Statement by the European Union
Fourth Session of the Conference of the States Parties to
the United Nations Convention against Corruption
Marrakech, Morocco, 24-28 October 2011
Statement by the European Union
To be delivered on 24/10/11
1. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States. The Candidate Countries Turkey, Croatia, Iceland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro [1] , the Countries of the Stabilization and Association Process and potential candidates Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia, the EFTA country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Armenia and Georgia, associate themselves with this statement.
( [1] Croatia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia continue to be part of the Stabilization and Association Process. Iceland remains an EFTA country and member of the European Economic Area.)
2. We would like to express our appreciation to the Government of Morocco for hosting this fourth session of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption in this proud, beautiful and historic city. Equally, we would like to extend our gratitude to the Secretariat of the Conference for the committed work in preparation for this meeting, in particular for its reports on the status of implementation of the convention as well as on possible technical assistance activities to respond to the needs identified by States parties during the first year of the first cycle of the implementation review mechanism.
3. We all know how important and at the same time difficult it is to fight and curb corruption. Although the nature and scope of corruption differ from one state to another, it harms societies as a whole by lowering investment levels, hampering the fair operation of the market and reducing public finances. We all are more than aware of the detrimental impact corruption has on all forms of progress and development, of its undermining role in confidence in governments, its cost for the poor and its impeding influence on all integrative international processes, including development cooperation. It is a global impediment to development, which undermines wealth and democracy wherever it appears and hinders the exercise of human rights and the rule of law.
4. Mister President, the European Union attaches great importance to combating corruption throughout its Member States. For this reason, a large number of measures adopted within the European Union aim at reinforcing the political will to effectively tackle corruption, improving the track-record of implementation of existing international, regional and national legal instruments against corruption, raising awareness of corruption, safeguarding integrity in the public and private sectors, and putting in place legal measures to deal with embezzlement and bribery.
5. As corruption is often linked to other forms of serious crime, such as trafficking in drugs and human beings, with the adoption of the so called Stockholm Programme , the European Union has been given a political mandate to measure efforts in the fight against corruption and to develop a comprehensive EU anti-corruption policy, in close cooperation with the Council of Europe Group of States against Corruption (GRECO).
6. A reinforced EU anti-corruption policy was reflected in the anti-corruption package adopted by the European Commission in June 2011, through which an EU anti-corruption reporting mechanism was set up for periodic evaluation of EU Member States' efforts against corruption ('EU Anti-Corruption Report'). The new mechanism aims at generating additional political will to intensify anti-corruption measures, including through further compliance with regional and international commitments, such as those undertaken in the UNCAC framework.
7. A new European Commission Communication on Fighting Corruption in the EU adopted in June this year called for stronger focus on corruption, highlighting special anti-corruption actions in the internal and external policy fields (e.g. judicial and police cooperation, public procurement, asset recovery, crime statistics, enlargement process, cooperation and development policies).
8. At the same time, the European Commission adopted a comprehensive strategy to fight fraud and corruption affecting the EU financial interests. In this mission OLAF, the European Anti-Fraud Office, plays a central role independently investigating corruption cases and assisting EU and national authorities in detecting and preventing corruption. The European Commission also presented a plan to strengthen the substantive and procedural laws to improve cross-border investigation and prosecution. These last measures are based on the reviewed founding treaties of the EU, amended by the Lisbon Treaty, which also paves the way for institutional developments such as setting up of a European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
9. In terms of legislation at EU level, the 2003 Council Framework Decision on combating corruption in the private sector aimed at criminalising both active and passive bribery, also setting up more detailed rules for liability of legal persons and ensuring minimum standards for an effective penalty system. Recent reviews of the level of transposition of these provisions across the EU showed however that more efforts need to be made in this regard. Several anti-corruption legal instruments are already in place at the European and international level. Several EU States have ratified all or most of the existing international anti-corruption instruments.
10. By the end of 2011, revised legislation at European Union level on confiscation and asset recovery will be proposed. This is a priority area in the fight against organised crime, including in cases of corruption. The new legislation on asset recovery will be part of a wider approach at European Union level on the protection of the licit economy against criminal infiltration. Moreover, a proposal for a revised modernized public procurement legislation at European Union level is currently under preparation, carefully considering the issues related to transparency, impartiality and fairness of procedures. In 2012, a strategy will be presented to strengthen the quality of financial investigations across the European Union and ensure further development of financial intelligence and exchange of information practices in EU Member States.
11. The European Union reaffirms the priority it attaches to the development of an area of freedom, security and justice, responding to a central concern of the peoples of the States brought together in the Union. It considers that the priority for the coming years will be to focus on the interests and needs of citizens. The challenge will be to ensure respect for fundamental rights and freedoms and integrity of the person while guaranteeing security. It is of paramount importance that law enforcement measures, on the one hand, and measures to safeguard individual rights, the rule of law and international protection rules, on the other, go hand in hand in the same direction and are mutually reinforced.
12. All measures taken at national or Union level and efforts made at the international level are regarded in the EU as mutually reinforcing. In this regard I would like to particularly welcome the opportunity provided by the Conference for practitioners and experts to meet and exchange views, information and good practices. In order to facilitate this we would encourage UNODC to continue to coordinate closely with other relevant international organisations involved with anti-corruption activities to ensure an appropriate division of labour in accordance with each organisation’s comparative advantage and in the interest of avoiding a duplication of efforts. In this context we welcome the establishment of the International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA) in Laxenburg/ Austria, which can play a role of assistance within UNODC´s future anti- corruption engagement.
