resolution on the prevention of corruption in the republic ... · assembly of the republic of...

Pursuant to Article 107 concerning Article 109 of the Rules of Procedure of the National

Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia (Official Gazette of the RS, No. 35/02 and 60/04) and

concerning Article 16 of the Prevention of Corruption Act OG,No. 2/04) the National

Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia adopted on its session on 16 June 2004 the following

RESOLUTION

on the Prevention of Corruption in the Republic of Slovenia (RePKRS)

I. INTRODUCTION

As elsewhere in the world corruption in Slovenia harms the citizens and the state, threatens

the rule of law and people's trust into the highest national institutions, reduces political

stability and social peace and by limiting free competition and reducing effective division of

means impedes economic development.

The number of corruption criminal offences is relatively low in Slovenia according to the

official data, but the empirical surveys show that there is more corruption, still not to an

extent that would require extraordinary measures, but indisputably to an extent that requires

coordinated and determined action of the state as well as of all its inhabitants.

The reactions to the occurrence of corruption have so far been explicitly repressive, thus

eliminating only the consequences but not the causes of this social pathological phenomenon.

The Resolution on the Prevention of Corruption in the Republic of Slovenia (hereinafter: the

Resolution) is intended to produce realistic, gradual and deliberated measures for the

elimination of corruption and its basic objectives are directed into preventive action: long-

term and permanent elimination of the conditions for the occurrence and development of

corruption, establishment of a suitable legal and institutional environment for the prevention

of corruption, consistent enforcement of accountability for illegal actions, the construction of

the widely accepted system of zero tolerance for any corruption activities via different forms

of training courses and effective application of internationally established standards in this

area.

The measures provided by the Resolution are long-term and coordinated with the level of its

economic, social and political development, they provide for the protection of universally

acknowledged human rights and freedoms including the presumption of innocence.

In addition to the engagement of national authorities and legal entities in the private and non-

governmental sectors an effective implementation of the Resolution requires an appropriate

level of preparation of all inhabitants for active cooperation in the implementation of this

document, for which they must be suitably informed and motivated.

II. DEFINITION OF CORRUPTION

Corruption as understood by the Resolution in accordance with the provisions of the

Prevention of Corruption Act (Uradni list RS, 2/04) is defined as follows:

Corruption shall be any violation of due conduct of official or responsible persons in the

public or private sectors as well as the conduct of persons instigating violations or persons

who can take advantage of the violation because of directly or indirectly promised, offered or

given or required, accepted or expected benefit for themselves or for another person.

The term "any violation" shall encompass any form of conduct, actions as well as omissions.

This involves conduct in the public and private sectors, and in the fields that cannot be

classified in the public or private sector or where the border between both spheres is not clear

and exactly determined. The universality principle applies to violations, i.e. corrupt conduct is

possible within the state or abroad. "Due conduct" shall be conduct determined by the

statutory and under- statutory acts adopted by the state, and the written codes of conduct in

business and vocational associations. "Officials" shall be persons as determined in the Penal

Code (OG , No.63/94, 70/94-amend., 23/99, 40/04). "Responsible persons" shall be persons

authorised to make decisions or to take certain steps defined by the regulation or act issued by

a competent authority or by the nature of tasks they perform, inter alia also members of

management or supervisory bodies in legal entities, irrespective of the ownership structure,

and also sole entrepreneurs and traders. "Private sector" shall be all areas not included in the

definition of "public sector" as determined by the Public Officials Act (OG , No., 56/02). The

type of action may be direct or indirect. An "indirect action" shall mean that the benefit on the

active side (the person making a bribe) is promised, offered or given via a third person, and on

the passive side, i.e. the bribed person, requested or accepted via a third person, whereby the

term "person" covers legal and natural persons. "Expected benefit" is when a person expects

for his or her action a certain benefit while it is not necessary that the promised benefit be

expressed in advance. The "benefit" may be financial - whereby its form, value or amount are

not relevant, or non-financial - whereby its type, form or content are not relevant either.

"Corruptive intent" is an essential component of all conduct perceived as corruptive. Such

intent exists when the violation is committed in expectancy of the promised, offered or given

benefit on the active side, or the required, accepted or expected benefit on the passive side.

Zero tolerance has to be enforced, whereby any corruptive action is unacceptable. Several

minor actions of this type already affect the rule of law and provide possibilities for the

occurrence of more serious violations. It is also possible that corruptive intent is aimed at

obtaining benefit for another person. "Another person" shall be any legal or natural person,

which is not the person having committed the violation corresponding to the above definition.

III. ASSUMPTIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The assumptions of the Resolutions are the following:

Respect of human rights and freedoms

The measures relating to the prevention, detection and prosecution of corruption according to

this Resolution must be in total accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia

as regards the assured human rights and freedoms (OG, No., 33/91, 42/97, 66/2000, 24/03 and

69/04) as well as in accordance with the Slovenian statutory acts and implementing

regulations and international legal acts, in particular with the European Convention on Human

Rights. The abstract danger of corruption and the danger of its actual forms allow for

deviations from the provided standards as regards the protection of human rights and

freedoms only to the extent allowed by the Slovenian and international legal instruments .

Political will

The prevention, detection and prosecution of corruption is possible only with a wide-reaching

and clearly expressed political will. Planning and implementing long-term changes is possible

only with the broadest social consent as regards the dangerous consequences of corruption

and as regards the importance of anticorruption measures without division between

government and opposition political parties.

Appropriate timing

The Republic of Slovenia has recently faced a number of suspected corruption cases and

reactions to them. The activities of the Government Office for the Prevention of Corruption,

the court proceedings, and a number of voluntary or forced resignations of senior public

officials as a consequence of the activities conducted by the detection and prosecution

authorities and the media have caused increased public awareness as regards legally and

morally disputed actions of mainly senior state representatives. The inhabitants of the

Republic of Slovenia have become very critical on the one hand and on the other they expect

a suitable reaction of the state authorities. This reaction in the form of a long-term and all-

encompassing strategy is vital, not only because of public expectations, but also because these

expectations have not yet reached a level when urgent, extraordinary, short-term or partial

measures would be required and planned and systemic action is still possible. International

organisations and institutions also expect the Republic of Slovenia to adopt and begin the

implementation of a strategic anticorruption document.

Appropriate situation assessment

It does not make sense to plan the measures to improve the situation in a certain area unless

reliable and relevant data in this area exist. One of the basic reasons for the activities relating

to corruption is the previous shortage of realistic data on the extent of the issue and its trends.

The data collected so far shows that the Republic of Slovenia is burdened with corruption to a

larger extent than revealed by the statistics of the law enforcement bodies, which calls for a

comprehensive and deliberated action. The fact is that the Republic of Slovenia is less

burdened with corruption than comparable transition countries but still cannot be compared

with the countries that have managed to control the issue. Prompt, matter-of-fact and analytic

assessment of the actual situation must be the basis for the adoption of the Resolution as well

as for its regular amendment.

Cooperation between the public and private sectors and the civil society

Corruptive actions damage the public as well as private sector, civil society and individual

citizens, which calls for the inclusion of all parties in the preparation and implementation of

national anticorruption policy. The participation of state bodies alone causes incomplete and

unsuitable reactions to the complex corruption issue, which is the reason that civil society

must be included in all activities, in particular in the supervision of the implementation of

jointly set tasks, as an equal partner, and enable a continuous influence on the content and

procedures of making the most important decisions.

