anti-corruption & civil rights commission republic of … · anti corruption & civil rights...
TRANSCRIPT
2009. 3.
Anti-Corruption & Civil Rights Commission
Republic of Korea
Background
Outcome
Procedures
Targets
Background
Previous anti-corruption strategies were geared toward detecting
corrupt acts and punishing the individuals responsible. They had a
limited impact on preventing corrupt practices in that they did not
address the mechanisms causing corruption and therefore failed to formulate effective countermeasures
The Corruption Impact Assessment is an analytical framework
designed to identify and remove factors causing corruption
in laws and regulations
Table 1. Types of corruption factors and corruption prevention measures
Type Corruption factors (examples)Corruption prevention measures
Laws and
Institutional
systems
Unrealistic standards,
excessive regulation, non-transparency
in handing procedures, etc.
Corruption Impact
Assessment and
institutional improvement
Culture and
behavioral
patterns
Practices of entertainment, grafting and
influence peddling, lack of a sense of
ethics, self-centered attitude, etc.
Education and innovation
Monitoring and
control
Lack of means of corruption control,
absence of concrete, stringent, and
timely punishment, etc.
Detection and punishment
Citizens
Stakeholders (associations/unions)
Civic groups and economic organizations
Survey on the needs for assessment
Survey on legislation and practicesSubmission of opinions
ACRC
Check whether recommendations are reflected in enactment/amendment bills
Government agencies
Legal departments
Establishment of enactment plans
Arrangement of discussions and interviews related to assessment
Departments related to the legislation concerned
Identification and submission of assessment tasks
Preparation of basic materials
Outside experts
Corruption Impact Assessment Advisory Group
Analysis and review of basic materials
Identification and examination of assessment tasks
Expert groups
Review and submission of opinions
Submission of materials
Compliance recommendations
Notification of assessment tasks
Recommendation of improvement/
Evaltation of compliance
Submission
Of consultation
Request of
Consultation
Identification and selectionof tasks
Monitoring and evaluation of compliance Institutional improvement Corruption Impact Assessment
Notify recommendations
Assessments framework
Targets
Target
Screening out corruption causing factors of laws in the
enactment and amendment as well as existing legislation
The assessment covers all forms of legislation germane to public life
Forms of legislation
Acts,
Presidential Decrees, Prime Ministerial decrees,
Ordinances of Ministries
Administrative rules
In other directives, regulations, announcements,
notices, ordinances and rules
autonomous laws and regulations
Public corporations’ rules
Assessment model
The Corruption Impact Assessment is based on a systemic model,
which was designed to examine corruption factors in regulations
or laws in terms of “demand”, “supply”, and “procedure.”
The evaluation model consists of three corruption-causing factors:
Assessment model
Each of These three factors is divided into three criteria.
The assessment form contains a checklist to lessen the burden
of assessment.
ease of compliance with laws and regulations
propriety of discretion,
transparency of administrative procedures.
Factors Criteria
Ease of compliance
(demand)
- Adequacy of the burden of compliance
- Adequacy of the level of sanctions
- Possibility of preferential treatment
Propriety of discretion
(supply)
- Clearness of discretionary regulations
- Appropriateness of the scope of discretionary
power
- Concreteness and objectiveness of discretionary
standards
Transparency of
administrative procedure
(procedure)
- Accessibility and openness
- Predictability
- Corruption control system
Table 2. Evaluation model for Corruption Impact Assessment
Criteria contents
Adequacy of the burden of
compliance
Whether the level of expense & sacrifice
borne by people, businesses, organizations to
comply with legal responsibilities is
appropriate or not in light with social norm
Adequacy of the level of
sanctions
Whether the content and level of penalties,
compared with those pursuant to similar laws,
are appropriate
Possibility of preferential
treatment
Possibility of certain class, business, group or
individual enjoying favor or benefit thanks to
application of laws
1 Ease of compliance ( demand )
Criteria Contents
Clearness of discretionary
regulations
Whether discretion (who has it, the scope of it,
process to exercise it) is clearly and firmly
defined
Appropriateness of the scope of
discretionary power
Whether the scope of discretion given is
appropriate in light of international and
domestic norm
Concreteness and objectiveness of
discretionary standards
Whether discretion related criteria or
requirement to exercise it is specific enough to
be applied to reality and objective enough to be
translated as the same by the third person
2 Propriety of discretion ( supply )
Criteria Contents
Accessibility and openness
Whether participation by people, businesses,
organizations in the exercise of discretion or
performance of duties is guarantee, and there is
special system for related information disclosure
Predictability
Whether required papers & steps, administrative
handling process, period and the results are ease to
know and predictable
Corruption control system
Whether a special system to control corruption exists
such as one to regulate corruption coming from efforts
to avoid compliance burden or to seek favor, coming
from face to face encounter during working
3 Transparency of administrative procedure ( procedure)
Procedures
Corruption impact assessment on legislation to be enacted/amended
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY
① legislative proposal
⑦review by regulatory reform committee
⑨review by ministry of government legislation
③consultation with relevant agency(10days)(ASSESSMENT)
ACRC② submission
⑧ submission of opinions
⑤ notification of assessment result
advisory committee
consultation④advance notice of enactment/revision(20days) ⑥ notification
Administrative agencies must prepare a legislative proposal
subject to evaluation as well as basic materials necessary for
such evaluation.
