Die Auseinandersetzung mit Korruption in Mittel- und Osteuropa[en] 

The EU has adopted the following legal instruments and measures to combat corruption:

• Convention on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests (entered into force on 17 October 2002);
• Convention on the fight against corrup tion involving officials of the European Communities or officials of the EU Member States (not yet ratified);
• European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) was set up address corruption within EU institutions.

In its Communication on a comprehensive EU policy against corruption, released in May 2003, the European Commission proposed measures for preventing and combating corruption in Europe.

The Communication on a comprehensive EU policy against corruption proposes 10 principles for improving the fight against corruption in acceding, candidate and other third countries:

• To ensure credibility, a clear stance against corruption is essential from leaders and decision-makers. Bearing in mind that no universally applicable recipes exist, national anti-corruption strategies or programmes, covering both preventive and repressive measures, should be drawn up and implemented. These strategies should be subject to broad consultation at all levels.
• Current and future EU Members shall fully align with the EU law and ratify and implement all main international anti-corruption instruments they are party to (UN, Council of Europe and OECD Conventions). Third countries should sign and ratify as well as implement relevant international anti-corruption instruments.
• Anti-corruption laws are important, but more important is their implementation by competent and visible anti-corruption bodies (i.e. well trained and specialised services such as anti-corruption prosecutors). Targeted investigative techniques, statistics and indicators should be developed. The role of law enforcement bodies should be strengthened concerning not only corruption but also fraud, tax offences and money laundering.
• Access to public office must be open to every citizen. Recruitment and promotion should be regulated by objective and merit-based criteria. Salaries and social rights must be adequate. Civil servants should be required to disclose their assets. Sensitive posts should be subject to rotation.
• Integrity, accountability and transparency in public administration (judiciary, police, customs, tax administration, health sector, public procurement) should be raised through employing quality management tools and auditing and monitoring standards, such as the Common Assessment Framework of EU Heads of Public Administrations and the Strasbourg Resolution. Increased transparency is important in view of developing confidence between the citizens and public administration.
• Codes of conduct in the public sector should be established and monitored.
• Clear rules should be established in both the public and private sector on whistle blowing (given that corruption is an offence without direct victims who could witness and report it) and reporting.
• Public intolerance of corruption should be increased, through awareness raising campaigns in the media and training. The central message must be that corruption is not a tolerable phenomenon, but a criminal offence. Civil society has an important role to play in preventing and fighting the problem.
• Clear and transparent rules on party financing, and external financial control of political parties, should be introduced to avoid covert links between politicians and (illicit) business interests. Political parties evidently have strong influence on decision-makers, but are often immune to anti-bribery laws.
• Incentives should be developed for the private sector to refrain from corrupt practices such as codes of conduct or “white lists” for faultless companies.

The Commission made the following assessment of the candidate countries regarding corruption in its regular report in 2002: