding NAPO for providing for special incompatibilities and situations of conflicts of interests for the offices of leadership within the NAPO, following that the same solution to be applied to the General Prosecutor from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to HCCJ;

vii. establishing clear procedures of collaboration between the NAPO and all the other structures competent in fighting against corruption;

viii. creating a department within NAPO to coordinate the collaboration of NAPO with other structures competent in fighting corruption;

3. Assessing the needs for human and financial resources for the activity of the NAPO in 2005 – 2007

4. Supplying these resources to the NAPO according to the assessments made; 5. Professional training for the NAPO personnel and continuing the automation

of the NAPO. 6. Improving the IT segment of the NAPO as to allow the developing of the

NAPO’s data base; 7. The drawing up and presenting by the NAPO of an annual track-record on

results on combating high-level corruption.

12

Objective 7. Increasing the celerity of criminal prosecution and criminal trials Romania has committed towards EU that the present strategy shall include the obligation to revise the protracted criminal procedure by the end of 2005 to ensure that corruption cases are dealt with in a swift and transparent manner, in order to guarantee adequate sanctions that have a deterrent effect. This measure will be accomplished by fully respecting of the rights of the indicted or other parties in the criminal proceedings. Proposed measure:

1. Elaborating legislative proposals on reducing the length of proceedings (reducing the number of means of judicial review for certain cases and reducing the grounds for adjournment, establishing strict conditions for requesting transfer of cases and challenge, etc.) for all criminal cases.

Objective 8. Combating corruption through administrative means One of the main recommendations of the independent audit on the NACS I refers to the extending of the definition of the conflicts of interests. In the same time, the audit recommends the designation of a single structure to verify the wealth, conflicts of interests’ declarations and the incompatibilities. Romania, also has committed towards EU that in particular will take measures to make possible the verification whether wealth declarations have been submitted and to introduce a regime of sanctions as to ensure its deterrent effect.

In 2004 it was created an instrument of protection for the reporting persons within the public institutions and authorities by Law no. 571/2004. The confidence of these categories of persons in the application of this law is fundamental for the fight against corruption within the public administration.

An important element in fighting corruption by administrative means consists in adopting of the new detailed forms for the declarations of wealth and interest by GEO no. 14/3rd of March 2005.

The proposed measures are:

1. Establishing certain verification mechanisms for wealth declarations, declarations of interests and incompatibilities and revising the administrative sanctioning regime as to ensure a deterrent effect. Designating a body competent to verify the respect of all legal obligations with regard to the wealth declarations, declarations of interests (including their timely submission, accuracy, updating) and the situations of incompatibility

2. The good functioning of the institution provided by 8.1.

13

3. Monitoring the implementation of Law No. 571/2004 on the protection of persons in institutions and public authorities who notify violations of the law (whistle blowers)

4. Realizing an independent audit to evaluate the management of the institution provided by 8.1.

Priority Area III: INSTITUTIONAL CO-OPERATION Objective 9: Coordination and monitoring the implementation of the strategy and of the action plan In what concerns the internal cooperation, it is to be followed the establishment of certain clear proceedings of cooperation between all structures with attributions in fighting against corruption. Also, the anticorruption efforts of the competent institutions will be coordinated, and the actions contained in the plan for the implementation of NACS II will be monitored by a single inter-institutional structure, coordinated by the Ministry of Justice: the Council for the coordination of the implementation of NACS II. The council will be established under the authority of the Prime Minister and will be coordinated by the Minister of Justice, The Ministry of Justice ensuring its Secretariat. The practical independence of the council will be ensured by its inter-institutional nature and by the obligation to invite to its sessions representatives of NGO’s and journalists. Proposed measures:

1. Transforming the National Council for Crime Prevention (NCCP) into a inter-institutional council coordinated by the Minister of Justice, having tasks in coordinating and monitoring the implementation of the NACS II, inclusively in monitoring the rigorous implementation of the anticorruption legislation;

