Neither the enterprises managed by the state nor their founders hurry to post relevant information on their websites. Even if practically all the enterprises have websites, only some of them contain consistent information, shows a study of the transparency of the activity of state-run enterprises carried out by Transparency International-Moldova. In total, there were monitored 38 state-run enterprises and joint stock companies managed by the authorities of the central public administration.
In a news conference at IPN, TI-Moldova expert Ianina Spinei said the most summary websites are those of ÎS “Cartuș”, ÎS “Urbanproiect”, SA “Tracom”, SA “Barza Albă”. A large part of the monitored enterprises do not obey the requirements concerning the publication of information. About ½ of them didn’t post the enterprise’s status on the website, most of the statuses being the old ones. 1/3 of the companies didn’t place the internal regulations. Even if about 90% of the enterprises inserted progress reports, these not always meet the requirements applying to annual reports.
Practically all the enterprises that informed about the auditing of financial situations inserted reports on their websites. But these are usually incomplete and are just syntheses or extracts from the main report. As to the information about procurement, about ½ of the monitored enterprises didn’t place annual procurement plans on their websites. No enterprise inserted data about the procurement working groups.
Another aspect mentioned in the study is the investigated decision makers of enterprises. About 100 criminal cases over the activity of state-run enterprises and joint stock companies were started in 2018-2020. Among these are ÎS “Calea Ferată Moldova”, ÎS “Poșta Moldovei”, SA “Metalferos”, SA “Moldtelecom”, SA “Banca de Economii”, ÎS “Aeroportul Internațional Chișinău”, ÎS “Aeroportul Internațional Mărculești”, ÎS “Gările și Stațiile Auto”, ÎS “Administrația de Stat a Drumurilor”, ÎS “Servicii Pază de Stat” etc. Many of the cases featured not decision makers, but engineers, vice directors of branches, train conductors, shop managers, customs brokers and others. Almost each tenth case was dropped.
The study authors also make reference to the audits conducted by the Court of Auditors in 2018-2020. The institution identified multiple irregularities as regards the keeping of accounting records, management of property, planning and making of purchases, leasing out of areas, primarily due to the improper management of enterprises and the administrative bodies’ low level of responsibilities. Even if most of the enterprises that were audited by the Court confirmed the performing of audits, the entities didn’t publish information about the audit result and the measures taken to fulfill the recommendations of the Court on their websites.
The study authors recommend introducing clear requirements concerning the publication of information by joint stock companies or companies with state capital, either these are entities of public interest or not, into the legislation, excluding the legislative inconsistencies related to the nature of the contract with managers of state-run enterprises, considering the opportunity of reviewing or updating the provisions concerning remuneration in units with financial autonomy, including enterprise managers, preventing abusive classification of information about the activity of enterprises, including by informing/training the managers and representatives of founders about the access to information and its publication.
The study was conducted in the framework of the project “Strengthening Democratic Rule of Law: Contribution of Civil Society” that is implemented by Transparency International-Moldova and is financially supported by the Embassy of the Netherlands.
