ACAs capacities for developing and monitoring the implementation of ac strategies
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
1 j'aime•419 vues
Advanced Training in prevention of Corruption Systems and Methodologies,10-11 November, Vienna Francesco Checchi
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
En vedette
Similaire à ACAs capacities for developing and monitoring the implementation of ac strategies
Similaire à ACAs capacities for developing and monitoring the implementation of ac strategies (20)
Plus de UNDP Eurasia
Plus de UNDP Eurasia (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
ACAs capacities for developing and monitoring the implementation of ac strategies
- 1. ACAs capacities for developing and monitoring the implementation of AC Strategies and Action Plans Francesco Checchi, Anti-Corruption Policy Specialist UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre
- 2. The tasks of preventive ACAs in relation to AC Strategies Anti corruption policy formulation Evaluating the Development of Effectiveness of Implementation Anti Corruption plans Policies Monitoring the Coordinating the implementation implementation of anti corruption of preventive policies policies
- 3. Other necessary functions Conducting Diagnostic and research Promoting international cooperation and mainstreaming the international standards Disseminating knowledge Enhancing civil society participation in the fight against corruption Development and implementation of corruption risk and integrity assessments
- 4. AC strategies and action plans, a special challenge Corruption a complex phenomenon National capacity in this area is often scattered among different agencies No dedicated academic discipline of “anti- corruption,” while the totality of knowledge required spans many different disciplines Anti-corruption policies often developed or revised to meet international obligations New anti corruption activities under development (eg. anti corruption in sectors)
- 5. UNDP CD framework Capacities at three levels Enabling environment Organizational Level Individual level
- 6. Policy formulation; development of the action plan Role of the preventive ACAs: raising awareness, engaging, coordinating, steering EE: Positioning and Coordination framework, enabling exchange of information among stakeholders. Org: structure, internal division of responsibilities/ functions and business processes enable to gather information from the stakeholders, to analyze and to formulate policy options Ind: Capacity among staff to do research, review and formulate policy documents – monitoring frameworks Ind: Existing sectoral specialization of staff in specific sectors. Capacity to outsource
- 7. ORG level: From the AC strategy to individual work plans
- 8. Coordinating and Monitoring the implementation (of the action plan) EE: capacity to coordinate/monitor – with the agencies implementing the plan and promoting coordination among other agencies You need: authority and positioning within the national integrity system – independence – capacity to engage stakeholders (Formal and informal elements) (UNCAC Art 6!) What does it entails for the other agencies? substantial changes in an institution’s day-to-day operations, new organizational arrangements, procedures, instruments, and new knowledge/technical capacities change management > ACA: monitoring relater to awareness raising and training requested to participate in drafting policy implementation guidelines for the various agencies implementing the anti-corruption action plan
- 9. Coordinating and Monitoring the implementation (of the action plan) Org: structure, functions and business processes enable to: gather information from a range of Stakeholders, process inputs received from various sources; communicating with other agencies > interface (focal points) > timeline – procedures – work plans > division of responsibilities > ICT means – databases > outsourcing (partnerships) Ind: RBM, capacity to develop and implement an effective monitoring methodology, including guidelines on reporting and quality control; design and development of data collection tools, actual data collection, capacity to analyze data; capacity to draft meaningful reports.