2. Assessing the progress in the implementation of NACS II and updating it if the assessment finds this necessary.

Objective 10: Fully implementing all the anti-corruption instruments of the EU, UN, CoE and OECD Until 2007, according to the commitments assumed, Romania has to entirely align to the European legislation and best practices Proposed measures:

1. Implementing the recommendations made by the GRECO in the second round of evaluation and the MONEYVAL recommendations;

2. Elaborating a draft law to amend Law No.36/1995 on public notaries and notarial activity, in view of removing the immunity of public notaries;

14

3. Elaborating a draft law to amend Law No.188/2000 on bailiffs, in view of removing the immunity of bailiffs;

4. Elaborating legislative amendments to regulate the criminal liability of legal persons, also for the bribery in private sector;

5. Implementing the obligations assumed by UN Convention against corruption - Merida.

D. METHODS OF ASSESSMENT THE FULFILLING OF THE OBJECTIVES The monitoring of the implementation of the National Anticorruption Strategy 2005-2007 will be performed by the Council for the coordination of the implementation of NACS II. The assessment of the progress registered in the implementation of the NACS II will be performed annually, in November, according to the terms and indicators provided by the action plan for the implementation of the National Anticorruption Strategy 2005-2007. The National Anticorruption Strategy will be updated if this necessity results from the annual assessments. The Romanian Government is committed to inform European Union, twice on year, and when necessary on the progresses registered in the implementation of the present strategy.

15

Annex 2

Action Plan to Implement The National Multi-annual Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2005 - 2007

Priority Area I : Prevention, Transparency, Education No.

Target Action Deadline

Resources Executive Authority Indicators

1.1 Elaborating the draft law on the granting of non-reimbursable financing contracts from public funds

June 2005

Existing budget of the Ministry of Justice (MJ)

The Ministry of Justice Partners: the Ministry of Public Finance(MPF), the Court of Accounts, the Prime Minister’s Chancellery, the General Secretariat of the Government(GSG), NGO-s

Draft law debated publicly; Draft law approved by the Government.

1.

Increasing the transparency and integrity in the public administration

1.2 Regulating the allocation of public funds for advertisement

June 2005

Existing GSG budget

GSG Partners: Convention of Media Organisations,

Draft normative act debated publicly; Draft normative act

16

Romanian Press Club, ARCA, Agency for Governmental Strategies (AGS), Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Justice, NGO-s

approved by Government.

1.3 Reviewing existing regulations on the financing of political parties with a view to: - regulating the discounts that service providers may grant to political parties and candidates; - Stimulating the transparency in the administration of campaign funds, by re-analysing the ceilings of expenditures for candidates, according to the number of inhabitants of the towns or sectors for which they are running and by achieving transparency of the accounts into which donations to political parties are made; - Sanctioning:

· Non-observance of regulations on the financing of political parties and electoral campaigns;

· Situations of conflicts of interests in the use of public funds for electoral campaigns by persons holding a public office;

- instating the obligation for the political parties to publish on their own web pages the donations received and the statements of their revenues and

December 2005

Existing MJ budget

Ministry of Justice Partners: Ministry of Public Finance, Court of Accounts, Prime Minister’s Chancellery, General Secretariat of the Government and the National Anti-corruption Prosecutor's Office (NAPO)

Draft normative act debated publicly; Draft normative act approved by the Government.

17

expenditures; - correlating these regulations with other regulations in force; - synchronising the activities of institutions that have tasks in the field of validation of the mandates.

1.4 Monitoring the publication of the list of donors and of sums granted to political parties

Annually,

starting in June 2006

Existing budget of the Court

of Accounts

The Romanian Court of Accounts

Annual publication in June of the list of donors and sums donated to political parties.

1.5 Elaboration and publication by the Court of Accounts of Audit Reports on the financing of political parties and electoral campaigns

Annually and for the electoral campaigns starting with May 2005

Existing budget of the Court of Accounts

Court of Accounts

Annual publication of reports by the Court of Accounts.