13. On the global scene, the United Nations Convention against Corruption is the most comprehensive anti-corruption instrument available. The Convention provides the framework and tools for the States Parties to advance their work on Prevention, Criminalization, Asset Recovery and International Cooperation, as well as Technical Assistance.
14. The EU notes with satisfaction the high level of political support for the Convention and the growing number of ratifications. Taking advantage of this opportunity we once again urge all States which have not yet signed or ratified the Treaty, to do so without further delay.
15. We welcome the establishment of the review mechanism, where each State Party is reviewed by peers in good faith and mutual trust, a review mechanism, which assists States Parties in identifying gaps in their implementation which highlights good practices and needs for technical assistance and which further enables the Conference of the States Parties to acquire necessary knowledge of the measures taken by States Parties in implementing the Convention. We recognize that the reviews carried out during the first year of the first review cycle have taken longer to complete than envisaged. Nevertheless, it is a considerable achievement taking into account that many countries have no prior experience of this kind of review. We are confident that as we gain experience, future reviews will better respect timeline set.
16. When it comes to the level of implementation of the convention there are a lot of remaining challenges to overcome in order to fully exploit the potential of the Convention in the effective implementation. Despite the fact that the very basic provisions of the convention, namely criminalization of the abuse of functions by public officials or criminalization of both active and passive bribery of domestic public officials, so far have been implemented, it seems however that the scope of coverage of the term “public official” is rather limited, given the fact that this is the key concept which determines the effectiveness of the convention to a huge extent. While each of the States parties had established a body or specialized department to combat corruption through law enforcement, in many cases such bodies have only recently been created and faced challenges related to limited capacity and resources for implementation, as well as competing priorities. The provisions under the chapter on international cooperation seem to be well implemented, including the so-called “non-discrimination clause”. The fact, however, which we have to deplore, is that many provisions have never been used so far. Therefore the level of implementation of these provisions cannot be properly identified and assessed. In this context, we would like to call for a stronger focus of the review process, where possible, on the implementation aspects, beyond the mere transposition in national legislation.
17. Corruption is a symptom of bad governance and is most detrimental to the poor and vulnerable. It undermines public sector and economic growth rates, investment rates, the allocation of public resources, and other essential elements of national development. Corruption redistributes resources and welfare away from those already deprived and reduces the legitimacy of the government and the public sector in the eyes of the rest of society. The EU and it’s Member States have provided substantial support to the efforts of developing countries and countries in transition to promote good governance and fight corruption, including through technical assistance. In supporting such efforts we have emphasized the need for participatory in-country dialogues on governance, including in areas such as anti-corruption, public sector reform, access to justice and reform of the judicial system. The EU is committed to continuing its partnership with developing countries and countries in transition which actively take a stand against corruption and support their endeavour to combat corruption in all its forms…? We believe that country-led and country-based, integrated and well coordinated technical assistance programmes are powerful vehicles for furthering implementation of the Convention. In this regard, we believe that some of the technical assistance needs emerging from the review process would best be met at country level. The fourth high-level meeting on Aid Effectiveness will be held in Busan, Korea, 29 November – 1 December 2011 in order to follow-up on the Paris Declaration and the 2008 Accra Agenda for Action. We are pleased that transparency, accountability and the fight against corruption will be brought to the forefront of the development effectiveness debate in Busan and that the Convention (UNCAC) will be explicitly recognized as a basis for this important work in the Busan Outcome Document.
18. Mister President, the EU always advocated a transparent review mechanism, where States Parties strive to make optimal use of all the relevant information available, including adequate input from non-governmental organisations. Also advocating transparency regarding the outcome as well. We would like to encourage all States parties to consider publication of the individual country review reports which could further contribute to enhancing transparency in the efforts to tackle corruption worldwide and to creating a good platform for exchanging good practices. We would also like to encourage States Parties under review to publish the name of their focal point, to allow all relevant stakeholders to input effectively into reviews. As indicated before efficient coordination with other international organisations involved in corruption is vital for the effective fight against corruption. Therefore, we have to ensure that participation in our working groups is open to relevant organisations. The EU is pleased with the willingness expressed by many non-governmental organizations to participate in the review processes as well as in the conference deliberations devoted to the implementation of the Convention.
19. The discussions at the IRGs themselves have shown that civil society and the private sector in general have a substantive role to play in both national and international implementation of UNCAC. Some NGOs have special expertise in the various issues involved in anti-corruption. By attending the sessions of the IRG, they can receive direct information on what the issues are in implementation of UNCAC and could be encouraged to assist States parties in implementation. In particular, they could have a contribution to make to the discussions on technical assistance and on the prevention of corruption. Since the reports prepared by the Secretariat for the IRGs do not contain reference to the status of implementation in individual States parties, it is unlikely that sensitive information would be revealed to them.
20. Mister President, we are aware of a different interpretation of some provisions of the Terms of reference of the Mechanism related to the participation of observers in the Implementation Review Group but truly believe that through a constructive dialogue, supported by a political will appropriate solution will be found. We are open for a dialogue on this issue. The participation of observers is crucial for the whole process of implementation of the Convention.
21. We believe that the establishment of the United Nations Convention on Corruption has been one of the greatest successes to render our fight against corruption into a joint, globalized and integrated effort. We are ready to do our part and we ask everyone here today to do likewise to allow for substantial progress at this session. Together, we can ensure that the fourth session of the Conference of the States Parties takes another leap forward in our important fight against corruption worldwide.
Thank you, Mister President.