After examination and verification of the relevant materials by
their legal departments, those agencies should submit them to
ACRC upon commencement of consultation on the bill with the
agencies concerned.
Administrative agencies should submit legislative proposals to ACRC,
Whenever agencies start to consult on the bill with agencies concerned.
Administraive agency
The evaluation by ACRC is conducted within the timeframe for
existing legislative procedures in order to prevent any delay in
such procedures.
Evaluation begins during consultation by the agencies
concerned (10 days)
and is completed by the preliminary announcement of legislation
(20 days).
Therefore, the assessment should be finished within 30 days of
submission of legislative proposals to ACRC.
Anti Corruption & Civil rights commission
the evaluation process of proposed legislation
guarantees consultation with the relevant agencies, as well as
collection of opinions from interested institutions and persons
to ensure fair and effective evaluation.
The Corruption Impact Assessment Advisory Group has been in
operation to promote professionalism and objectivity in
Corruption impact assessment.
Advisory group
Corruption impact assessment on existing legislation
ACRC
Selection of Item
Assessment of result
ASSESSMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE agency
Check of the result
notification of assessment result
advisory committee
consultationConsultation
Institutional improvement
according to recommendations
-if necessary, requesting re-deliberation
Concerning existing legislation, ACRC identifies high-risk areas,
formulates assessment plans conducts assessments according
to research.
ACRC determines the subjects of assessment based on an
overall review through consultation.
when necessary to conduct fact-finding investigation in relevant
fields In addition, the evaluation process of proposed legislation
guarantees consultation with the relevant agencies, as well as
collection of opinions from interested institutions and persons
to ensure fair and effective evaluation
it will be disclose assessment-results to the public.
The emphasis of evaluation is placed, on making institutional
improvements with a view to removing corruption risks and
factors. Assessment results are, therefore, used to improve
relevant bills or legislation and establish institutional devices
including sub-laws, rather than to directly withdraw
unreasonable bills or existing laws.
In addition, the evaluation process of proposed legislation
guarantees consultation with the relevant agencies, as well as
collection of opinions from interested institutions and persons
to ensure fair and effective evaluation.
The Corruption Impact Assessment Advisory Group has been in
operation to promote professionalism and objectivity
Corruption impact assessment on administrative rules
Given the large number (10,000 or so) of administrative rules, ACRC
Conducts assessments on laws and their subordinate
administrative rules issued by government agencies together.
Additionally, it requests government agencies to submit existing
administrative rules and carries out intensive assessments on those rules.
First of all , ACRC select ministry of land ,transport and maritime affairs and conduct assessment 1.000 rules and recommended 98 corruption causing factors
It is now performing assessments on these rules in ministry of knowledge economy.
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
① Basic materials related to assessment
(departments related to the legislation concerned)
③ review by regulatory department
④ review by legislation department
⑥review by local state council
② consultation with
relevant department(20day)② CIP deparement
ACRC
Corruption impact assessment
⑤ check whether recommendations are reflected
Advisory committee
Corruption impact assessment on autonomous laws, regulations
Corruption impact assessment on autonomous laws, regulations
More than 60,000 autonomous laws and regulations are now in
force, and over 10,000 are enacted or revised annually, so a
comprehensive evaluation by ACRC was not possible.
Considering such large volume and the purpose of local
autonomy systems, ACRC is guiding 262 local governments to
establish and operate assessment systems of their own.
ACRC is planning to supplement the existing assessment model
and provide an assessment manual by the first half of 2008
so that each local government can use it autonomously.
Based on the current evaluation criteria, the evaluation model
for autonomous laws and regulations will include items to
improve responsibility and responsiveness of local governments.
Self assessment flow chart
Check item by item
According to work type
evaluation model
Decision on
self-evaluation
Omission of
Corruption
Impact
Assessment
1. Ease of compliance
2. Adequacy of discretion
3. Transparency of administrative process
Check item by item
According to work type
evaluation model
Evaluation model
determination
1. Accounting 2. contract 3. sales
4.Construction 5. Asset management
6. trust 7. Personnel 8. Audit
9. Inspection 10. Operation of Committee
Work pattern modelEvaluation
Criteria model
Work type Check list Existence
① Trust.