1.6 Reviewing the regulations on public procurement to harmonise them with the consolidated EU directives and with European best practices in this field

June 2006

Existing MPF

budget

Ministry of Public Finance

Draft normative act debated publicly; Draft normative act approved by the Government.

1.7. Reviewing the legislation that restricts June Existing Ministry of Justice, Draft normative act

18

access to information of public interest (e.g.: Law 182/2002 on the protection of classified information, Law 16/1996 on the National Archives, Law No. 51/1991 on national security; Law No. 14/1992 on the Romanian Intelligence Service (RIS), Law No. 1/1998 on the Foreign Intelligence Service (FIS), the Criminal Code)

2006 MJ budget Partners: non-governmental organisations

debated publicly; Draft normative acts approved by the Government.

1.8 Monitoring the implementation of Law 52/2003 on transparency of the decision making in public administration and of Law 544/2001 on free access to information of public interest

Annually, in April, starting in 2005

Existing AGS

budget

AGS Partners: all the public institutions

Annual report, published in April by the AGS; Annual reports issued by the public authorities according to Law 544/2001 and to Law 52/2003; Improving the institutional react on these two laws.

1.9 Assessing the need to generalise the practice of one-stop shops in the public administration and introducing them where it is found that they are necessary.

From May 2005 to December 2007

Existing budget of the Ministry of Administration and

MAI – Central Unit for Reform of the Public Administration Partners: all public authorities that provide services

Assessment report elaborated and published; One-stop shops that became operational.

19

the Interior (MAI)

1.10 Reviewing the legislation on public servants, in view of harmonising it with European legislation and best practices, including as regards:

the introduction of criteria for competence as a basis for professional evaluation and appropriate remuneration. SIGMA recommendations will be taken into account as well.

the rotation of personnel from the sectors that are vulnerable to corruption

Strengthening the role of the National Agency of Public Servants (NAPS) as an agency for advanced monitoring, analysis and reporting

December 2007

Existing MAI, National Agency of Public Servants (NAPS) budgets

MAI Partner: NAPS, non-governmental organisations

Draft law approved by the Government;

1.11 Conducting an independent assessment on the institutions that perform controls/inspections with economic agents, with a view to suggest among others:

Solutions to avoid overlapping, (where appropriate) the taking over of

success models from the EU; reanalysing the differences between the

lower limit and the upper limit of fines; reanalysing the financial incentives for the

March 2006

Required: 35000 EUR

MPF, Partner MEC Publication of the assessment report.

20

civil servants who have tasks of control. 1.12 Elaborating legislative amendments based on the proposals emerging from the analysis (Commitment to EUCP)

June 2006

Existing MEC, MPF

budgets

MEC, MPF Draft normative act debated publicly; Draft normative act approved by the Government.

1.13 Developing by the administrative control entities in cooperation with NAPO of control plans in various areas.

Permanently,

starting with

September 2005

NAPO existent budget and the

budget of the other control entities

Entities with administrative control

tasks, NAPO

Approved control plans.

1.14 Developing the activities according to the adopted plans

Permanently,

starting with

October 2005

NAPO existent budget and the

budget of the other control entities

Entities with administrative control

tasks, NAPO

Activities organized, according to the control plans.

1.15 Elaborating updated strategies and detailed action plans on the fight against corruption in vulnerable public sectors. The strategies will include in particular the revising of the existing

December 2005

Existing budget of

the respective

Ministries involved in cooperation with the

Council for coordination of the

Approved strategies

21

sectoral measures and the proposal of clearer integrity standards, periodically assessment means and indicators for the implementation of the integrity standards.

Ministries implementation of the NAS 2005-2007

1.16 Elaborating un updated strategy and detailed action plan on the fight against corruption at customs, covering at least the years 2005-2006 (Commitment to EUCP)

1st of May 2005

Existent budget of

the National Customs Agency

National Customs Agency

Presentation of the draft normative act to the Government; Reporting to EU.

