OECD: There is no way to understand Bulgaria corruption abroad – World
Is it possible that a country from the lower unions, considered by its citizens to be the most corrupt for years, does not export corruption abroad? The answer, according to a new report to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), is that the situation is unknown.
And it is not known, because the Bulgarian authorities have practically no investigations into Bulgarians gathering in another country. The same applies to the transfer of money for bribes abroad through Bulgarian companies. As well as for the termination of the participation in the Bulgarian public procurement of foreign citizens, tried for fraud and corruption in another country. There is no effective legal framework for holding citizens accountable for corrupt practices – or related to this violation – outside Bulgaria.
In the absence of cases of this type, it is not possible to assess whether the law enforcement agencies are doing an effective job and even how useful the training of magistrates on this topic is, which Bulgaria reports to the OECD. Although it was recommended to be introduced 10 years ago, there are still no adequate statistics on Bulgaria’s international cooperation with other countries.
The conclusions are from a report released a few days ago on the Working Group on the Collection of International Business Transactions, responsible for the implementation of one of the OISR conventions. It is for combating the gathering of foreign officials in international business transactions and is associated with its tools and came into force in Bulgaria in the last century – in early 1999.
These are the main measures – organizational and legislative – affecting cases of Bulgarian individuals and legal entities, as well as the Bulgarian company, belonging to the persons in the corrupt actions of the citizens of other countries. The previous report was from 2011 followed by a mid-term review in 2013, which found that 8 out of 28 were fully implemented (partially – another 8 and not 12)
The report of 14 October 2021 is on the occasion of the Fourth Phase of the Review of the Implementation of the OECD Convention against Bribery. Work on it began in 2016, approved on October 14, 2021 by representatives of the 44 pages of the organization and was announced on October 22.
The very first sentence in the publication notice is unequivocal: “Detecting, prosecuting and protecting the attention of foreign corruption are things that are sorely lacking in Bulgaria and the situation needs to be significantly improved, including extensive changes in the law.”
Among the identified new works are specific, such as
take urgent action on raising awareness of the risks of foreign corruption among all relevant public and private stakeholders
– ensure that allegations of foreign corruption are properly assessed by the competent authorities, undertake appropriate inspections and tests and direct the prosecutor’s attention to how important it is to act against strangers
adoption of legislation ensuring clear and national protection against revenge from foreigners reporting allegations of corruption.
One of the systemic problems that has been going on for a decade is that there is no anti-corruption clause in public procurement contracts and it is not checked whether a foreign candidate company is known to be involved in fraud and corruption. The recommendation was initially opened to the Procurement Agency, but then Bulgaria was declared to the OECD as the state body that regulates the announcement and award of contracts that are not responsible for the award of specific contracts. The advice for this PPA is interested in the internal control or ethical rules of the candidates of the companies, nor in the comparison with the data of the international financial institutions. Thus, it is shown that the World Bank has pointed out 5 Bulgarian companies that have performed prohibited activities (fraud and corruption).
The text takes into account and changes the changes in the texts such as the update of the Code of Criteria and the new law on combating money surveillance, the efforts for training of law enforcement agencies, the cooperation between institutions, as well as the financial intelligence in the financial sector. For some of the measures, there is a position that they may not be proportionate and effective – such is the sanction for keeping accounts that cover up corruption. Here, the fine reaches BGN 10,000 for companies, but the author points out that this is only 5,100 euros – which is hardly a problem for business, especially what is ready to be included in the corruption scheme.
Mentioned and cases, such as the one in which the Bulgarian prosecutor’s office knows, but does nothing, about a Bulgarian citizen accused of fraud and bribery in connection with a bank loan in another country. The general was that there was no need for a Bulgarian parallel investigation, because the Bulgarian pleaded guilty and was tried and the crime was not committed on the territory. In another case, it concerns the consideration of spending money for bribery through the Bulgarian “hollow” company and a request for cooperation from another country to the Sofia Prosecutor’s Office. No preliminary inspections or pre-trial proceedings were initiated for the same reasons.
“The lead inspectors (from the OISR group) are seriously concerned that the absence of detention, investigation and prosecution of cases of foreign corruption in Bulgaria continues, especially on allegations that have been made public or that the group has provided information to the Bulgarian authorities, “the report’s authors wrote in a commentary on the matter. and misuse EU funds, but it is recalled that it also has commitments under international instruments such as the OECD Convention.
Your visit to Bulgaria in May by representatives of the group, discussion of the free hours of the media and the role of the source of data on the mentioned type of corruption. At the meeting it was said that you publish about corruption “quickly fade away” because “public authorities do not respond to questions and inquiries from the media.” It is difficult to reach public information due to the undesirableness of the authorities and the weak cooperation with them, the report says.
The authors also cite cases of legal harassment against one of Dnevnik’s and Capital’s publishers. Economedia and Ivo Prokopiev are not explicit, but it is said that “judicial harassment against independent media continues to intensify. In particular, in May 2020, Reporters Without Borders mentioned the case against the publisher on charges of privatization fraud.” According to the RSF, the process appears to be an example of “growing political pressure against a large independent media group” from “politically controlled agencies” in response to journalistic investigations, revealing unpleasant truths about corruption cases.
According to BN data, the leading pages for foreign direct investment from Bulgaria in 2020 are:
– Luxembourg
– United Arab Emirates
– Czech Republic
– Moldova
– Northern Macedonia
– Liechtenstein
The last more indicative of the normal operation of the business was 2019 and then investing from Bulgaria to other countries were 332 million euros. dollars against 1.2 billion dollars. dollars invested directly in Bulgaria.
Bulgaria must inform within a year what it has done for the prosecution in the context of the Convention on Legal Entities and the Protection of Informants. After two years, a Bulgarian written answer to what has been done for everyone should be submitted to the OECD working group.