An exclusive interview of President of the Council of Europe Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) Marin Mrcela with the Interfax-Ukraine News Agency Q: Ukraine became a member of GRECO in 2006. After 6 years, what is your opinion on the issue of corruption in this country, and how effective is the cooperation with Ukraine in the framework of GRECO? A: In GRECO's findings from its Evaluation Report on Ukraine in 2007 we stressed that the reforms to fight corruption should – above all – be about consolidating democratic principles, the rule of law and institutional reforms. This requires a long term approach and strong political commitment. In that perspective, six years are a rather short period of time, and one cannot expect all problems to be solved so rapidly. That said, GRECO was encouraged to note in its Compliance Report of 2009, that almost all recommendations have been addressed to some extent. Initiatives have been undertaken, for example, to reform the judiciary, the civil service as well as the criminal legislation on corruption. However, to date only part of the reforms have been carried through. In its most recent Compliance Report of 2012, GRECO expressed its regret that the pace of reforms so far had been very slow, and that the legislative process was riddled with obstacles. Therefore, GRECO continues to monitor closely the measures taken by Ukraine to implement the outstanding recommendations. In this context, it is important to note that Ukraine is assisted by the Council of Europe's co-operation services, in the framework of the Council's „Action Plan for Ukraine 2011-2014“, for example in developing a detailed action plan for the implementation of the new anti-corruption strategy for 2011-2015. Q: What is your assessment of the anti-corruption legislation and its implementation in Ukraine? Where do you see problems and what is are the possible ways of solving it? A: Please let me refer to GRECO's Evaluation Report of 2011. It deals with the criminalization of corruption. GRECO pointed out that the recent criminal law reform in this area was incomplete and has even added more incongruity to the terminology used in the corruption-related provisions. For example, the concept of a “bribe” is not broad enough to capture any non-material advantages, and instances such as the promise of, and request for, an advantage do not constitute completed criminal offences. Such loopholes are incompatible with the Council of Europe’s Criminal Law Convention on Corruption. In addition, the existence of parallel criminal and administrative systems of corruption offences gives rise to manipulation, for example, to escape from the justice process. The recent reforms have not resolved this problem. Another significant loophole is that legal persons are still not criminally liable for corruption offences. It is crucial that those deficiencies be remedied, because they hamper the effectiveness of the anti-corruption legislation and its proper implementation. Q: What is your view on the reform of the judiciary in this field? A: One of GRECO's recommendations of 2007 which are concerned by the judiciary reform is still subject to the compliance procedure. The recommendation to „enhance the independence of the Procuracy from political influence and to provide it with a clearer mandate focused on the leading of pre-trial criminal investigations and prosecutions“. At this stage, I cannot pre-empt the assessment of the current reforms in this area, which will be carried out by GRECO early 2013. I have noted, that the European Union last month expressed its disappointment about the amendments to the law on public prosecution, but as I said, we will have to look into this matter more in detail soon. Q: In 2007 GRECO published its Joint First and Second Round Evaluation Report on Ukraine, in which it concluded that corruption in Ukraine constitutes a real threat to the principles of democracy and the rule of law. The fight against corruption can therefore not be treated in isolation from democratic reforms. Is this assessment still on the table or is something changing – is it getting better or worse? A: As mentioned earlier, reforms to fight corruption effectively require a long term approach and strong political commitment. In my view, it would be premature to make an overall assessment of the situation in Ukraine. On the one hand, as recently as 2011, GRECO stated it was concerned to hear that there was some resignation and a pervasive sense among Ukrainians that political parties are established and used for private gain, and that politicians have not served them well and that democracy has failed to deliver on its promise. On the other hand, it should be noted that the recent anti-corruption strategy for 2011-2015, clearly recognizes that corruption in Ukraine has reached the level of a systemic problem and that more ample reforms are needed. I am hopeful that the action plan under preparation – with the assistance of the Council of Europe – (to which I have referred above) and its implementation will be an important step in the right direction. However I should add, that GRECO has expressed its concerns on several occasions, that civil society needs to be involved more broadly in the reform process. Q: The Evaluation report addresses 25 recommendations to Ukraine. Have they been implemented? A: In its most recent Compliance Report of 2012, GRECO noted that twelve of the 25 recommendations addressed to Ukraine in 2007 had been fully implemented, including for example the implementation of a functional administrative justice system, the preparation of a plan for the reform of the public administration, the further development of the operation of the Justice Academy such as training for judges on corruption-related issues and further preventive measures. That said, a large number of recommendations have only been partly implemented to date, given that many reforms have not yet been completed in a satisfactory manner. That is why GRECO will continue with a follow-up procedure, in which it expects the authorities of Ukraine to present a further report on measures taken by the end of this year. Several fundamental issues, such as the independence of the judiciary, the existence of judicial and administrative processes in parallel and the liability of legal persons in respect of corruption offences still need to be further assessed. Q: In 2011, GRECO stated that parties and election candidates in Ukraine could become dependent on powerful businesses or shadow financing, as they rely entirely on private funding. The election campaign already is ongoing. What is your assessment on this issue in the current election? A: I hope you will understand that I wish to refrain from commenting on the ongoing election campaign. A proper assessment of the situation can only be made after the elections. It is clear however, that issues such as heavy influence of business interests on politics and shadow financing need to be addressed, for the sake of the democratic process. As the pre-electoral delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe put it recently, the 'oligarchisation' of Ukraine's politics, the merging of political and economic interests, is a matter for serious concern. Q: According to deputy of the head of the Central Election Commission Mr.Magera, the main problem on this parliamentary election is bribery of voters. Will this issue be a matter of your attention? A: I think it should be clear that any forms of corrupt behaviour are unacceptable and need to be addressed. Of course we will also keep an eye on issues such as vote-buying, but it is not strictly speaking in the focus of our current evaluations.