Prevention before repression

Repressive reactions alone to corruption leads only to elimination of harmful consequences in

individual cases while the causes, reasons and circumstances surrounding the corruption

remain untouched. Not only due to clearly expressed global trends but also due to more

rational and efficient preventive action, the basic position for the content and implementation

of Slovenian anticorruption measures is the prevention, detection of causes and conditions for

the corruption and their elimination, while repressive action remains a corrective measure

applicable for sanctioning illegal operations.

Graduated approach

Corruption is a system subject to social, cultural and political features of every individual

country, including Slovenia, and the elimination of such system is not possible in short

periods or even at once. Effective action is feasible only by identifying priorities and by

realistic time planning of their solutions. Understanding the sequence of causes and

consequences and a rational, gradual approach are absolute preconditions for planning the

activities relevant for the drafting and implementation of the Resolution.

Transparency and openness of the project

The Resolution is by definition a document intended for all citizens, which means that this is a

project which, at the stage of composition as well as its implementation, is fully transparent

and open to all who wish to participate in its drafting or implementation. The procedures

leading to individual solutions must be equally transparent and open. Transparency, which is

one of the basic principles and conditions for effective fight against corruption, can be

achieved only by full transparency of all actions and by its appropriate response to the

reactions from the environment.

Organised and spontaneous supervision and performance measurability

Although the widest possible circle of entities should be included in the implementation of the

anticorruption resolution, some entities bear greater responsibility than others. This is the

reason why it is necessary to determine in detail in what way the supervision of Resolution

implementation is carried out, and to entrust this supervision to a specially qualified authority

while the professional and general public must be encouraged to monitor the implementation

of the Resolution, and for which procedures of influencing the basic actors of the

implementation of the Resolution must be ensured.

What is important in preventing corruption are the indicators through which the presence of

this phenomenon in the society could be detected and because of which the supervision of the

implementation of the Resolution will essentially present realistic monitoring of its

effectiveness in certain periods after its adoption as well as the verification of the set

objectives.

Permanence

Since the complete elimination of corruption is not feasible but it calls for persistent and

ongoing prevention, detection and combating of its forms, this necessarily entails permanent

anticorruption activities. Any laxity or temporary inactivity is immediately and directly

expressed in the increase of the risk represented by corruption. The Resolution must therefore

be a document, which at the stage of composition as well as implementation enables ongoing

implementation of the set tasks, from the first as well as from the subsequent stages.

Updated assessment and corrections

Any document is an expression of the time at which it is created while corruption, as with all

similar phenomena, is a phenomenon that is not only permanent but also regularly changes its

form. It therefore calls for specified procedures and methods for updated monitoring of

circumstances that cause corruption and for appropriate and regular response to changed

conditions. Thus justified corrections in a longer period do not present a critique of the basic

text of the Resolution but only ensure its topicality, flexibility and efficiency.

IV. OBJECTIVES OF THE RESOLUTION

The basic purpose of the Resolution is the formation of a suitably high level of anticorruption

culture at the personal and general social levels by realising the following direct and general

objectives:

– formulation and implementation of adequate ethical standards;

– long-term and permanent elimination of the conditions and circumstances for the

occurrence and development of corruption;

– establishment of adequate legal and institutional environment for the prevention of

corruption;

– strict enforcement of accountability for illegal actions;

– establishment of a system of zero tolerance toward all corruptive actions;

– effective introduction of internationally established standards relating to this area.

In addition to direct and general objectives the implementation of the Resolution will affect

the achievement of the following broader social objectives:

- identification of areas most exposed to corruption;

- transparent and legal financing of political parties;

- effective reform of state administration;

-

- overcoming the conflict of interests in public services;

-

- ensuring legal, professional and responsible decision making;

-

- establishment of appropriate mechanisms for detection and notification of

possible corruptive actions;

-

- ensuring independent and effective operation of law enforcement authorities,

and judicial authorities;

- ensuring effective operation of other supervisory mechanisms;

- ensuring open and transparent budget spending procedures;

- creative cooperation between state and private organisations and the civil

society;

- training of and assistance to the private sector as regards effective and self-

regulatory actions against corruption;

- increase of sensibility of state authorities, the civil society and individual

persons toward forms of corruption;

- increase of general awareness on the rights and obligations pertaining to

individuals and institutions;

- assistance to the media in the implementation of their supervisory function;

- inclusion of the Republic of Slovenia into international endeavours for the

prevention of corruption.

V. TYPES AND EXTENT OF CORRUPTION IN THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA

In the Republic of Slovenia there is a discrepancy as regards the extent of corruption between

the official data of the law enforcement authorities and the data obtained by empirical

analyses. The police thus annually deal with 20 to 60 criminal offences of corruption while

opinion polls, surveys and case studies show the phenomenon is much more widespread.

1. Police data

Official data on the level and extent of criminal offences of corruption in the Republic of

Slovenia are given in police statistics concerning this phenomenon, encompassing seven

criminal offences from the Penal Code prior to the change in 2004:

– violation of the free decision of voters from Article 162, accepting bribes at elections

from Article 168, unjustified acceptance of gifts from Article 247, unjustified giving of gifts

from Article 248, taking bribes from Article 267, giving of bribes from Article 268, and

trading in influence from Article 269.

Year Number of criminal offences Number of all

Of corruption criminal offences

1991 21 42,250

1992 39 54,085

1993 51 44,278

1994 55 43,635

1995 35 38,178

1996 32 36,587

1997 19 37,173

1998 33 55,473

1999 56 62,836

2000 43 67,617

2001 58 74,795

2002 51 77,218

2003 54 76,643

-----------------------------------------------

Source: Annual police reports

2. Opinion polls and other surveys

Opinion polls usually collect data on the opinion of the population as regards a specific issue

and not so much as regards the actual extent and severity of the issue. In spite of that such

analyses play an important role in corruption prevention since they show the level of

sensitivity and awareness of population, which are highly important factors in the engagement

of the entire population as regards elimination of the conditions, circumstances and causes for

the occurrence of corruption. Other types of analyses are more economically justified and

fairly reliably present the situation in a certain segment of corruption.

a) The first two general studies on corruption in Slovenia in 2002 and 2003 showed that the

estimate of the citizens on the extent of corruption (as much as 68.1% of the people in 2002

and 55.3% in 2003 were of the opinion that public officials accept bribes) is worse than their

actual experience (29.6% of the people or their acquaintances experienced this phenomenon

in 2002 while in 2003 the percentage was 31.5%). Among the most significant causes of

corruption in the country they stated penalties being too low (25% in 2002 and 22.9% in

2003), ineffective law enforcement (19.8% in 2002 and 19.4% in 2003) and poor legislation

(17% in 2002 and 18.4% in 2003). In their opinion the institutions that contributed most to the

fight against corruption were the media (rated 3.43 in 2002 and 3.41 in 2003 at the scale from

1 – the least – to 5 – the most), the Office of the RS for the Prevention of Corruption (3.03 in

2002 and 3.11 in 2003) and inspection services (2.94 in 2002 and 2.90 in 2003). The people

surveyed in the poll had experienced corruption when at a medical visit (14.4% in 2002 and

7.1% in 2003), in public procurement procedures (4.9% in 2002 and 28.8% in 2003), in

privatisation or denationalisation procedures (4.4% in 2002 and 22.3% in 2003), in customs

procedures (5.5% in 2002 and 16.5% in 2003) and in police procedures (6.8% in 2002 and

15.7% in 2003). The survey also indicates that the opinions of the people surveyed are mainly

based on media reporting (32% in 2002 and 31.5% in 2003).

b) The survey of the business environment, business ethics and unofficial payments in the

Republic of Slovenia carried out in January 2004 showed that 62% (43.4% in 2002) of

Slovenian managers regard corruption in the country as a major issue, and that the largest

obstacle to the operation of their company was taxes (52%, while in 2002 the first place was

occupied by judicial authorities - 43.3%).

