A new independent study by Czech, Polish and Slovakian watchdogs identifies major gaps both in the national and EU legal framework that fundamentally increase the risk of political corruption and allow misuse of EU funds. The comparative analysis complements the long-delayed first EU Anti-corruption report released today.
It concludes, among else, that European Commission and the three studied member states have not been effective in regulating anonymous and offshore recipients of funds and allowed management and oversight of the programs riddled with political conflicts of interest in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland.
The “shadow report” on political corruption and misuse of public funds results from a year-long research by local teams of lawyers, economists and political analysts, and is independent of the Commission's findings as well as the governments' views. 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. Up to a third of the EU resources allocated to the countries is not reimbursed by the EU programs and—as the authors of the study believe—this is largely due to the effects of political corruption and lack of rules and transparency. Because of six months delay in publishing its first Anti-corruption report, European Commission did not translate these and other similar findings into the 2014–2020 funding conditions.
“It is not surprising that EU funds are linked with chronic political corruption in the three studied states since not even the basic rules against conflicts of interest are in effect. EU hasn't been successful in convincing the governments to do so,” comments Martin Fadrný, coordinator of the research team.
Read full report – Public Money and Corruption Risks.
Martin Fadrný: martin.fadrny@frankbold.org, +420 775 154 079
Frank Bold – a legal watchdog with offices in Prague, Brussels and Krakow.
Naši politici – gather and publish information about activities of Czech public service and its elected representatives with the emphasis on potential conflict of interest.
Center of Applied Economics – a semi-academic NGO engaged in data-driven research on public sector.
KohoVolit.eu – a non-governmental organization and an eponymous website aimed at promoting democracy by encouraging political awareness of citizens and public control of elected representatives.
Centrum Cyfrowe Projekt – Polska works towards social change and enhancing citizens’ participation through the use of digital technologies and open, cooperative models based on sharing knowledge and other resources.
Slovak Governance Institute – an independent civic association bringing and supporting solutions to increase quality of the process of public funds allocation.
The project was supported by a grant from the Open Society Foundations.
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.
Due diligence under the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) is designed to direct finite corporate resources towards the issues that matter most for people and the environment. At the heart of that effort is prioritisation, defined in Article 9 of the Directive. Having spoken about this topic at the RBA conference this week, I want to share some reflections on what good prioritisation looks like in practice and what pitfalls to avoid.
The Parliament proposal shows that many of the concerns raised through Frank Bold’s research and engagement with policymakers are now entering the legislative mainstream. But the negotiations ahead will determine whether the final framework is capable of addressing the structural weaknesses that continue to undermine trust in the sustainable investment market.
The European Commission has published its draft Delegated Regulation revising the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). The revision follows the Omnibus I Simplification Package and is presented as a burden-reduction measure. Some of it is - but a closer reading reveals a set of changes that go well beyond simplification, departing from EFRAG's technical advice and disregarding formal recommendations from the European Supervisory Authorities. Many of these changes have significant implications for the quality and comparability of sustainability data available to the market and public.