2 Preventing corruption in the business environment

2.1 Reviewing the legislation on bankruptcy July 2005

Existing MPF, MJ budgets

PHARE

2002

MPF, MJ Draft law debated publicly; Draft law approved by the Government.

2.2 Reviewing the legislation on rescheduling and exemptions from the payment of taxes

May 2005

Existing MFP

budget

MPF Draft law debated publicly; Draft law approved by the Government.

2.3 Elaborating the draft law on tax evasion March 2005

Existing MFP

budget

MPF Draft law debated publicly; Presentation of the draft law to the Government.

2.4 Elaborating a draft law to amend Law 656/2002 for preventing and countering money

April 2005

Existing budget of

MJ, NOPCML, Prosecutor’s Office

Draft law submitted to public debate;

22

laundering, for harmonising the legislation with the community acquis and FATF recommendations (Commitment to EUCP)

MJ, National

Office for Preventing

and Combating Money

Laundering

(NOPCML)

attached to the High Court of Justice and

Cassation (POHCJC), MAI, National Bank of Romania (NBR)

Draft law approved by the Government. Reporting to EU

3.1 Information and awareness campaigns (Commitment to EUCP)

December 2005

Requires additional budgetary resources – 150000

EUR

MJ Partners: NGO-s

Increase of the degree of transmission of the anticorruption messages; Increase of the degree of understanding the corruption mechanisms; Reporting to EU.

3 Information campaigns and educative measures

3.2 Continuing the measure 3.1. by information and awareness campaigns, focused on specific topics

Starting with

Decemb

Phare 2004

componen

MJ, partners: NGO-s Increase of the degree of transmission of the

23

(possible topics: the citizens’ right to information, transparency in the administration, corruption – institutions and their competence in preventing and combating corruption, access to institutions, the protection of whistleblowers, each person’s role in countering corruption) etc) (Commitment to EUCP)

er 2006 t (project value 1.2 MEuro) – evaluation

report

anticorruption messages; Increase of the degree of understanding the corruption mechanisms; Reporting to EU

3.3 Organising a pilot programme in view to modify the school curricula on civic education by introducing a component on integrity and corruption prevention. Stages:

• drafting the educational instruments; • implementing and assessing the

educational instruments; • correcting them, according to the

evaluation.

Starting with June 2005

Requires additional budgetary resources -100 000

EUR

Ministry of Justice, Partners: Ministry of

Education and Research (MER),

NGO-s

Increase of the level of understanding of integrity issues; Increase of the degree of understanding the mechanisms of the corruption phenomenon; Increase of the level of interest and civic involvement of pupils.

3.4 Amending the civic education curricula by inserting modules on anti-corruption issues depending on the outcome of the pilot programme

September 2006

Requires additional budgetary

MER, MJ New curricula drawn up and implemented;

24

resources -50 000 (the sum will be

reassessed according

to the results of the pilot

programme)

Progressive increase of the number of education institutions that introduced and implemented the new curricula.

3.5 Continuing the professional specialised training on integrity and anti-corruption issues at the National Institute for Magistrate (NIM), the National School for Court Clerks, the National Institute of Administration (NIA), the Diplomatic Academy, the Police Academy, and the National Institute for the Professional Training of Lawyers (NIPTL), the Romanian Intelligence Institute (RII).

September 2006

Existing budgets of the institutions involved

Superior Council of the Magistracy (SCM), MER, NIM, NIA, NIPTL, MAI, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), Romanian Intelligence Service (RIS)

Increase of the number of classes in this field; Increase of the number of specialised persons.

Priority Area II : Combating corruption 4 Increasing the

integrity and resistance to corruption of the judiciary system

4.1 Amending the legislation to ensure the independence of public prosecutors and the application of the principle of continuity also at the stage of criminal prosecution: 1. Establishing objective criteria for the assignment of cases to public prosecutors

September 2005

Existing MJ budget

Ministry of Justice Partners: Public Ministry (PM), SCM

Draft law approved by the Government; Reporting to EU.