Company operations are most affected by the corruption of public officials, in particular with

regard to public procurement (23.6%); 24.3% (31% in 2002) of the managers involved in the

survey think that corruption may contribute, at least to a certain degree, to the development

and growth of their company, as much as 48% (48.3% in 2002) think that corruption is an

unavoidable part of Slovenian economic system, and as much as 47% (52% in 2002) of all

managers think that their company does not need a code of ethics. Given the independence of

the private sector as regards their own ethical regulations, the survey shows that professional

and business associations will have to be more active in this area, but positive trends could be

noticed in the area of business ethics of Slovenian companies in comparison to 2002.

c) Among the opinion polls and other surveys the most recognised is the Transparency

International Perception Index (CPI), which shows the opinion of the citizens in individual

countries on the level and extent of corruption in their country, but it does not offer data on

the actual situation in the area. Slovenia is among the countries of central and middle Europe

least burdened with corruption. What is worrying is the fact that the situation of the country

on the CPI scale grew constantly worse between 1999 and 2000, and even more the fact that

its evaluation also continued to deteriorate (in 1999 - 25th place on the scale and a rating of

6.0; in 2000 28th place and a rating of 5.8; in 2001 34th place and a rating of 5.2). In 2002 the

Republic of Slovenia was placed better: 27th place with a rating of 6.0, and in 2003, 29th

place with a rating of 5.9.

d) What is interesting is the data that shows the influence of companies on the legislative

work of state bodies (state capture) in the Republic of Slovenia and in some other countries in

transition. According to the EBRD studies the percentage of companies in Slovenia, which

may illegally influence the content of laws , i.e. the Parliament, amounts to 8%, the content of

implementing regulations can be influenced by 5% of companies, the content of the decisions

by the central bank by 4% of companies, criminal courts 6% of companies, economic courts

6% and political parties 11% of the 125 – 150 companies involved in the opinion polls. The

total state capture index, which also presents the share of companies injured by such illegal

influence is 0.07 in Slovenia, which is essentially one of the best results.

e) In its 2001-2002 study of global competitiveness the World Economic Forum classified

Slovenia in 31st place out of 75 countries as regards corruption with the result of 5.29 (rating

between 1- poorest and 7- best), after Lithuania, Hungary and Italy and before Greece. The

Republic of Slovenia is in 31st place (5.3 with 7 the highest) for frequency of paying bribes in

the import-export sector; for the frequency of bribes in public/private sector relations it is in

35th (5.3), for the frequency of bribes in the paying taxes it is in 32nd place (5.2), for the

frequency of bribes in the system of public procurement it is in 41st place (4.2), for the

frequency of bribes in taking loans it is in 47th place (4.7). Slovenian companies evaluate

their burden with corruption requests from other companies at 4.8 (1 – major costs and 7 –

irrelevant), which places the Republic of Slovenia in 35th place. According to the data on the

level of trust in the integrity of politicians the Republic of Slovenia was in 32nd place with a

rating of 3.0 (1 – very low trust, 7 – very high trust), whereby Romania, Italy, USA are better

placed while Estonia, Slovakia, Japan, Hungary, Greece, Poland, Latvia and the Czech

Republic are placed worse.

f) Public opinion in post-communist countries from 1998 on whether the change of the

political system had increased or decreased corruption is also of interest. In the Republic of

Slovenia a total of 58% of people surveyed were of the opinion that it had increased, 28%

thought that it had stayed the same and only 14% that it had decreased. These are slightly

poorer results than in Poland (52%-increased 37%-the same, 12%-decreased) and better than

in the Czech Republic (70%, 24%, 5%) or Hungary (77%, 20%, 3%). In 2003 a total of 67.3%

of the people surveyed in an opinion poll in the Republic of Slovenia answered the same

question by saying that corruption increased after 1990 (in 2002 the percentage was 63.7),

15.6% thought that it stayed the same (in 2002 16.4%) and 6% that it decreased (9.6% in

2002).

In the Republic of Slovenia the difference between perception of the inhabitants as regards

the level and extent of corruption in the country and their actual and direct experience with

this phenomenon is very high. A high percentage (55.3%) of people is thus of the opinion that

Slovenian public servants accept bribes although a much lower number of the people involved

in the poll had personal experience of that (17.3%). This means that the sensitivity and the

level of awareness of the population, which are extremely important factors in eliminating the

conditions, circumstances and causes for the occurrence of corruption, are very high. This is

confirmed by a number of studies, from which it also derives that this is mainly due to the

media and the activities of specialised and newly established bodies in this area in Slovenia.

In the business sector, there is a low opinion regarding corruption with almost half (48%)

of the managers involved in the poll thinking that corruption was an unavoidable part of

Slovenian economic system. In spite of explicitly emphasised role of economic self-regulation

the surveys show also a low level of readiness of the managers involved in the opinion poll to

do anything themselves to increase ethics of operations, since as many as one half think that

their companies do not need a code of ethics.

International surveys and studies produce almost identical findings, i.e. that the Republic of

Slovenia is one of the less corrupt transition countries, and is in this aspect sometimes better

than some EU Member States. This derives from surveys establishing perception as well as

others which measure econometric indicators. The European Parliament estimates that the

Republic of Slovenia is closer to the profile of developed countries than that of the transition

countries with widespread and existentially conditioned corruption.

Of course the surveys and polls establishing the situation in specific fields also indicate that

there still exist certain deficiencies which will have to be eliminated in order for the Republic

of Slovenia to speak of corruption as of irrelevant, side phenomenon. There still exist the

possibilities for individual persons and interest groups to influence the legislative and other

work of state authorities, i.e. state capture, public procurement, healthcare and public

administration in general remain critical. Quality analysis of sources confirms the pattern of

corruptive actions present in developed societies. It can be concluded that this involves

corruption at the higher and the highest levels of social and political life. On the basis of

analyses it can be said that corruption is present to the greatest extent in public administration,

and on the basis of the content of complaints it can be established that the forms of "grand

corruption" prevail, wherein the most common forms of corrupt conduct are misuse of

position, social status, political power, decision making possibility and similar. Such actions

many times qualify as serious criminal offences, which are difficult to detect and investigate.

At the moment this is one of the key issues addressed by the Resolution with the proposed

measures.