CommissionMatters related to trust and commission of municipalities YES, NO
② Control.
Check
Matters on-site visit (guidance, regulation, checkup) in fire fighting, health care,
environment, welfare
③ Approval.
Permission
Matters related to approval, permit, patent, authorization, designation, criteria,
exam, inspection, test and cancellation, suspension
④ Assistance.
Support
Matters related to budget and fund support for various associations and
organizations
⑤ Inspection Matters related to on-site inspection in tax affairs, industry, economy,
administrative system
⑥ Imposition.
Collection
Matters related to various imposition and collection of fines, surcharge, charge
for compelling compliance, allotment, fee, redemption of development benefit
⑦Personnel Matters related to recruitment, promotion and placement
⑧CommitteeMatters related to authority, formation, operation of various committees with
deliberation and resolution function
Evaluation model check list for each type of works
Corruption Impact Assessment on public corporations’ rules
ACRC is guiding more than 574 public corporations to establish
and operate assessment systems of their own.
ACRC is planning to supplement the existing assessment model
and provide an assessment manual by the first half of 2008 so
that each local government can use it autonomously.
Based on the current evaluation criteria, the evaluation model
for public corporations’s rules will include items to improve
responsibility and customer’s satisfactions.
outcome
Corruption impact assessment on legislation to be enacted or amended
last year, ACRC has received requests for assessment of a total
of 1.368 legislative proposals for enactment or amendment.
ACRC identified 496 corruption-causing factors from 269
proposals (20% of evaluated proposals) and
recommended that the competent agencies address these
factors.
Bills received
Assessments completedAssessment in
progressAgreed to original bill
Recommended amendment
1,368(100%)
1,099(80.0 %)
269
(20.0%)
ASSESSMENTS COMPLETED(’08.1-’08.12.)
196
43
81
266
182
9080
430
1112
32
63
1415
83
39
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Education/
Culture
Industry/
Development
Science/
Information
National
defense/Welfare of
patriots & veterans
Environment/
Health
Finance/
Economy
General/
administration
Law enforcement/
Justice
Recommended amendments by area(’08.1-’08.12)
Corruption impact assessment on existing legislation
ACAC focused on not only the assessment of enacted and
revised legislation, but also corruption issues requiring
immediate action.
Thus, it conducted a Corruption Impact Assessment on legislation
related to the promotion of the gaming industry, public water
management and reclamation, and the process to grant
permissions on road occupation for construction, and presented
suggestions for improvements based on assessment results.
Legislation Problems and corruption status Major recommendations
Legislation on the promotion of the gaming industry
• Rating of gambling games as lawful ones• Lack of transparency and accountability in the organization and operation of the Game Rating Board• Collusion between supervising public officials and gaming businesses
• Blocking gambling games by abolishing the prize system set forth in the Gaming Act• Improving transparency in the organization and operation of the Game Rating Board• Carrying out guidance and control in a more organized manner and establishing a dedicated agency
Legislation on public water management and reclamation
• Lenient crackdown on and punishment for illegal land reclamation from public water• Inadequate post-management after permission of public water occupation and use, and lenient punishment against violators• Decrease in government-vested properties due to inflated costs for reclamation work
• Devising a system to systematically manage and supervise public water • Issuing a restoration order for illegal damaging of public water and introducing an advance warning of fines• Improving the cost-estimation system to curb undue favors for those who reclaimed land from public water
Legislation on the process to grant permissions on road occupation for construction
• Common practices of bribery in the direct or vicarious application process • Frequent abuse of discretion such as rejection of permission based on arbitrary decisions• Lack of supervision of illegal occupation and use of roads
• Making it obligatory to fill in the name of the application agency and the application fee in the application form• Making it obligatory to present legal grounds for requesting supplementation of or returning applications• Introducing an advance warning of fines and lump-sum payment of road occupation fees
Conclusively the findings from corruption impact assessment are
utilized in pushing for institutional improvements. The corruption
impact assessment, therefore, functions as an advance analysis
system for efficient institutional improvements.
When assessment results indicate a need for improvement, ACRC
formulates measures to implement the institutional improvements
and recommends execution of such measures to each agency
concerned.
An anti-corruption mechanism will be active in all policy
formulation and execution processes in the future, dramatically
improving the transparency of policies.
Moreover, development and dissemination of various
mechanisms To eliminate each type of corruption-causing
factors will facilitate selection of policy alternatives that are
less likely to give rise to corruption. Over the long term, such
actions will raise policymakers.
The corruption impact assessment is expected to contribute to
uprooting corruption-causing factors in each and every area,
ultimately putting an end to the so-called ‘dead zones’ of
Corruption