30^th Session of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities – 22 to 24 March 2016

Herwig van Staa: “Local and regional elected representatives must become role models for promoting public ethics and fighting corruption”

A long-standing proponent of transparency and anti-corruption measures at local and regional level, the Congress is preparing a strategy in this area, which are all the more important as no country is immune from public corruption. A former president of the Congress and chair of the thematic group on public ethics, Herwig van Staa (Austria, EPP/CCE) pointed out, in a debate in Strasbourg on 22 March, how corruption threatens the rule of law and invited experts to work with the Congress on this issue.

In many countries the transfer of powers to towns and regions has increased still further the risk of corruption at local and regional level, said Herwig van Staa, listing the threats which undermine the pillars of democracy, such as the lack of transparency in recruitment, the awarding of contracts and services and conflicts of interest.  For over 15 years the Congress has been taking action to combat corruption and has supported the introduction of many verification and prevention tools, including local and regional courts of audit. But the “transparency indices” show that all this is not enough and that much more needs to be done.  The Congress’s Governance Committee is currently drawing up preventive a strategy to increase transparency and enhance public ethics in conjunction with other partners, including the European Union’s Committee of the Regions.

Local and regional authorities must themselves devise ways to ensure transparency

According to Francesco Merloni, professor of law and a member of Italy’s National Anti-Corruption Authority, such a strategy must include the introduction of measures taken at the level closest to citizens, and these measures must be drawn up by the authorities concerned themselves. “These measures must be shared by all staff and local government officials, whose impartiality must be guaranteed,” he added, stressing the importance for local and regional authorities to draw up their prevention measures themselves: “if central government does this for them, there is a real risk of recentralisation,” he said.  He pointed out that Articles 3 and 6 of the European Charter of Local Self-Government make provision for the introduction of such policies, which could be monitored by the Congress.  In his view, it was essential to combat corruption by identifying the organisational rules which were best adapted to each administrative authority and clearly setting out the expected behaviour of staff at all levels, through codes of conduct.

Marin Mrcela, a Croatian judge and President of the Group of States against Corruption, a Council of Europe partial agreement, said that anti-corruption policies were still broadly drawn up at national level, but that whatever the level of action, “ethics and transparency are the natural enemies of corruption”.  Transparency must be introduced with regard to recruitment and career progression, but it should also cover elected representatives’ assets and income. He felt that “whistle-blowers” should be able to express themselves without fear of reprisals and codes of ethics and professional conduct should be widely disseminated and used. “Transparency is not a universal cure, but the first essential step towards combating corruption.  And in order to prevent corruption there must also be a focus on education,” he concluded.

Regional rules to prevent abuses

During the debate, members of the Congress outlined the anti-corruption policies pursued in their respective countries, such as Germany, Azerbaijan, the Federation of Russia and Ukraine. Some German regions, such as Bavaria, had adopted special rules, such as the compulsory rotation of staff and had made corruption at local level a criminal offence.  The prohibition of gifts to staff and officials and the holding of public meetings before certain important economic measures are taken pursued the same objectives.  Other members said that while it was imperative to combat excessive secrecy and confidentiality, controls should not be too cumbersome.  The Georgian youth delegate felt that the fight against corruption also needed to focus on preventing nepotism.  Replying to the questions put, Marin Mrcela said that administrative authorities must foster a commitment to take practical action, but this was not yet the case everywhere.  Herwig van Staa concluded the discussions, reiterating the need to work together to fight “the cancer of corruption”.