VI. PREVENTING AND COMBATTING OF CORRUPTION IN THE REPUBLIC OF

SLOVENIA

The level of economic development of the Republic of Slovenia, its annual domestic product

and other economic indicators classify Slovenia alongside some EU Member States. This

means that corruptive actions are as a rule not existentially conditioned but serve the long-

term privileges and improvement of material situation of individual persons and groups

involved. In pursuing individual advantages thus motivated individual persons exploit any

weaknesses, errors and deficiencies brought about by the rapid establishment of new state,

change of the type of political system, ownership transformation processes and development

of economy in the conditions of free competition. Traditional public administration and

traditional hierarchic relations between its officials and citizens are only slowly developing

into a professional and transparent system, whose exclusive purpose should be exemplary

administrative services for the inhabitants of the Republic of Slovenia. The recruitment of

personnel in public services is still not based only on the criteria of efficiency and

professionalism, and a strengthening economy causes a drain of professionals from state jobs

to private companies. The development of law also struggles to follow the changes in the

economic and political system, lengthy judicial procedures and insufficiently developed

supervision mechanisms play into the hands of violators. In taking steps in cases of detected

irregularities, individual persons still rely only on state mechanisms, their awareness of their

rights is poor, they are not familiar enough with the tasks, rights and obligations of

institutions they come into contact with. Civil society is developing too slowly, sufficient

attention to the ethicality of actions and operations in all forms and at all levels is not yet

provided, the inclusion of Slovenia into international integrations increases corruption risks in

certain areas.

The only way which ensures actual reduction of the extent of corruption in any country is

the elimination of causes, conditions and circumstances enabling and accelerating the

occurrence and development of corruption, which means that the response to developments in

corruption should first and foremost be preventive action, while repressive action remains a

corrective measure for dealing with the most serious forms of corruption and elimination of

their consequences. Both forms of action, preventive and repressive, must be coordinated,

which can be only achieved by discussing them at the same time without formal separation.

The provided measures for the prevention and suppression of corruption at the legislative,

institutional and practical levels are thus divided into several topical sections, while detailed

indication of required activities, their objectives, responsible institutions and deadlines for

implementation will be the central part of the Action Plan for the Implementation of the

Resolution drawn up by the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption.

In the process of EU integration, Slovenian legislation came fairly close to European

standards, so that extensive topical changes are not expected. Inclusion into international

flows calls for updated coordination with new regulations from international environment,

which is not only a process of their mechanical transfer into Slovenian environment but again

and again also an opportunity to advance legislation in accordance with the desired level of

democracy and desired observation of the principles of the rule of law.

All future regulations will also have to be examined from the aspect of compliance with the

acquis communitaire. As regards the building of institutions, the Republic of Slovenia has

most of the institutions typical of democratic countries with a longer tradition, potential

changes will not be extensive, but the coordinated and responsible cooperation of all existing

institutions strictly within the scope of their responsibilities will have to be ensured. A more

serious problem is the implementation of the adopted regulations, in particular in the areas

relevant for corruption, which also calls for the conditioning of all social formal and informal

supervisory mechanisms for legal and effective performance of the role.

A. Politics

The basic measures in the area of politics that may contribute to elimination of causes and

conditions for the occurrence of corruption are further development of democracy,

consolidation of the principles of the rule of law, development of civil society and strict

implementation of the principle of the separation of powers.

A.1. Legislative measures

Legislative measures include the following most important ones:

A.1.1. Amendment of legislation on funding political parties and elections, which will

ensure fully transparent funding of political parties, as a rule raised from the Budget and

realistic, comparable and comprehensive reporting on financial operations of political parties

and candidates, define general rules for fully documented and unified bookkeeping by

political parties, establish clear and precise supervision procedures and enable the supervisory

mechanisms to effectively carry out their tasks, including the enforcement of the sanctions

provided.

A.1.2. The establishment and monitoring of implementation of the new regulations on

incompatibility of public function with profitable activity, reporting on the financial situation

of certain categories of persons, the acceptance of gifts and resolution of the conflict of

interests, including provisions on effective central supervisory mechanism and proportional,

serious and deterrent sanctions.

A.1.3. The adoption of the regulation on incompatibility of individual public functions , e.g.

deputies and mayors.

A.1.4. The adoption of regulations on lobbying, including the ethical principles for the

work of persons involved therein.

A.1.5. Transfer of public authorisations to the private sector, when that is possible without

increasing the risk of corruption.

A.1.6. Systematic analysis of valid and future regulations from the aspect of their

anticorruption consistency and drafting of necessary amendments.

A.1.7. Introduction of legal obligation to report criminal offences of corruption for all

public functionaries.

A.1.8. Introduction of a list of gifts received by public functionaries and obligations to

submit those lists to a competent authority.

A.1.9. Inclusion of measures for the prevention of corruption and provision of transparent

operation of the relevant authorities among the basic tasks of public functionaries.

A.1.10. Examination of the issues of incompatibility of simultaneous membership of public

functionaries in management and/or supervisory bodies of public institutes, public companies,

public funds, public agencies and enterprises in the majority ownership of the Republic of

Slovenia or local communities.

A.2. Institutional measures

This area requires the following changes:

A.2.1. Establishment or appointment of bodies that will decide on the violations of the code

of ethics within individual institutions.

A.2.2. Appointment of persons or authorities that will keep a list of gifts for public

functionaries.

A.2.3. Establishment of professional association of lobbyists of the Republic of Slovenia

with its code of ethics.

A.3. Practical measures

This area requires the following:

A.3.1. To ensure more effective internal and external supervision of the implementation of

the valid regulations.

A.3.2. To ensure the observance of valid ethical principles.

A.3.3. In cases of established irregularities or inobservance of procedures to strictly and

publicly enforce the provided sanctions.

A.3.4. To ensure the issuing of annual reports on the major and/or most frequent violators

of valid regulations and ethical principles in this area.

A.3.5. To strictly observe the prescribed legislative procedure while ensuring full

transparency in the implementation of political and professional arguments and to prevent any

possible urgent interventions of different formal or informal social groups or individuals.

A.3.6. To publish the lists of gifts received by public functionaries in the form of a public

annual catalogue.

A.3.7. To introduce anticorruption clauses in all contracts concluded by the state and which

exceed a certain value.

A.3.8. To strictly impose the security measure of banning public functionaries convicted of

corruption from the profession.

A.3.9. To strictly implement the prohibition of participation by public functionaries in

management and supervisory bodies in companies if such participation is not necessary in

order to represent public interest.

B. Public administration

Alongside general and political measures the area of public administration is where the state

wins or loses the war against corruption. Discretionary rights determined to the highest

possible extent, precise description of tasks and authorisations of public officials and effective

implementation of their codes of ethics are the areas that most contribute to the elimination of

causes and conditions for the occurrence and development of corruption within public

administration.

B.1. Legislative measures

The required legislative measures include the following:

B.1.1. Systematic monitoring of the implementation of the Public Officials Act, other acts

and implementing regulations, and in cases of established deficiencies the adoption of

appropriate amendments, which are to ensure to the largest possible extent genuinely

apolitical, professional, effective and transparent public administration, increasingly operating

independently from personnel changes deriving from the elected and appointed officials; in

the case of unauthorised pressures to provide the option of legal remedies for individual

public officials and their associations, including the Council of Officials; to ensure the

implementation of exclusively merit criteria in the recruitment and promotion of public

officials.

B.1.2. The introduction of prohibition on public officials holding direct hierarchic superior

rank over relatives in direct or indirect line to those four times removed and spouses or

extramarital partners with a definition of alternative measures in cases of such situation

occurring for objective reasons.

B.1.3. The criteria for the recruitment of individual persons to posts in the public sector

should be adjusted to assessments of the corruption risk of these posts.

B.1.4. Introduction of integrity plans in the public sector.

B.1.5. Introduction of legal obligations for reporting corruptive actions for all public

officials.

B.1.6. Adoption and monitoring of the implementation of regulations on the resolution of

the conflict of interests, incompatibility of offices and the acceptance of gifts in public

administration.

B.1.7. Amendments and adjustments of the code of ethics of public officials to international

standards.

