To support our advocacy work on concrete legislative proposals and recommendations, we collaborate with partners from the Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovakia to prepare and publish reports, case studies, data analyses, and examples of international best practices.
Duration: 1 August 2014 – 31 March 2016
The project aimed at monitoring and evaluation of enforcement of anti-corruption policies and legislation in the Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovakia, in four thematic areas relevant to the prevention of political corruption and misuse of public funds:
As part of the project, we analyzed and identified weaknesses in the national anti-corruption legislation, its implementation, and practice in these four areas, and formulated recommendations for the three member states on the basis of our own data and findings as well as international standards and good practice:
Partners:
Co-funded by the Prevention of and Fight against Crime Programme of the European Union.
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the European Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
Supported in part by a grant from the Foundation Open Society Institute in cooperation with the Think Tank Fund of the Open Society Foundations.
Duration: 1 December 2012 – 31 July 2014
The project’s long-term goal was to build the capacity of front-line national and EU level civil society organisations (watchdogs) by networking and sharing their know-how, and thereby contributing to a more coordinated and efficient fight against political corruption and misuse of public funds within the EU. Specific project objectives included:
Comparative study: Public money and corruption risks
The study compares Czech, Polish, and Slovak regulations and practice, identifying major gaps both in the national and EU legal framework that fundamentally increase the risk of political corruption and mismanagement of EU funds. The report results from a year-long research by local teams of lawyers, economists and political analysts, and “shadows” the first EU Anti-corruption report published in early 2014. Analyzing major risks of political corruption in the management of public funds, the study sheds light on why millions of euros continue to be misused and why implementation of EU funds regularly ends up in criminal prosecution in all three studied countries. It concludes that European Commission and the three studied member states were ineffective in regulating anonymous and offshore recipients of funds and allowed management and oversight of the programs to be riddled with political conflicts of interest. The report includes a number of concrete examples from all three Member States and offers a set of recommendations for both national and EU level decision-makers. Read more about the study findings.
Read the full report: Public money and corruption risks
Other selected project outputs:
Partners:
With the financial support of the Prevention of and Fight against Crime Programme European Commission - Directorate-General Home Affairs.
The project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This communication reflects the views only of the author, and the European Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
The project was supported by a grant from the Open Society Foundations.
Brussels, Prague – The European Commission today published the European Grids Package (EGP), a comprehensive set of measures aimed at strengthening energy security and competitiveness across the EU.
After one year of rushed and frenzied political decision-making on the Omnibus 1 package, the EU has come to a decision.
The revised EU Sustainability Reporting Standards have been significantly reduced down to just one-third of the original disclosures.
Under intense pressure to cut reporting obligations and prioritise deregulation over transparency and safeguards against greenwashing, Europe's leadership in setting sustainability standards is at risk. While the new standards provide a functional framework, their application relies on companies approaching implementation in good faith.
