Serbia in the bottom half of the world list on the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index
Transparency Serbia (a member of the international organisation Transparency International) presented today the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) 2019. CPI is the most renowned global ranking of countries by the perception of corruption in the public sector. Serbia is still considered a country with a high level of corruption because it has 39 of the ideal 100 points. Serbia now occupies a place in the lower half of the world list with that score because it is 91st out of 180 countries. Although the fight against corruption is still one of the priorities, Serbia's score is the same as in CPI 2018. There have been no significant changes for more than a decade.
According to TS, Serbia's stagnation in research on corruption is the least that can be expected in a situation where the government openly violates and relativises the anti-corruption rules it proposed, and the prosecution does not provide clear answers to publicly expressed and documented suspicions of corruption.
Concentrated political power and citizens' support for the fight against corruption has not been used to strengthen institutions and the rule of law, ensuring that the accountability system functions regardless of the existence of "political will", especially without a "political order". The 2013-2018 anti-corruption strategy, in which the "zero tolerance of corruption" was announced, and the Action Plan for Chapter 23 of EU integration (2016-2018) has not been fulfilled. The reasons for these omissions have not been discussed in the Assembly.
Although the assessments of the European Commission and international observers were often critical, the pressure was not strong enough to lead to a significant change. This was shown by the example of amendments to four laws important for financing the campaign and preventing the misuse of public resources for party purposes from December 2019. Namely, these changes did not eliminate even those problems that the ODIHR pointed out to Serbia in 2016, although the European Parliament has also joined the dialogue on electoral conditions.
Over the past 12 months, the long-standing disregard for the government's legal obligation to select directors of public companies and assistant ministers in competition has grown into open claims that political control of acting officials, who can be replaced at any time and without any explanation, is actually a good thing. With an increase in the number of decisions of the Commissioner for information that remained unfulfilled, insufficient transparency of work remains a significant problem
Anti-corruption mechanisms have been suspended when contracting the most significant infrastructure projects. In addition to interstate agreements, which have been used for a long time to avoid competition, supervision and transparency, during 2019, several "laws for one project" were passed, which have a similar effect. In addition to the possible damage to the budget due to the conclusion of contracts under conditions that have not been tested on the market, irreparable damage is inflicted on trust in the legal order.
More details on the Corruption Perceptions Index and results
For the twenty-fifth year in a row, the Corruption Perceptions Index has been compiled by the leading anti-corruption organisation on a global level, Transparency International. This year, 180 countries and territories were ranked, the same as a year earlier. Countries are scored on a scale from 100 (very clean) to 0 (very corrupt). This year, Serbia is ranked 91st (last year 87th), with a score of 39, which is the same assessment as the previous year. We share this place with Turkey. The drop of four places led to Serbia being on the lower half of the world list, where it was in 2006.
Changes in Serbia's score have been minimal for more than a decade. With a score of 39, Serbia is in the group of countries with widespread corruption (below 50). This score places us four points below the world average (43) and 19 points below the average of our continent, and 27 points behind the average of the part of Europe of which we want to become a part.
At the top are New Zealand and Denmark with 87 points, and at the bottom Somalia with 9, South Sudan with 12 and Syria with 13. Among the former socialist countries of Europe, the best place has Estonia with almost 74, and from the former SFRY Slovenia with 60. Of the non-EU countries in the broader region, the perception of Georgia is the best (56). Montenegro received better grades (45), while Bosnia and Herzegovina (36), Northern Macedonia and Albania (35) were ranked slightly worse than Serbia. Special research is being done for Kosovo; the score is 36.
The CPI takes into account 13 relevant surveys that measure perceptions of public sector corruption. These surveys represent the opinion or impression of the corruption of state officials and public servants by those who do business with them or who advise business people, governments and international institutions. Surveys must be published in the last 24 months, and there must be at least three such data sources for a country/territory to be ranked.
This year, Serbia is included in a total of eight relevant surveys (same as for 2018), which guarantees an even higher degree of reliability of the findings and comparability of data with those from previous years. The following surveys were: Global Insight Country Risk Ratings, Bertelsmann Foundation, World Economic Forum, Economist Intelligence Unit, Freedom House, International Country Risk Guide, World Justice Project Rule of Law Index and Varieties of Democracy Project.
Five of the surveys relevant to Serbia were published in 2019, two in 2018, and one in 2020 (some were conducted during 2018). Estimates for individual surveys range from 34.93 to 43.07. The standard deviation is (2.48).
A statement from Transparency International on the promotion of the CPI emphasises the need to address the problem of political corruption. TI points out that those countries that have comprehensive rules on campaign finance and apply them in practice have a CPI score of 70, while those countries that either do not have such regulations or do not apply them well have half the average. Serbia is one of the countries with numerous rules regarding the financing of parties and campaigns, but they have remained a dead letter on paper.
To address political corruption, TI proposes, among other things, controlling campaign funding, reviewing preferential treatment when concluding contracts with the state, regulating conflicts of interest, regulating lobbying and open decision-making, strengthening the integrity of the election process, supporting civil society activities, whistleblowers and the media and respecting principles of separation of powers.
We remind that last year Serbia regulated lobbying for the first time and changed the laws governing the conflict of interest of public officials and campaign financing, but that these reforms have not been used to increase the publicity of the decision-making process, prevent the "functionary campaigns", increase the transparency of funding and the accountability of the Anti-Corruption Agency for omissions or selectivity in performing controls.