B.1.8. Adoption and monitoring of the implementation of regulations enabling extra-

budgetary funding of state authorities, in particular the regulation of supervisory procedures

with compulsory inclusion of formal supervisory mechanisms and the civil society.

B.1.9. Analysis of administrative procedures in all areas concluded with the issuing of

different authorisations or licences, and in the areas where decisions on the rights of

individuals are made as well as their reduction to the most necessary and simplified extent in

order to achieve the following:

– elimination of all authorisations not explicitly provided by the law;

– amendment of implementing regulations determining different authorisations, consents or

licences, which have no basis in explicit provisions of laws;

– elimination or change of all regulations allowing inadmissible arbitration in making

decisions on authorisations, consents and licences;

- composition of lists of required authorisations or consents for users in individual areas.

B.1.10. The adoption of regulations which will oblige all administrative authorities to

periodically assess the corruption risk of an authority and the posts therein, to the adoption of

appropriate preventive measures and the drawing up of formalised internal supervisory

procedures.

B.1.11. Monitoring the implementation of regulations on the accessibility of information to

the media, the enforcement of potential necessary changes and strict provision of judicial

protection in cases of violation of regulations.

B.1.12. The extension of duties as regards the supply of information by state authorities in

favour of economic entities, non-governmental organisations and individual persons.

B.1.13. The adoption of regulations enabling electronic operations with administrative

authorities to the largest possible extent for all users and binding them to formulate software

which will enable the users of administrative services to follow procedures on-line, in

particular proposed and actual deadlines for the resolution of their applications and names of

public officials involved in the procedures.

B.1.14. Detailed anticorruption analysis of regulations in the area of public finance, in

particular as regards public procurement, tax and customs area and healthcare, the adoption of

appropriate changes.

B.1.15. Transfer of concessions for the issuing of different authorisations or consents to the

private or non-governmental sector where this is justified and possible without an increase in

the corruption risk.

B.1.16. Formulation of simple internal rules for reporting corruption actions within state

authorities and the formulation of the rules for the protection of people reporting corruption

within state authorities (whistle-blowers).

B.1.17. Analysis of organisational and other legislation relating to local government from

the aspect of its anticorruption consistency and the formulation of proposals for potential

improvement.

B.1.18. Formulation of samples of undestatutory anticorruption acts for the whole public

sector.

B.1.19. Monitoring regulations on the organisation, field of work and tasks of the public

administration authorities, which are to ensure transparent, rational and effective

implementation of legally stipulated tasks, without overlapping authorisations and doubling

tasks and taking into account specific features of certain bodies.

B.1.20. Determination of the assumption of the code of ethics for public officials as a

condition for conclusion of employment.

B.2. Institutional measures


B.2.1. Monitoring the objective and politically unbiased operation of the Council of

Officials to ensure that the recruitment and promotion of public officials occurs exclusively

according to merit.

B.2.2. Commencement of practical operations by the central contact point in the Ministry

of Finance for the cooperation with OLAF (European Anti-Fraud Office).

B.2.3. Appointment of persons responsible for integrity plans in the public sector.

B.2.4. Determination of services or persons in state authorities responsible for keeping a list

of gifts to public officials.

B.2.5. Establishment and/or training of authorities making decisions on the violations of

codes of ethics for public officials.

B.2.6. Establishment of regular cooperation between the central state authority responsible

for the area of corruption and working bodies of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia

involved in cases also relevant for the prevention of corruption.

B.3. Practical measures


B.3.1. Elimination of discretionary rights for public officials where possible, and

formulation of objective criteria for decision making in cases where this is not possible.

B.3.2. Prior formulation of supplementary criteria for determining levels of confidentiality

in any state authority.

B.3.3. Inclusion of price accessibility of services of state authorities among the criteria for

pricing.

B.3.4. Drawing up of brief, simple and easily accessible notices to individual persons

relating to their rights in the processes at different state authorities.

B.3.5. Introduction of a simple standardised form enabling individual persons to report

corruptive actions of public functionaries and public officials .

B.3.6. Introduction and strict implementation of one-stop shop system for obtaining

required permits and consents of state authorities.

B.3.7. Formulation of criteria for the assessment of corruption risk of state authorities and

their posts, and periodical analyses of the exposure according to the adopted criteria.

B.3.8. De-personification of contacts between citizens and public officials with

simultaneously ensured transparency of the identity of decision-making officials or members

of collective bodies.

B.3.9. Consistent division of tasks between the authorities issuing different authorisations

and consents, and authorities carrying out the supervision of the use of the authorisations or

consents.

B.3.10. Development and implementation of the beginners' and advanced programmes of

professional training courses for public officials with obligatory inclusion of know-how

relating to ethics and professional integrity, introduction of supervision of the implementation

of the programmes.

B.3.11. Provision of all forms of assistance to unjustly stigmatised public officials and

public officials aggrieved by unjustified promotions in state administration.

B.3.12. Provision of on-line public access to databases with no prescribed requirement of

confidentiality or protection of personal data.

B.3.13. Limitation or elimination of cash operations between public officials and

customers.

B.3.14. Formation and publication of precise and unambiguous conditions for the

participation in public tenders for any acquisition of budget funds by the private sector.

B.3.15. Periodical analyses of the procedures conducted in the area of public procurement,

state aids, subsidies, credits and other forms of use of public finance, in particular by the

criterion of frequency of individual users of these services.

B.3.16. Conclusion of integrity pacts between state authorities and their business partners in

the private sector.

B.3.17. Enforcement of effective internal supervision of the operation of the public

administration, in particular as regards the division of competences, documenting work

processes, risk management and internal auditing, including the supervision of the procedures

of promotion of public officials.

B.3.18. Ensuring the greatest transparency of operation of the Council of Officials.

B.3.19. Appointment of an authority – information point for all questions relating to the

rules and principles of professional ethics.

B.3.20. Analysis of operation of all authorities with inspection authorisations with a view to

detect systemic or individual deficiencies and inconsistencies and the formulation of

proposals for the improvement of the situation.

B.3.21. Consistent implementation of public tenders and consistent application of

professional criteria in recruiting to senior executive posts in state administration and

companies owned by the state.

B.3.22. Consistent imposition of a security measure of banning public officials convicted of

corruption from the profession.

B.3.23. Ensuring better participation of non-governmental sector in appeal procedures

against the work of public officials.

B.3.24. Detailed anticorruption analysis of established practices in the area of public

finance, in particular as regards public procurement, tax and customs area and healthcare, the

adoption of appropriate changes.

B.3.25. Strict implementation of the prohibition of participation of public officials in

management and supervisory bodies in companies if such participation is not necessary in

order to represent public interest.

B.3.26. Ensuring a suitable number of internal auditors in state administration and their

actual independence and professionalism.

C. Law enforcement and judicial bodies

Despite all the regulations preventing and prohibiting corruptive conduct, they still occur in

every society. This calls for the bodies involved in investigation , prosecution and the judicial

process to express their independence and professionalism. Above and beyond all the

requirements that apply to the public administration in general, the importance of the work of

these bodies means that even more stringent conditions apply to them.

C.1. Legislative measures

The measures required in this area are as follows:

C.1.1. Ensuring the independence of the judiciary in the appointment and promotion of

judges and ensuring their budgetary independence.

C.1.2. Ensuring the independence of the public prosecution service in the appointment and

promotion of public prosecutors.

