The work of the National Integrity Commission leaves to be desired. Two years after its foundation, the Commission’s powers are ambiguous, its budget is small, the personnel are insufficient, while its work is worrisome. Such conclusions are contained in a study made by the Association for Participatory Democracy ADEPT, IPN reports.

One of the authors of the study, ADEPT associate expert Mariana Kalughin said one of the concerns refers to the low efficiency of the control over the income and property statements submitted by public servants. In the first half of this year, there were carried out 121 inspections, 55% of which based on notifications.

The low number of investigations that resulted in criminal cases over submission of false statements and in administrative penalties imposed for not declaring the conflicts of interests is also worrying. Last year, the National Integrity Commission informed the competent bodies only about 28 of the cases of violation identified. Other shortcomings refer to the lack of deadlines by which the statements must be examined, the excessively formalized procedures and the insufficiency of staff. There are 26 persons who must analyze 110,000 cases.

Mariana Kalughin noted that these problems are generated by a multitude of causes, which can be removed by implementing the legislative and normative documents adopted by the Government and Parliament. The legal framework concerning the foundation of the National Integrity Commission should be reviewed. Financial resources should be allocated to the Commission based on its needs. The personnel and the salaries should be increased and the staff should be continuously trained. The parties must not become involved in the appointment of the members of this Commission.

The National Integrity Commission is an independent and autonomous public authority whose task is to implement the mechanism for examining and controlling the income and property statements filed by persons holding public posts.