The integrity of institutions according to KDI: Cut police, eventually political parties

The Kosovo Democratic Institute (KDI) has unveiled key findings in the assessment of the National Integrity System in Kosovo for 2023. This is the third assessment made in Kosovo, after those in 2011 and 2015, reports Online Economy.

Eugen Cakoli said the National Integrity System (SIK) is part of Transparency International <x1) holistic approach to fighting corruption, through assessment of the legal base and current performance of relevant institutions in the corruption combating system, in aspects such as resources, independence, accountability, integrity, interaction and roles.

“The SIK therefore estimates the overall institutional efficiency in fighting corruption and fighting phenomena with abuse of power. The assessment, which is the result of almost two-year research, shows that over the past eight years, institutions in Kosovo have generally noted progress in their integrity systems, especially in terms of transparency and accountability measures. Many of the improvements recorded in the assessment have been largely due to public pressure, international requirements or implementation of commitments made under the Agency for European Reform or the approach of legislation to acquis of the EU”.

While there is a broad perception in Kosovo that the legal framework is highly consolidated, and problems are only in its implementation, in fact, the assessment has calculated shortcomings in both the legislation regulating the functioning of institutions, especially in relation to ensuring independence, resources and internal integrity mechanisms, as well as the general anti-corruption legal framework. But it is clear that all institutions have problems with implementing laws and fulfilling their obligations and role in fighting corruption.

He has clarified that KDI has estimated that the average level of integrity in all institutions is only 67 out of the possible 100 points, therefore, a barely passed note; and that it is insufficient to have an efficient fight of corruption and integrity governance.

“According to SIK assessment, the three institutions or pillars with the highest level of integrity are the National Audition Office (83.3 out of 100 points); Ombudsman (79.5 out of 100 points) and police (75 out of 100 points). While the pillars or institutions that rank at the bottom of the list are political parties (58.3 out of 100 points); Public companies (50 out of 100 points); and businesses (45.8 out of 100 points).

If we compare the level of integrity in the three main powers turns out that the justice system leads 69.7 points, followed by the executive to 65.9 points, while in the end it is Legislative with only 60.4 points”.

The key problems that are recorded in this report are related to the failure of corruption cases from the justice institutions, the impact of executive and other acts on the work of other institutions through the division of budgets, public statements or recruiting processes; the absence or failure to implement integrity and accountability mechanisms, as well as the lack of full transparency over the way political subjects and candidates spend. Lack of adequate resources, especially financial, human and infrastructure, also negatively affects the role and performance of institutions in fighting corruption”.

According to him, considering the results of this assessment, KDI estimates that reforms are necessary to address inclusive challenges identified, such as resource, transparency level, accountability or integrity mechanisms.

He even said that in terms of resource share, the immediate focus should be on addressing shortcomings in financial, human and infrastructure resources in institutions. Accessing adequate resources is essential for optimising the performance of institutions in fighting corruption.

“Prohibiting external interventions and influences, especially political ones, are critical of preserving the independence of institutions. This is especially true in relation to the institutions of the justice system, which must be guaranteed independence, especially financial. While considering the performance of the latter in combating corruption, it is needed as soon as possible to strengthen the accountability mechanisms of judges and prosecutors, envisioning penalties for poor performance. The vetting process should ensure higher levels of integrity of the leaders of the justice system.
rigorous implementation of courtesy codes and extraction of them into institutions that do not have them should be seen as a priority for promoting integrity measures. Also regulated by law should be the issue of lobbies in institutions or public officials who have decision-making powers”.

“Transparency in decision-making processes must be increased, especially in Government and Parliament. The opening of these processes not only promotes public confidence but also significantly contributes to promoting a more responsible government”.