C.1.3. Increasing the effectiveness of the pre-trial process.

C.1.4. Introduction of the possibility of an additional extended covert investigation in line

with the Criminal Procedure Act (Uradni list RS, 63/94, 70/94-amend., 72/98, 6/99, 66/2000,

111/01, 56/03 and 43/04) in the investigation of corruption.

C.1.5. Full harmonisation of material criminal law provisions on corruption and fraud with

the provisions of the international legal instruments adopted by the Republic of Slovenia.

C.1.6. Increasing the punishment for corruption.

C.1.7. Making procedural regulations more strict to prevent their abuse by participants in

those procedures.

C.1.8. Studying the issue of shifted burden of proof in proving illegal financial benefit

deriving from criminal acts.

C.1.9. Introduction of public catalogue of legal entities convicted of corruption.

C.1.10. Adoption of regulations on the protection of witnesses and persons that report

corruption.

C.1.11. Adoption of regulations on the division of confiscated financial benefits within the

public administrative bodies of the Republic of Slovenia and on the division of such benefits

between the Republic of Slovenia and other countries.

C.2. Institutional measures

This area requires the following measures:

C.2.1. Reorganisation of specialised anti-corruption police units, with greater centralisation

to maximise their functional capacity and ensuring full harmonisation of their operations and

full independence of potential illegitimate influence.

C.2.2. Increase in the number of police positions in the detection of corruption and making

appointments to those positions with experienced and well-trained staff that have

demonstrated a high level of integrity.

C.2.3. Rationalising the use of existing capacity within Slovenia's public prosecution

service.

C.2.4. Enabling bodies to deal with violations of rules on the disclosure of financial

situation for prosecutors and judges within the public prosecution service or judiciary.

C.2.5. Organisational solutions for the multidisciplinary handling of cases, when police

officers, public prosecutors or public functionaries and public officials above a specific rank

are suspected of corruption.

C.2.6. Establishing adequate coordination between representatives of the ministries of

justice and the interior, the police, the public prosecution service and other bodies with

authority to detect and investigate illegal conduct, with the objective of strengthening inter-

institutional cooperation and information sharing and specialisation knowledge.

C. 3. Practical measures


C.3.1. Introduction of basic and advanced specialised training of police officers, public

prosecutors and judges in the areas of corruption, fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, and

illegal practice in accountancy.

C.3.2. Introduction of the principle of joint police and prosecution service action on

important corruption cases.

C.3.3. Introduction of continual professional supervision of decision making by police

officers and prosecutors in cases of abandoning or postponing a case in important corruption

cases.

C.3.4. Ensuring regular periodic assessments of the effectiveness of prosecutors and judges'

work.

C.3.5. Restricting the opportunities for the illegitimate influence of senior police officers on

police procedures regarding corruption.

C.3.6. Practical training prosecutors to lead the pre-trial process.

C.3.7. Improving police pay system.

C.3.8. Introduction of additional conditions for the appointment of people to positions

important to the detection and investigation of corruption and the appointment of their

superiors.

C.3.9. Ensuring the active participation of non-governmental sector in appeal procedures

against the work of the police.

C.3.10. Detailed anti-corruption analysis of practice in investigation, prosecution and

judging and adoption of any required changes.

C. Private sector

Corruption cannot be prevented, without action being taken in the private sector and without

the participation of businesses, not only because the public and private sectors are inseparably

linked in all societies, but also because corrupt conduct can take place within the private

sector itself. As the state cannot force the private sector to follow specific patterns of conduct

without enforceable legislation which is always an extreme option, most depends on the

extent to which the sector itself acknowledges the danger that corruption represents and to

what extent it voluntarily adapts its conduct. Again cooperation between the state and private

sector is vital, however it must be based entirely on the content of solutions and not their

external imposition. Institutional and practical solutions are entirely left to the private sector

alone, making the sector itself responsible for the anti-corruption atmosphere within the

economy at large.

D.1. Legislative measures

In an era of economic liberalisation, the basic principle is the deregulation of areas which can

be regulated by the market itself . For this reason the concept "legislative measures" in this

chapter also contains measures the private sector prepares and applies on its own initiative.


D.1.1. Greater punishments for the crimes of forging or destroying business documents.

D.1.2. Introduction of a prohibition on legal persons convicted of corruption in public

procurement.

D.1.3. Analysis of arrangements to prevent illegal work and employment and introduction

of any necessary changes.

D.1.4. Introduction of the obligation to include anti-corruption clauses in contracts worth

over a certain amount.

D.1.5. In the case of the sale of legal persons in state ownership, the mandatory audit of

their operations for a set period before the sale.

D.1.6. Promotion of the introduction of codes of ethics within legal persons in the private

sector and in business and professional associations.

D.1.7. Adoption or review and consistent application of codes of ethics for professions

most at risk.

D.1.8. Analysis of legislation in areas most at risk (stock market, gambling, insurance)

regarding their anti-corruption consistency and preparation of proposals to improve them.

D.1.9. Review of rules to resolve conflicts of interest in the private sector and application

of necessary changes.

D.1.10. Promotion of further creation and updating of recommendations on the content of

individual contracts and criteria for salary and other rewards for managers.

D.1.11. Promotion of introduction of integrity plans in legal persons in the private sector.

D.2. Institutional measures

D.2.1. Further strengthen the role and importance of existing courts of honour in

strengthening good business practice and business morals.

D.2.2. Promoting the establishment of new courts of honour in individual economic sectors

and professional associations.

D.2.3. Definition of persons responsible for integrity plans and for monitoring the

implementation of adopted codes of ethics.

D.3. Practical measures

D.3.1. Production of sample anti-corruption clauses.

D.3.2. Promoting the introduction of anti-corruption clauses in all contracts.

D.3.3. Introduction of integrity pacts.

D.3.3. Introduction of integrity assessments and certificates.

D.3.5. Promoting business and trade union activities to prevent corruption.

D.3.6. Definition of internal procedures for reporting suspected corruptive conduct in

companies.

D.3.7. Complete transparency in procedures relating to the transformation of ownership of

legal entities in state ownership.

D.3.8. Inclusion of successful efforts by companies to prevent and detect unethical business

conduct in the criteria for granting business achievement awards.

D.3.9. Regular training on the dangers of corruption and opportunities to prevent it in the

private sector.

D.3.10. Consistent refusal to acknowledge income received from illegitimate payments in

the tax procedures.

D. Non-governmental organisations

No state can successfully prevent corruption without assistance from the non-governmental

sector. Civil society in Slovenia is very poorly organised in relation to anti-corruption efforts.

Except for individual attempts by some in the media, its influence is not felt, and there are no

active NGOs in Slovenia that address the problem of corruption. The basic principle on which

NGOs function in developed countries, is that they are organised themselves, which ensures

their objectivity and the impartiality of their work, especially when monitoring the

functioning of the state. There is a growing recognition that the state can encourage civil

society activities first through appropriate legislation, and providing assistance in the

organisation of various forms of civil society action, by leaving some areas of its activities to

civil society and finally by part financing these activities. Only in this way can all the

professional and human potential of a country be employed in the prevention of corruption.

A precondition for this are clear legal rules on all possible relations between state bodies and

civil society. The Republic of Slovenia still has considerable work to do in this area; the

media and general public are given special chapters in this Resolution, given the importance

of their role.

E.1. Legislative measures

This area requires the following action to be taken:

E.1.1. Analysis of regulations on the organisation and functioning of all state bodies with

the objective of discovering opportunities for civil society to be included in the disciplinary

procedures of these bodies.