25

(Commitment to EUCP); 2. Restricting the possibilities for cases to be reassigned or taken over hierarchically to situations expressly and exhaustively provided in the law, while introducing provisions on sanctions for failure to comply with the law. Introducing the public prosecutor’s right to object to measures of reassignment ordained by hierarchically superior public prosecutors to the SCM within the procedure of verifying the conduct of magistrates; 3. Introducing court control on the acts of invalidation adopted by the hierarchically superior public prosecutors upon request from the public prosecutors who perform the investigations; 4. Expressly regulating the public prosecutor’s right to object to the SCM, within the procedure of verifying the conduct of magistrates, against the interventions of the hierarchically superior public prosecutors in any manner in the course of criminal prosecution or in the adoption of decisions.

4.2 Adopting the updated Deontological Code for the magistrates (Commitment to EUCP)

April 2005

SCM existing budget

PHARE 2002

SCM

Deontological code adopted and published in the Official Journal; Reporting to EU.

26

4.3 Consultations on the updated Deontological Code of the magistrates in the 15 Courts of Appeal, with the participation of magistrates from other countries (Commitment to EUCP)

May-October

2005

SCM existing

budget and 9000 EUR Phare 2002

SCM

Debates in the 15 courts of appeal; Dissemination of the Deontological Code; Reporting to EU.

4.4 Enhancing the effective and direct control of the public prosecutor on the work of criminal investigation performed by the judiciary police, including by amending the legislative provisions if necessary

September 2005

Existing MJ, MAI,

PM budgets

Ministry of Justice

Partners: MAI, PM

Increase of the role of the prosecutor in the professional assessment process of the judiciary police; Separating the functional subordination and the administrative subordination of the judiciary police; Draft law debated publicly; Draft law approved by the Government.

4.5 Ensuring direct access for public prosecutors who deal with cases of organised crime and corruption to all the databases containing information required by their inquiries, including those held by intelligence and investigation structures;

March 2006

The budget of institutions involved

Supreme Council of National Defence (SCND), RIS, PM, MPF, NOPCML,

Integrated data bases; Defining the conditions and rights to access the data bases; Direct access of the prosecutor to the data bases.

27

MJ, NAPO and the intelligence departments

4.6 Elaborating the amendments to the 3 laws on the reform of the Judiciary (e.g.: changing the procedure of appointment in leading positions in courts and prosecutor’s offices, incompatibilities between the position of member SCM and a leading position in a court or a prosecutor’s office, instituting permanent status for the SCM members, transparency in the evaluation of the magistrates, changing the structure of the directing council and the establishment upon its decision of the structure of the sections and panels based on the principle of specialisation, limitative enumeration of the situations when the structure of the sections and panels may be modified, reconsidering the role of the inspectors, introducing the SCM obligation to present an report regarding its activity, introducing the liability of the SCM members. etc.)

April 2005

MJ budget approved for 2005

MJ

Presentation to the Government of the draft law

4.7. Monitoring the random assignment of cases by the courts, including the application of the principle of continuity of panels/judges in solving the cases (Commitment to EUCP)

Permanently each trimester, starting with April

Existing budgets of the SCM and of the MJ

SCM and all the courts – application of the random

Quarterly reports debated by SCM; Possible correction measures adopted by SCM;

28

2005 assignment system MJ – technical operation of the system

Reporting to EU.

4.8. Continuing the reforming the Directorate General for Protection and Anti-Corruption, turning it into a modern and accountable unit for internal investigations, inclusively by redefining its competencies and creating efficient control mechanisms (Commitment to EUCP)

August 2005

MJ budget for 2005

MJ Appointment of a civilian as head of DGPA; Draft law approved by the Government; Reporting to EU.

5.1 Conducting an analysis to establish the exact number, redefine and clearly delimit the tasks of authorities and public institutions that currently hold competences in the field of combating and/or preventing corruption (Commitment to EUCP)

October 2005

Phare 2003 component

(project value 1.2 MEuro)

MJ in partnership

with the PHARE project

Publication of the analysis report;

Reporting to EU.

