• Home
  • City
    • ALBANIA
    • AMSTERDAM
    • ANDORRA
    • ANNECY
    • ANTWERP
    • ATHENS
    • AUSTRIA
    • AVIGNON
    • BARCELONA
    • BELARUS
    • BELGIUM
    • BERLIN
    • BILBAO
    • BORDEAUX
    • BRNO
    • BRUSSELS
    • BUDAPEST
    • BULGARIA
    • CAEN
    • CALAIS
    • CROATIA
    • CZECH_REPUBLIC
    • DEBRECEN
    • DENMARK
    • DIJON
    • DUBLIN
    • ESTONIA
    • FINLAND
    • FLORENCE
    • FRANKFURT
    • GENEVA
    • GENOA
    • GERMANY
    • GLASGOW
    • GREECE
    • HANNOVER
    • HELSINKI
    • HUNGARY
    • ICELAND
    • INNSBRUCK
    • IRELAND
    • ISTANBUL
    • KRAKOW
    • LIECHTENSTEIN
    • LILLE
    • LIMERICK
    • LISBOA
    • LITHUANIA
    • LONDON
    • LUXEMBOURG
    • LYON
europe-cities.com
  • Home
  • City
    • ALBANIA
    • AMSTERDAM
    • ANDORRA
    • ANNECY
    • ANTWERP
    • ATHENS
    • AUSTRIA
    • AVIGNON
    • BARCELONA
    • BELARUS
    • BELGIUM
    • BERLIN
    • BILBAO
    • BORDEAUX
    • BRNO
    • BRUSSELS
    • BUDAPEST
    • BULGARIA
    • CAEN
    • CALAIS
    • CROATIA
    • CZECH_REPUBLIC
    • DEBRECEN
    • DENMARK
    • DIJON
    • DUBLIN
    • ESTONIA
    • FINLAND
    • FLORENCE
    • FRANKFURT
    • GENEVA
    • GENOA
    • GERMANY
    • GLASGOW
    • GREECE
    • HANNOVER
    • HELSINKI
    • HUNGARY
    • ICELAND
    • INNSBRUCK
    • IRELAND
    • ISTANBUL
    • KRAKOW
    • LIECHTENSTEIN
    • LILLE
    • LIMERICK
    • LISBOA
    • LITHUANIA
    • LONDON
    • LUXEMBOURG
    • LYON

PORTUGAL

Portugal with high risk of corruption in the Defense area

Sugar Mizzy November 16, 2021

Alfredo Maia

Today at 00:20

Portugal is among the 17 countries with a high risk of corruption in the Defense area, ranking 49th in the 2020 assessment by Transparency International, which analyzed 85 countries.

With 44 points out of a possible 100, Portugal is below the European average of 59, indicates the 2020 assessment by Transparency International (TI), released on Tuesday.

In Portugal’s risk group, the worst rating goes to Chile (34 points) and the best to Indonesia (47). The score is inversely proportional to the risk of corruption, on a scale from zero (critical critical risk, where there are 18 countries) to 100 (very low risk). Only New Zealand is in this group, with 85 points, while Sudan occupies the worst position on the scale, with five points. There are 17 countries at very high risk, 24 at moderate and eight at low risk.

TI, which assesses the quality of controls to manage corruption risks in defense and security institutions, emphasizes that Portugal registered a positive evolution compared to 2015, with emphasis on political risks and associated with personnel management, but there are still problems in prevention and mitigation of risks from lack of inspection.

According to the executive director of Transparency International Portugal (the national chapter of TI), Karina Carvalho, cited in the organization’s communiqué, the Assembly of the Republic “continues not to exercise the entire spectrum of supervisory powers” that it has and the Parliamentary Defense Commission does not oversees the oversight ministry “with the detail and distance that competes with it.

Operational risk with zero points

The document notes a “sharp difference between the public reporting of information” by the Ministry and by the different branches of the Armed Forces, noting that the effort to publish data by the tutelage is not accompanied by the General Staff of the FA, “whose public presence is practically non-existent”.