E.1.2. Formalising the possibility of NGOs participating in the work of state bodies in all

three branches of power and leaving individual tasks of state bodies to the non-governmental

sector.

E.1.3. Adoption of standard, transparent criteria for financial assistance to national NGOs,

definition of minimum annual spending on this area, establishing conditions for supervision

over the use of this assistance and determining safeguards to ensure the independence of

organisation financing.

E.1.4. Application of codes of ethics for all NGOs and associations thereof.

E.1.5. Review of legislation on the criminalisation of corrupt conduct of persons in the non-

government sector and application of necessary changes.

E.2. Institutional measures

Although it is extremely important that initiatives originate from civil society itself, it is

nevertheless possible to find ways of improving the current situation:

E.2.1. Use of existing NGO associations, particularly the Centre for Slovenian Non-

Governmental Organisations (CNVOS), to directly coordinate the work of organisations in

similar fields.

E.2.2. Creation of effective mechanisms to deal with violations of legal and ethical norms

within all organised forms of civil society.

E.3. Practical measures

The most important tasks in this area are as follows:

E.3.1. Cooperation between trade unions and professional and business associations in

creating codes of ethics.

E.3.2. Effective provision of information to the non-governmental sector on the availability

of domestic and foreign funding for their activities.

E.3.3. Ensuring genuinely transparent procedures in the handling of NGO funds.

E.3.4. Implementation of independent research into integrity, individual ethical problems

and corruption in Slovenia.

E.3.5. Coordination of NGOs in the field of ethics and integrity to apply considerable

pressure on known cases of unethical or corrupt conduct in society.

E.3.6. Active inclusion of NGOs in the work of the Commission for the Prevention of

Corruption.

E.3.7. Regularly informing the public of civil society positions on individual cases of

unethical or corrupt conduct in the country.

E.3.8. Plan the promotion of all organised forms of civil society by area of operation to

raise their profile and consolidate the public sense of identification with them and consolidate

the ethical principles for their functions.

E.3.9. Inclusion of NGOs in appropriate international anti-corruption associations.

E.3.10. Giving NGOs the knowledge to receive reports on the violation of legal and moral

norms, which the person making the report does not what to send directly to a state body, and

sending these reports to the appropriate state body; popularising this role for NGOs.

E.3.11. Drawing up agreements on cooperation between state bodies and NGOs.

E. Media

In most countries the media, as shapers of public opinion, plays an important role in

preventing and combating corruption, not only by highlighting individual cases, but also by

raising anti-corruption awareness in general. Given the power and importance the media has

in shaping public opinion, journalism is one of the professions most exposed to various forms

of pressure. Activities must therefore be planned to assist journalists in raising ethical

standards in a specific environment, to focus as much attention as possible and ensure their

independence, objectivity, professionalism and impartiality.

F.1. Legislative measures


F.1.1. Analysis of existing regulations on the media with regard to possibility of

inappropriate influences on the work of journalists to remove any journalistic dependence,

direct or indirect, on such influences.

F.1.2. Creation of regulations that will ensure that journalists have genuinely equal status

with owners and management within individual forms of media in the adoption of decisions

of importance to actual journalistic work, including personnel related issues.

F.1.3. Analysis of regulations on the status of media houses as legal subjects under

commercial law to ensure full transparency of ownership and prevent monopolies.

F.1.4. Analysis of Slovenian journalism's code of ethics with respect to possibilities of

clarifying ethical principles that ensure objective and ethically correct journalistic work,

independent of all attempts at corrupt influence.

F.1.5. Study possibility of additional legal strengthening of journalistic independence and

enforcement of their liability in the case of a violation of existing legislation and the code of

ethics for journalists.

F.2. Institutional measures


F.2.1. Organising media houses to enable journalists to exercise their rights, particularly in

the cases of violations of their independence.

F.2.2. Enhance internal mechanisms to deal more effectively with violations of legal and

ethic norms by journalists.

F.2.3. Appoint an internal media ombudsman.

F.3. Practical measures

This area requires the following action:

F.3.1. Introduction of initial and supplementary training for journalists on the dangers,

forms and methods of illegitimate influence on their work and on the possibilities of opposing

such influences.

F.3.2. Introduction of initial and supplementary training for journalists on the most

common forms of corruption in Slovenia.

F.3.3. Introduction of regular analysis of anti-corruption media articles to ascertain the

independence of state institutions on their content; publication of analysis results.

F.3.4. Ensure media support to positive anti-corruption efforts by state bodies.

F.3.5. Introduction of a special annual prize for journalists for achievements in the field of

exposing and preventing corruption.

F.3.6. Ensure suitable pay for journalists.

F.3.7. High level of publicity for decisions by journalists' Court of Honour of significance

to corruption.

F.3.8. Application of internal procedures for reporting conduct suspected to be against the

journalism's code of ethics to the journalists' Court of Honour.

F.3.9. Consistent provision of legal protection to journalists in cases of refusal to provide

information or obstruction on the part of state bodies.

F.3.10. Ensure transparency of the basic elements in negotiations between advertisers and

the media.

F.3.11. Clear separation of advertising and journalistic activities within individual media.

F. GENERAL PUBLIC

The efforts of all state and non-governmental institutions in preventing corruption will be

unsuccessful, if the majority of the population is not involved in some manner in those efforts.

Increasing anti-corruption awareness, developing among individuals and generally a culture

of refusal to accept any unethical and illegal gain of any advantage or benefit, changing ways

of thinking about the role, status and rights of individuals in relation to state institutions, does

not occur spontaneously in transition states such as Slovenia. In addition to all the other anti-

corruption activities that can motivate individual citizens only to a limited extent, state

institutions must pay considerable attention to lasting, well planned measures to achieve these

objectives. Only in this way can we expect to see a long-term improvement in the situation,

especially in improving understanding of the causes and consequences of corruption among

the majority of citizens. As there is always the risk that this form of communication with the

public may be misused, measures from this chapter must be completely apolitical and can in

no way be linked to any political party, in government or opposition.

G.1. Legislative measures

There is not a large number of possibilities in this area:

G.1.1. Improving regulations on the transparency of all state body operations (documents,

procedures, responsible persons, …), where there is no obstacle relating to the protection of

confident data or personal data.

G.2. Institutional measures

The development of new institutions exclusively for this area is not necessary.

G.3. Practical measures

Most of the objectives in this chapter can be achieved through appropriate practical

conduct:

G.3.1. Creation and implementation of permanent, public campaigns that are balanced and

properly oriented, with special focus on selecting the most important target groups,

particularly young people, using all modern social marketing tools (audio-visual methods,

posters, promotions, themed campaigns) and the mandatory design of a logo, slogan and

single "corporate identity" for the campaign with the aim of presenting the causes and

consequences of corruption.

G.3.2. Implementation of activities as part of or in addition to the campaign such as:

production and regular publication of audio-visual promotional messages, regular columns in

periodicals, publication of data on corruption in other environments, production of special

free-of-charge brochure, organisation of "anti-corruption days" in micro-environments and

other events.

G.3.3. Production of a simple manual for secondary school pupils on the functioning of the

state, with a description of basic tasks and institutions and the rights of the individual in

relations with them.

G.3.4. Development of anti-corruption content within existing education programmes in

primary, secondary and tertiary education.

G.3.5. Production of simple, free-of-charge anti-corruption handbook for all citizens.

