Corruption and Anti-corruption Policy

Corruption in Central and Eastern Europe

The countries of Central and Eastern European (CEE) have made impressive progress towards establishing (or re-establishing) democracy, the rule of law and a market economy. However, these countries often inherited conditions conducive to the persistence of corruption, such as a tradition of entrenched mistrust of the State. They have also undertaken transitional tasks that are inherently highly vulnerable to corruption, including the privatisation of their entire economies. The result is a situation in which many CEE countries continue to be troubled by relatively high levels of corruption.

In the CEE countries, citizen awareness of corruption has tended to be both overblown and under informed. Although corruption has been a prominent political issue in most of these countries, the character of such awareness has not been such as to exert consistent pressure on elites to behave non-corruptly or to pursue consistent and effective anti-corruption policies. Only in a very small number of countries have civil society organisations been able to fulfil their essential role of making corruption and anti-corruption initiatives a domestic as well as an international issue, and thus contributing to the process of devising effective anti-corruption policies.

As part of the EU accession process, the Commission has scrutinised corruption in the framework of its regular evaluations of the progress of each of the candidate countries towards fulfilment of the so-called ‘‘Copenhagen criteria’’ (the political and economic criteria, and ability to take on the obligations of membership - acquis communautaire). Corruption has consistently been one of the European Union's major concerns in candidate States since its 1997 Agenda 2000 report on the applications of the CEE countries for EU membership and the Commissions 2002 and 2003 Reports on the ten CEE countries make frequent reference to problems of corruption.

The EU's concerns with corruption are understandable, given that corruption can (directly or indirectly) impact on each of the three areas evaluated by the Commission, undermining implementation of the acquis communautaire, the smooth functioning of the single market, and the quality of democratic institutions and core democratic values the Union seeks to represent. The Commission has been able to require the CEE countries to put in place anti-corruption policies. However, its task has been seriously limited by the fact that the EU itself largely lacks an anti-corruption framework, beyond conventions that are narrowly focused and not ratified by a large proportion of member States, and therefore not yet in force.

EUMAP corruption monitoring

In November 2002, EUMAP published a volume of reports based on monitoring of corruption and anti-corruption policies in the ten CEE countries: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.

As for all EUMAP reports, the monitoring was carried out by independent experts and in cooperation with other NGOs. The monitoring was based on a methodology (available on this web-site) developed by EUMAP, in co-operation with Transparency International (TI). EUMAP also co-operated with several TI chapters in the preparation of the individual country reports. Prior to publication, the draft country reports were offered for feedback, critique and discussion at roundtable meetings organised in each of the countries. This critical input then was then incorporated into the final reports, published both in English and the national languages, and launched internationally at the EU and nationally in the monitored countries.

The EUMAP reports addressed the legal and institutional structures and policies with which governments are seeking to combat corruption and the impact of the EU accession process on the development of such structures and policies. A main finding of the reports was that that the EU accession process had on the whole had a major positive impact on candidate States' legal and institutional frameworks for fighting against corruption. However, the EU's role in supporting candidates in their fight against corruption could have been substantially more effective if tackled in a more coherent and consistent way.

With the accession of the first eight CEE countries, the European Union has now admitted a number of countries with persistent and serious problems of corruption. However, now that Commission evaluations of these countries, based on the Copenhagen criteria, have ended, the authority and bargaining power of the EU vis-à-vis these countries has been lost, despite the fact that problems of corruption remain serious in most of these countries. The issue of a lack of a clear set of accession criteria relating to corruption continues to remain important in the case of Bulgaria and Romania – both aiming to accede to the EU in 2007 – as both countries appear to suffer from severe problems of corruption. It will also remain of relevance to countries that are at an earlier stage of talks with the EU, but are expected to join eventually, such as the countries of South Eastern Europe (SEE).

A wider problem is that the EU itself lacks an adequate framework for dealing with problems of corruption, even in the older member States. Although available evidence suggests that administrative corruption is much more widespread in most candidate States than in the vast majority of member States, it also indicates that current member States also do not effectively control the distribution of EU funds, and that high-level corruption is a problem in some of the largest existing member States. The lack of a clear set of criteria for addressing corruption therefore remains of vital relevance to the EU as a whole, as this situation could well undermine the implementation of the acquis, the integrity of the single market and the quality and functioning of democratic institutions

The EU and the Council of Europe’s Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO)

A main recommendation of the EUMAP reports on Corruption and anti-corruption policies was that given the lack of a clear EU anti-corruption framework, the European Union should join the Council of Europe’s Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO), which conducts regular monitoring on corruption in all its members.

In May 2003, the European Commission released a “Communication on a Comprehensive EU Policy Against Corruption”, which did recommend the establishment of closer links between the Commission and GRECO. In December 2003, the European Parliament voted on this Communication and called on the Commission to prepare the European Community's accession to the Council of Europe's two Conventions on corruption. It also called on the two Member States which have still not done so (Italy and Austria) to join the Council of Europe's GRECO.

At present, the European Commission is continuing negotiations with GRECO on the legal obstacles to be overcome for its joining of GRECO. Meanwhile, EU Member States governments have not yet reacted formally to the Commission’s Communication. The European Commission is however hopeful to receive the Council’s reactions during the current Irish Presidency, giving clear indications as to the next concrete steps to be taken.

Follow-up to the EUMAP reports on corruption and anti-corruption policies

A main finding of the EUMAP reports was that a failure to guarantee media independence, in particular for public broadcasting, was a key locus of corruption in many CEE countries. A general recommendation made in the report was that the CEE States should “ensure independence of broadcasting regulators as much as possible, most likely through provisions defining strictly which organisations have the right of representation in the regulator”.

The ongoing EUMAP monitoring on TV Across Europe: broadcasting regulation, policies and democracy will, in part, build on and further develop, these conclusions. Reports based on this monitoring are due to be launched in early 2005 (see also media independence section).

The EUMAP report on corruption is out of print, but the full report is still available online on this site.

If you are interested in being informed about the follow-up work on these reports please click here