“An operational risk area is the one that stands out the most in the negative, with a score of zero points”, underlines the press release from TI Portugal. “In a context where the action of the FA becomes increasingly complex operational theaters, implying logistical chains with many intermediaries and chains of command, the lack of specific military doctrine on the risk of corruption is less and less understandable”, considers Karina Carvalho .

Indeed, “almost all countries score poorly in the area of ​​safeguards against corruption in the military”, with an average score of just 16 points, and “most countries lack anti-corruption measures as a central pillar of the newspaper its missions “. Among those with a “particularly low score in this area are countries that contribute to or lead large international military operations, such as the United States (18/100), France (10) or Bangladesh (zero)”, the document reads.

Moderate to very high risk arms exporters

TI data on the other hand indicates that 62% of countries had an overall score of 49 points or lower, indicating a high to critical corruption risk. This is also the average score for the 20 richest countries (G20), he adds.

The report also stresses that “86% of global arms exports between 2016 and 2020 originate from countries with a moderate to very high risk of corruption in their Defense sectors”. The five largest exporters alone – the United States (55/100), Russia (36), France (50), Germany (70) and China (28) – accounted for 76% of the global total.

“Almost half of global arms imports (49%) are made by countries that register a high to critical risk of corruption in Defense matters”, but parliamentarians, auditors or a civil society cannot scrutinize the deals, nor are there control data on how they choose which companies to buy from or whether third parties are involved, which “leaves the door wide open to bribery, the waste of public money and the discovery of weapons in the hands of criminal associations or terrorist groups.”

Related Posts

PORTUGAL /

Águas de Portugal workers in strike promise to continue to fight for salary increases

PORTUGAL /

Online sports betting in Portugal

PORTUGAL /

weather. Why is it cold in Portugal and hot in Finland? – Observer

‹ Employer knows in one click which Brussels resident has not been vaccinated › Prague gathers and publishes information about greenery in the city

Recent Posts

  • Will the West push Russia out of the Arctic?
  • San Marino. Unions and the Government sign the stabilization agreement for the precarious PA
  • Adding Finland and Sweden to NATO is not without risks
  • NEW EVENING OF THE ROSE FESTIVAL Toulouse Toulouse Wednesday July 6, 2022
  • OPEN AIR FESTIVAL Toulouse Toulouse Friday, July 8, 2022

Categories

  • ALBANIA
  • AMSTERDAM
  • ANDORRA
  • ANNECY
  • ANTWERP
  • ATHENS
  • AUSTRIA
  • AVIGNON
  • BARCELONA
  • BELARUS
  • BELGIUM
  • BILBAO
  • BORDEAUX
  • BRNO
  • BRUSSELS
  • BUDAPEST
  • BULGARIA
  • CAEN
  • CALAIS
  • City
  • COLOGNE
  • COPENHAGEN
  • CORK
  • CROATIA
  • CZECH_REPUBLIC
  • DEBRECEN
  • DENMARK
  • DIJON
  • ESTONIA
  • FINLAND
  • FLORENCE
  • FRANKFURT
  • GENEVA
  • GENOA
  • GREECE
  • HELSINKI
  • HUNGARY
  • ICELAND
  • INNSBRUCK
  • ISTANBUL
  • KRAKOW
  • LIECHTENSTEIN
  • LISBOA
  • LITHUANIA
  • LUXEMBOURG
  • LYON
  • MALTA
  • MARSEILLE
  • MILAN
  • MOLDOVA
  • MONACO
  • MUNICH
  • NAPLES
  • NETHERLANDS
  • NICE
  • NORWAY
  • PARIS
  • PISA
  • POLAND
  • PORTUGAL
  • PRAGUE
  • ROME
  • ROUEN
  • RUSSIA
  • SALZBURG
  • SAN_MARINO
  • SIENA
  • SLOVAKIA
  • SLOVENIA
  • STRASBOURG
  • SWEDEN
  • SWITZERLAND
  • THESSALONIKI
  • TOULOUSE
  • TURKEY
  • UK_ENGLAND
  • UKRAINE
  • VENICE
  • VERONA
  • VIENNA
  • WARSAW
  • ZURICH

Archives

  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • September 2008
  • June 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2007
  • January 2002
  • January 1970

↑