G.3.6. Media friendly publication of results of empirical research into corruption.

G.3.7. Encouragement for more attention from various sectors of the population by

organising various competitions, such as selecting the best anti-corruption story, poster,

drawing, etc.

G.3.8. Review of possibilities of including religious institutions in anti-corruption efforts,

implementation of acceptable actions.

G.3.9. Organisation of anti-corruption workshops and lectures for citizens in specific

environments.

VII. INTERNATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION COOPERATION

The Republic of Slovenia already cooperates in international efforts to combat and prevent

corruption. As part of the process of international integration it has already adopted a range of

binding international instruments, while there remains work to be done in this field. Current

tasks that the state must continue to perform in the future are presented below in relation to

the relevant international organisations of which Slovenia is a member.

1. United Nations Organisation – UN

The Republic of Slovenia has already signed up to the "Convention against Transnational

Organised Crime" and its three protocols, which was adopted in Palermo on 15 November

2000 and will ratify it soon. The adoption of the "Convention against Corruption" in

December 2003 as the only binding legal act in the field means that Slovenia must in time

sign up to and adopt that document as well.

The UN regularly reviews the standing of its members in regard to corruption and the

Republic of Slovenia will have to continue to submit reports, and after the Convention

against Corruption comes into force it will become a member of the assessment mechanism

that will assess the enforcement of the convention by UN members.

2. European Union

After Slovenia's accession to the European Union, it will have to further its fulfilment of

existing and new obligations binding on EU members. Slovenia will continue to meet the

provisions of the Preaccession Pact Expert Group on Organised Crime – PAPEG and meet the

obligations of the Stability Pact Anti-Corruption Initiative – SPAI.

On Slovenia's accession to the European Union it fulfilled the criteria for accession to a

number of conventions that apply to EU members that address corruption partly or in their

entirety: the Convention on the Protection of the European Communities' Financial Interests

of 27 November 1995 with its three protocols and the Convention on Corruption of EU or

Member Officials of 25 June 1997.

Slovenia was active in all forms of reciprocal cooperation between the EU and candidate

countries and in the future will carefully implement all tasks arising from cooperation

between Slovenia and the European Anti-Fraud Office – OLAF.

3. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development – OECD

In 2004 the Republic of Slovenia will be subject to the first inspection of the specialised

OECD corruption body - the Working Group against Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in

International Business Transactions, which will assess the harmonisation of Slovenian

legislation with the provisions of the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign

Public Officials in International Business Transactions, while in 2006 and 2007 the next visit

and supervision of the next phase will take place - implementation of the convention in

practice. As the results of this supervision are very significant to the OECD decision on

whether to accept Slovenia as a member, it will be the subject of special attention.

Slovenia will also have to strengthen its cooperation with the OECD Public Management

Committee – PUMA.

4. Council of Europe

The Republic of Slovenia must continue its work with the Council of Europe's Group of

States against Corruption – GRECO. Other Council of Europe programme of significance to

preventing and combating crime that Slovenia must take part in are as follows: PACO

(Programme against corruption and organised crime in South Eastern Europe), OCTOPUS

(Programme combating corruption in South Eastern Europe) and MONEYVAL (Council of

Europe Select Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering Measures).

5. International Chamber of Commerce

In 1996 this institution, of most importance to the commercial sphere, adopted a set of Rules

of Conduct to Combat Extortion and Bribery in International Business Transactions as a code

of ethical rules for businesses that are not compulsory, but that application of which sends a

clear message about a national economy.

It is important for Slovenian companies to directly apply these rules to their business

operations, or to incorporate them into their own code of ethics.

6. Regional initiatives

As a newly formed state, the Republic of Slovenia has been and will be subject to a range of

initiatives to join regional anti-corruption initiatives, and has sometimes been responsible for

launching them. Slovenia's membership of the European Union and other international

organisations provides an opportunity to review the participation of Slovenia in various

regional anti-corruption initiatives, particularly given the country's material and human

resource potential.

VIII. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESOLUTION

Simply adopting this Resolution without a carefully planned approach to its implementation

will not help raise public awareness in Slovenia, improve the quality of state body operations

or help in the development of an overall anti-corruption culture within the state. As the

content of the Resolution refers to state bodies, the private sector and civil society, its

implementation will only be possible with the conscientious and voluntary implementation of

the planned measures. If the state uses compulsion on the private sector or civil society it

could have negative consequences, which means that measures aimed at supervising

implementation of the Resolution must be designed to leave most initiatives in the hands of

their final implementers and users, while ensuring at least a minimal level of coordination,

monitoring and continual assessment of the performance of implemented measures.

Performance deadlines, criteria and the responsible parties and other important preconditions

to the implementation of the adopted programme will be set out in a special document -

Resolution Implementation Action Plan.

1. Responsible bodies

The Resolution shall be adopted by the National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia, and

the Action Plan by the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption.

Information on the implementation of the Resolution shall be collected, assessed and

evaluated by the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption.

Reports on the implementation of the Resolution to the Commission for the Prevention of

Corruption will be prepared by those responsible for individual actions, as set out in the

Resolution Implementation Action Plan.

2. Proposed procedures

The Commission for the Prevention of Corruption shall adopt the Resolution Implementation

Action Plan within six months of the adoption of the Resolution, which will, in accordance

with the measures set out in Chapter VI "Preventing and Combating Corruption in the

Republic of Slovenia", define: guidelines for sector-based anti-corruption programmes, clear

objectives for individual measures, the parties responsible for their implementation, the

methods of implementation, priorities and deadlines for their implementation, expected costs,

risk factors and success criteria.

Parties responsible for measures to prevent and combat corruption in Slovenia shall first

report on their work to the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption within six months of

the adoption of the Resolution Implementation Action Plan and every 12 months thereafter.

Reporting shall be compulsory for all state bodies, while other responsible parties shall be

invited to do so.

The Commission for the Prevention of Corruption shall within three months of the receipt of

reports from responsible parties, compile a report on the implementation of the Resolution

giving the major successes, problems, and risk factors and offering an assessment of the

implementation with a proposal for further measures, and if necessary, proposals on the

accountability procedures with regard to not implementing or poor quality implementation of

the Resolution within state bodies. It shall submit the report to the National Assembly of the

Republic of Slovenia. The report shall be published in full, following its adoption by the

National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia.

Inasmuch as the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption finds during the reporting

period that immediate amendments should be made to the Resolution, or that other urgent

action should be taken for its implementation, it shall charge the responsible party with its

implementation and describe this in the regular report to the National Assembly.

Inasmuch as responsible parties propose amendments to the Resolution in their reports, and

the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption is also of the opinion that these amendments

are important to Slovenia's anti-corruption efforts, the National Assembly shall be informed

of the proposals of the responsible parties and the Commission itself. Inasmuch as the

Commission does not agree with the proposals of responsible parties, it shall inform them

thereof and provide an explanation thereof.

The Commission for the Prevention of Corruption shall every three years, with reference to

the actual situation in Slovenia and the regular annual reports, check the need for general

amendments and any other specific changes to the content of the Resolution. It shall include

its findings in its next regular report to the National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia.

No. 212-05/04-33/1

Ljubljana, 16 June 2004.

EPA 1224-III

Vice-President of the National

Assembly of the Republic of

Slovenia

Valentin Pohorec

resolution on the prevention of corruption in the republic ... · assembly of the republic of...

Documents