Anti-Corruption Priorities for Latvia in 2013

Aivars Endziņš, Former chairman of the Constitutional Court and Delnas board memberKristīne Dupate, Professor at Latvia’s University, Faculty of Law and Legal Protection for Whistleblowers in Latvia assessment authorInese Voika, chairman of Delna’s councilKristaps Petermanis, Delna’s director

09.01.2013.

How Delna looks at curbing corruption?

How has Latvia succeeded with priorities defined in 2011 before extraordinary elections?

Priorities set in summer of 2011: achievements

1. Current head of KNAB N.Vilnītis must be dismissed

2. Determine a criminal liability for political parties’ “slush funds”

3. Repeal closed parliamentary votes4. Achieve transparency of media

ownership5. Increase the opportunities for the

public to participate in decision-making

Priorities set in summer of 2011: under-achievements & failures?6. Reduce political party dependency on

sponsors7. Repeale deputy immunity8. Provide more effective law courts9. Set high standards for the

Constitutional Court judge candidates 10.Change the approach of corporate

management appointments

Anti-Corruption Priorities of Latvia in 2013

1. A court system that’s effective and immunized against delays

2. Uniform and sufficient legal protection framework for corruption whistleblowers

3. Effective anti-corruption agency (KNAB)

4. Transparent and accountable Parliament

5. Freedom of Information Act really implemented

6. Fewer public procurement corruption risks

7. Corruption reduction in local governments

8. Due process and merit-based selection of top officials

9. Effective governance of state- and municipality-owned enterprises and ports

10.Restored reputation of the Constitutional Court

1. A court system that’s effective and immunized against delays

Legislative changes to improve efficiency of the legal process, decrease delays

Free courts of non-actionable cases

Fewer appeals for some groups of cases

Wider use of written case procedure

Introduction of mediation

2. Uniform and sufficient legal protection framework for corruption

whistleblowers

Whistleblower protection legislation for the public and private sectors

Development of internal reporting mechanisms in institutions and enterprises

Financial compensation for the whistleblowers, if a significant public benefit has occurred

3. Effective anti-corruption agency (KNAB)

Work finished on the “big cases” (Daimler and Riga City Council, Latvenergo and Alstom, “Oligarchs’ case”)

Sufficient budget, draft reviewed only at parliamentary level

Criminal liability of legal persons

4. Transparent and accountable Parliament (Saeima)

Transparent committee work – internet broadcast, registration of lobbyists

Establishment of a policy analysis unit

State’s Audit Office audit of Parliament’s Administration

Audit of Parliament’s Garage

5. Freedom of Information Act really implemented

Publication of classified information lists on institutions’ websites

Full transparency, as foreseen by law, when a body uses state or municipal funds or property

Supervisory body on law’s implementation

6. Fewer public procurement corruption risks

Publication of all contracts (and amendments) online

Administrative penalties for violations of Public Procurement Law, supervision by the Public Procurement Office

7. Corruption reduction in local governments

Control of administrative resource misuse before the municipal elections

Selection of all staff based on merit, competitively

8. Due process and merit-based selection of top officials

Establishment of clear, actionable selection criteria

Nomination of candidates also by interest groups

Assessment of professional and managerial skills

Declaration of candidates at least one month before selection

9. Effective governance of state- and municipality-owned enterprises and

portsImplementation of the “centralized management model” implementation, including substantial transparency and accountability improvements

Setting-up of professional boards and councils in all cases

Significant improvement of transparency and good governance in ports

10. Restored reputation of the Constitutional Court

Higher criteria for candidate judges (e.g., at least master's degree in law, proven research track record)

Distancing of persons under criminal investigation from Court’s decision making

www.delna.lv/

ziedot