Oversight

The OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public Integrity calls on adherents to “reinforce the role of external oversight and control within the public integrity system, in particular through:

a) Facilitating organisational learning and demonstrating accountability of public sector organisations by providing adequate responses (including redress, where relevant) to the sanctions, rulings and formal advice by oversight bodies (such as supreme audit institutions, ombudsmen or information commissions), regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts;

b) Ensuring that oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts that reinforce public integrity are responsive to information on suspected wrongdoings or misconduct received from third parties (such as complaints or allegations submitted by businesses, employees and other individuals);

c) Ensuring the impartial enforcement of laws and regulations (which may apply to public and private organisations and individuals) by regulatory enforcement agencies.”

Questions for self-assessment:

1. In general, are oversight bodies (e.g. supreme audit institutions, ombudsmen, information commissions) and regulatory enforcement agencies free from undue influence of the executive or other branches of power?

There is no legislative framework or mechanisms in place to ensure that oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts are free from undue influence of the executive or other branches of power.
Oversight institutions, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts are only formally independent from the executive in performing their functions and in their internal governance. They enjoy limited, if any, independence in orientations and priorities in conducting oversight activities.
Oversight institutions, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts have sufficient financial and human resources to perform their missions and can choose their priorities. Their managing bodies are appointed through transparent procedures with safeguards against revolving doors, conflict of interest and partisan appointments. They enjoy unrestricted access to a vast majority of public information. They publish and disseminate their reports.
Oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts are not only de jure and de facto independent, but also considered a trusted and independent institution by a significant majority of the population. They enjoy unrestricted and systematic access to information. They publish and disseminate their reports and recommendations. The implementation rate of those recommendation is monitored.

2. Are the oversight bodies responsive to reports about wrongdoings of public bodies?

There is no right to report to the oversight bodies in the legislative framework.
Citizens’ right to report wrongdoings of public authorities to oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts is entrenched in the legislative framework and these bodies are required to record and consider reports, but there are limited (if any) reports. When a report is received, there is limited follow up.
Some oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts process the submitted reports but with considerable delays. Oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts do not inform applicants about the outcomes of their reports.
All oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts usually process the reports submitted with reasonable delays, observing the deadlines set by the legislation. In case of excessive length of proceedings, provisions are established to provide applicants with remedies. Oversight bodies, regulatory enforcement agencies and administrative courts inform applicants about the outcomes of their reports. They disseminate guidance for processing reports received from citizens, e.g. in a form of service charters published on their websites.

3. Do public organisations address feedback received from oversight bodies?

Public organisations do not receive feedback from oversight bodies.
There are deadlines set by the legislation to respond to requests and recommendations of oversight bodies. However, most public organisations do not address the feedback.
There are deadlines set by the legislation to respond to requests and recommendations of oversight bodies. Most of the recommendations of oversight bodies are addressed within reasonable time.
There are deadlines set by the legislation to respond to requests and recommendations of oversight bodies. Feedback from oversight bodies feed into design and reform. The legislature actively supports oversight bodies by regularly monitoring the implementation of their recommendations by the executive and calling for corrective actions and reforms based on these recommendations.

4. Are the regulatory enforcement agencies capable of impartial and efficient enforcement of regulations?

The legislative framework does not include provisions for impartial enforcement of laws and regulations by regulatory enforcement agencies.
The independence of regulatory enforcement agencies in making regulatory decisions without influence from the executive (e.g. a parent ministry) or regulated industries is defined in the legislative framework. However, in practice the managing bodies are not independent and there is no independence in selecting the regulated entities to be inspected and deciding on the measures to be applied, including sanctions.
The independence of regulatory enforcement agencies in making regulatory decisions without influence from the executive (e.g. a parent ministry) or regulated industries is defined in the legislative framework. The managing bodies of agencies are appointed through open and transparent procedures for a fixed term. Revolving doors are still possible, as well as partisan and industry influence in appointing managing bodies. There is independence in selecting the regulated entities to be inspected and deciding on the measures to be applied, including sanctions.
The independence of regulatory enforcement agencies in making regulatory decisions without influence from the executive (e.g. a parent ministry) or regulated industries is defined in the legislative framework. The managing bodies of agencies are appointed through open and transparent procedures for a fixed term. There are provisions preventing revolving doors and partisan or industry influence in appointing managing bodies. There is independence in selecting the regulated entities to be inspected and deciding on the measures to be applied, including sanctions.

Loading...