5 Reducing the number of structures that have tasks in the fight against corruption

5.2 Adopting normative acts to allow for the rationalization of the structures that have tasks in the fight against corruption, based on the conclusions of the analysis (Commitment to EUCP)

December 2005

MJ budget MJ Draft laws submitted to public debate; Presentation of the draft laws to the Government; Reporting to EU.

29

6.1 Assessing the need to: expand the competence of the NAPO

to combating organised crime; Extend the SCM opinion for the

investigation of the magistrates regarding the acts connected to their work duties.

June 2005 MJ budget MJ, PM Published assessment report;

6 Strengthening the institutional capacity of the NAPO

6.2 Reviewing the existing normative framework with a view to:

strengthen the independence of the NAPO (Commitment to EUCP);

reorganising the NAPO; restricting the competence of the

NAPO to high-level corruption – material and personal competence (Commitment to EUCP);

Periodically assess the activity of NAPO and of the General Prosecutor of NAPO, including form the point of view of managerial performances in administering the institution and of concrete results, provided that the same solution applies to the General Prosecutor of the Prosecution Office near the High Court of Cassation and Justice

Recruiting the public prosecutors of the NAPO by assessing their professional results on the basis of objective criteria;

June 2005 MJ existing budget

MJ, PM Draft law submitted to public debate;

Presentation of the draft law to the Government; Reporting to EU.

30

Amending and supplementing the legal provisions on NAPO functioning to provide for special incompatibilities and situations of conflicts of interests for the management positions within the NAPO, following that the same solution applies to the General Prosecutor of the Prosecution Office near the High Court of Cassation and Justice;

Establishing clear procedures of collaboration between the NAPO and all the other structures that have tasks in the fight against corruption(Commitment to EUCP);

Creating a department within the NAPO that will coordinate the collaboration of the NAPO with the other institutions with competencies in fighting corruption;

Revising the nomination procedure for the General Prosecutor of NAPO and ensuring the symmetry between the nomination and the revocation procedure

6.3. Assessing the needs for human and financial resources for the activity of the NAPO in 2005 – 2007 (Commitment to EUCP)

December 2005

Existing NAPO budget for 2005

NAPO Presentation of the assessment report to the MJ and the SCM; Reporting to EU

31

PHARE 2003

6.4. Supplying the human and financial resources to the NAPO according to the assessments made (Commitment to EUCP)

Annually, starting with 2005

Existing budget of NAPO for 2005 and budgets for 2006, 2007

NAPO Partners: MJMPF

Complete personnel scheme; Reporting to EU

6.5. Specialised professional training for the NAPO personnel, in particular on the typologies of the corruption cases and judicial cooperation with similar structure from the member states (Commitment to EUCP)

Annually, starting in September 2005

Budgets of NAPO + Phare 2003 component (total project value 1,2 MEuro) and Phare 2004 (1,6 Meuro)

NAPO Organised training sessions; Specialised NAPO personnel; Reporting to EU.

6.6. Improving the IT segment of the NAPO as to allow the developing of the NAPO’s data base (which will include an unitary report on categories of persons which have been investigated, indicted and finally convicted for high level corruption, the length of proceedings and the amount of prejudice, the value of seized and confiscated goods for this type of offences,

Annually, starting in December 2005

PHARE 2003 NAPO investments 0,8 Meuro – support for investments 0,47 Meuro co-financing required for

NAPO Partners: MJ, courts and PM

Delivered IT equipments and installed and functional software; Functional data base; Reporting to EU.

32

the distribution of cases according to the value of prejudice, the value of bribe, the positions held (dignitaries, officials etc.), as these are defined by the law on organization and functioning of the NAPO. (Commitment to EUCP)

2006) PHARE 2004 1,3 Meuro 0,4 Meuro - co-financing

6.7 The drawing up and presenting by the NAPO of an annual track-record on results on combating high-level corruption

(Commitment to EUCP)

Annually, starting in November

2005

NAPO existent budget

NAPO Publication of the report on the website; Reporting to EU

7 Increasing the celerity of criminal prosecution and criminal trials

7.1. Elaborating a legislative proposal on reducing the length of proceedings (reducing the number of means of judicial review for certain cases and reducing the grounds for adjournment, establishing strict conditions for requesting transfer of cases and challenge, etc.). (Commitment to EUCP)

July 2005 MJ budget MJ Draft law debated publicly; Draft law approved by the Government. Reporting to EU.

8 Combating through administrative means

8.1 Establishing certain verification mechanisms for wealth declarations, declarations of interests and incompatibilities and revising the administrative sanctioning regime as to ensure a deterrent effect. Designating a body competent to verify the respect of all legal obligations with regard to the wealth declarations, declarations of interests (including their timely submission, accuracy,

June 2005 MJ existent budget

MJ Draft law debated publicly; Draft law approved by the Government. Reporting to EU.

33

updating) and the situations of incompatibility (Commitment to EUCP)

8.2 The good functioning of the institution designated at point 8.1 (Commitment to EUCP)

Permanently starting

with October

2005

Necessary budget for the institution nominated for 2005: 1.750.000 EUR

The institution designated at point 8.1

Endowment of the institution with: staff, siege, equipment, budget; Verifications conducted by the competent authority; Petitions solved. Reporting to EU

8.3 Monitoring the implementation of Law No. 571/2004 on the protection of persons in institutions and public authorities who notify violations of the law (whistle blowers)

Permanently starting in October 2005

Budget of the institution designated at indent 8.1

The institution designated at indent 8.1. Partners: institutions competent for the implementation of the law

Notifications made by whistleblowers; Notifications made by whistleblowers and confirmed by verifications.

8.4 Conducting an independent audit to evaluate the institution designated at point

Annually, starting with June

Budget of the institution

The institution designated

Published audit report.

34

8.1 from point of view of the management. 2006 designated at indent 8.1 for 2006

at indent 8.1

Priority Area III: Institutional Co-operation

9.1 Transforming the National Council for Crime Prevention (NCCP) into a inter-institutional council coordinated by the Minister of Justice, having tasks in coordinating and monitoring the implementation of the NACS II, inclusively in monitoring the rigorous implementation of the anticorruption legislation (Commitment to EUCP)

March 2005

Existing MJ budget

MJ Draft law approved by the Government; Reporting to EU.

9 Coordinating and monitoring the implementation of the strategy and of the plan of action

9.2 Evaluating the progress in the implementation of the NACS 2005 – 2007 and anticorruption legislation, also updating NACS 2005-2007 if this considered necessary according to the evaluations.

Annually, in

November

Existing MJ budget

MJ and the other

institutions included in the inter-

institutional council for

coordination and

monitoring the

implementation of

NACS II

Published evaluation report

35

10.1 Implementing the recommendations made by the GRECO in the second round of evaluation (Commitment to EUCP) and the MONEYVAL recommendations

December 2007

Budgets of the MAI, MJ, PM

MJ, Partners: MAI, MFA, SCM, NOPCML

Number of GRECO recommendations accomplished; Number of MONEYVAL recommendations accomplished; Reporting to EU.

10.2 Elaborating a draft to amend Law No.188/2000 on bailiffs, in view of removing the immunity of bailiffs

May 2005

MJ budget for 2005

MJ

Legislative amendment approved to the Government.

10.3 Elaborating legislative amendments to regulate the criminal liability of legal persons, inclusively in what concerns the bribery in the private sector. (Commitment to EUCP)

June 2005

MJ budget for 2005

MJ

Legislative amendments approved by the Government. Reporting to EU.

10 Fully implementing all the anti-corruption instruments of the EU, UN, CoE and OECD

10.4 The Implementation of the obligations assumed by the UN Convention against corruption – Merida (Commitment to EUCP)

December 2007

MJ budget MJ Draft law debated publicly; Draft law approved by the Government. Reporting to EU.

TOTAL BUDGET/2005: 2,000,000 EUR