- 10. Evaluation (of the strategy) Impact ?Less corruption ? Anti corruption system improved? More transparency? The missing link (who does evaluation?) How? combining a series of sources of various type (statistical analysis, perception and experience surveys) Capacities: EE: capacity to promote the evaluation (awareness raising) Training – engagement - non state actors (civil society and NGOs, business) ORG: Time – network for the organization of consultation
- 11. Shortcomings – problems 1) positioning and authority 2) resources and internal processes (time – HR – financial) 3) Technical capacities (lack of training – low salaries – deficient edu system)
- 12. Methodology for capacity assessment of anti corruption agencies
- 13. Thank you! website: http://europeandcis.undp.org/anticorruption Francesco Checchi, UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre Francesco.checchi@undp.org
Notes de l'éditeur
- This various tasks constitute a cycle.. We cannot consider them in isolation. The policy formulation stage is where the framework for the monitoring and evaluation is developed as well and this is often missing.. We have to close this cycle in order to have effective anti corruption strategies and be able to evaluate the impact of the strategy
- The development of anti corruption strategiesanc action plans constitute a special challengeBecause of the nature of the corruption phenomenon, complex, rooted in the culture and traditions, fuelled by economic and societal problems, The phenomenon has various aspects and it is present under different forms in different servicesThe anti corruption strategies have to be multi-disciplinary, based on a series of different analysis and require capacities that are scattered in various agencies , it is very unlikely to have the expertise that you need to develop this strategies in one department. You will need a consultative process and this is why anti corruption strategies provide an opportunity to mobilize national stakeholders around a comprehensive national policy, but at the same time constitute a challenge in terms of prioritization and coordination among many different actors. No dedicated academic discipline, but multiple dsciplinesAC policies and international cooperation .. There is often the development of new tools and the need to update and review the current approach , it is a relatively new science, training and updates are needed and it is hard to keep the pace with the new developments, thisnk for instance about the UNCAC review mechanism.. It is evident that there is a big challenge in making the review really effective.. And evne more to make sure that the exercise contributes to the development of the anti corruption strategy.. The two should be aligned There are constantly new activites - e.g. in sectors
- Positioning that allows you to influence policy, the formulation process is a multi stakeholders exercise: The issue of the stakeholders.. Who are they? > identify and engage the right counterparts.. Civil society is very often left behind as well as the business community, or engaged in a formalistic way.. The international community should be part of the process as well .. Is now engaged mostly as provider of technical assistance but it should be more engaged as a stakeholder ( think about how the state through the UNCAC is taking a commitment vis a vis the other states)How do you manage to steer the process in the right direction ? Without loosing to much time and make the best out of the contribution of all the stakeholders You need the right positioning , not too close to the executive but not too far.. Be able to make pressure and criticize eventually but also to provide independent and constructive inputs for the policy makers organizational and individual level capacities as well Outsourcing capacity having the legal framework to engage with external experts / NGOs .. Understanding of who are the actors to involve in the process
- EE: Capacity to coordinate; to tell to other agencies what to do and how to do it .. Areas of shared competences and possible overlapping should be identified. Accountability lines and the independence of thevarious institutions should be analyzed. Tensions can arise from unclear or duplicated competencies, and from potentialconflict with other independent bodies (e.g. courts).Coordination protocols (memoranda of understanding or similar mechanism) may be useful in preventing potential inter-institutional conflicts.ORG: example you receive reports from other agencies on the implementation of the action plan, you need a procedure that tells how often you need to receive these reports, how it has to be processed , and what to do if an agency is not compliant with the requirements in the monitoring mechnism, you have to have the capacity power to impose certain actions to the other agencies
- Ultimately the impact would be the reduction of corruption , how do we assess that impact is quite complex, the agency will have to have the time and the resources to do this in cooperation with the other actors involved in the measurement of corruption
- Lack of an adequate legislative framework defining powers and functioning of the AC body and providing both for its independence and accountability The fact that the agencies are new and find themselves in front of much more well established agencies like the prosecutors office .. The lack of consideration for the issue of prevention of corruption in many of the countries of the region, > determines the fact that these agencies become a sort of Secretariat for the implementation of the convention and not a body that can steer the policy and take the lead in the development of the anti corruption tools. Ineffective or scarce cooperation with other national bodies and deficient positioning of the agencies within the existing institutional set-up of the country; in particular referring to the conduction of administrative controls – COI - Asset Declarations – Risk Assessments – Handling of Complaints > relation with the law enforcement authorities. Scarce communication at the national and international level, scarce cooperation with the Civil Society Lack of budget and of independence in the procedure of budget drafting; Inadequate facilities and technical means; Low level of salariesLack of specialized learning opportunities and incentives for the staff to grow IND: scarce understanding of the issies of monitoring and evaluation ..Lack of trained staff, in particular with reference to:the UNCAC and other international legal instrumentstools and new methodologies for corruption prevention