Team of two local consultants (legal and economic) to strengthen the capacities of NAC in performing anti-corruption proofing of the draft normative acts by evaluating its impact .Vacancy Number: Pr19/01862
Contacts: Ms. Olga Crivoliubic. olga.crivoliubic@undp.orgBackground
Anticorruption proofing of normative acts represents a process of the identification of corruption risks which can emerge in relation to the process of promoting normative acts by public entities, identification of the factors generating such risks and formulating recommendations to exclude such risks in the content of draft normative acts. It was introduced as a mandatory tool in 2006 and is carried out by the National Anticorruption Center. The current methodology for anticorruption proofing expertise was adopted in 2017. According to the Integrity Law no.82/2017, anticorruption proofing has the following objectives: - Prevention of corruption acts by excluding the risk factors from the draft normative documents; - Information of the authors and of the public at large on the risk factors and corruption risks identified in a draft document; - Offering supplementary guaranties that the legislative process is in compliance to the citizens’ interest and the public interest.
Within the corruption proofing process, the NAC experts identify the legal norms’ corruptibility factors and formulate conclusions and recommendations on excluding or diminishing their effects. According to the NAC 2018 Activity Report, out of the total of 1015 drafts that were subject to anticorruption proofing expertise, 327 - were draft laws (in 2017 - 301), 629 - draft Government decisions (in 2017 - 511) and 59 - departmental draft acts (in 2017 - 30). According to the Report, the most frequent corruption risks identified through the anticorruption proofing were ambiguous formulations that allow for abusive interpretations – 595; lack / ambiguity of administrative procedures - 580; legal loopholes - 465; duties/powers that allow derogations and abusive interpretations - 416, etc., as well as the risks related to conflicts of interest and / or favoritism, excess of service duties, undue influences, influence peddling, active corruption, passive corruption, etc. The practical application of such uncertain norms and provisions, without additional clarification, creates favorable conditions for corruption acts. Of the total recommendations submitted in the anticorruption expert reports and accepted by the authors of the projects in 2018, the efficiency of anticorruption proofing expertise amounts to approximately 70% (in 2017 - 59.56%). According to the Study “Legislating the interests: quid prodest (who will benefit)? Findings of the Anticorruption Expertise (2010 – 2015)” commissioned by UNDP in 2016, the highest incidence of the corruption factors in the drafts submitted for the anticorruption proofing expertise was registered in the category of “Excessive discretions of public authorities”, accounting for a total share of 42.2% of the total corruption risks; followed by the category “Ambiguous linguistic formulations” – accounting for 21.0%. A total of seven categories of private interests had been analyzed: exemption from fiscal and customs fees; debt forgiveness; land use change; public-private partnerships; exemptions from trade rules; creation of the industrial parks; and public authorities budget favoring. The analysis demonstrated that most frequently private or corporate interests were promoted in the field of budget and finance and of the labor legislation, social insurance, health and family. According to the estimates of the costs of the draft legislation categorized as promoting some interests (where such estimation was possible), the anticipated public prejudice of normative acts retracted as the result of anticorruption proofing was at 198,340,946 MDL lei (almost USD 10 mln) and public prejudice of normative acts adopted in spite of the conclusions of the anticorruption proofing was estimated at 371,187,304 MDL (USD 18,5 mln). UNDP, through its project “Curbing Corruption by Building Sustainable Integrity in Moldova” (further the Project) aims to strengthen the capacities of NAC in performing anti-corruption proofing expertise of the legislation by evaluating its impact and delivering recommendations on improving the process to ensure a higher impact of anticorruption proofing. In this context, the project intends to contract a team of two local consultants (legal and economic) to assess the impact of the anticorruption proofing of normative acts in the period of 2016 – 2018 and in the period 2019 - 2020 and deliver recommendations on improving the process. Scope of work
The main objective of the assignment is to evaluate the impact of the corruption proofing of the normative acts in the period of 2016 -2018 and 2019 - 2020 and to deliver recommendations on improving the process to ensure the highest possible impact on corruption prevention. The consultancy will be conducted in 2 phases: 1) September – November 2019: Analytical report on the Assessment of the period of 2016 – 2018; 2) February – April 2021: Analytical report on the Assessment of the period of 2019 - 2020 Each of the two Studies will have five major outputs: 1) Methodological framework for the assessment of (anticipated) prejudice caused by normative acts reviewed and adjusted (based on the methodology applied in the Study “Legislating the interests: quid prodest (who will benefit)? Findings of the Anticorruption Expertise (2010 – 2015)” commissioned by UNDP in 2016); 2) Analysis and assessment of the caused and anticipated (substantial) prejudice of normative acts proofread by NAC, including: - Analysis and economic assessment of the (substantial) anticipated prejudice of normative acts retracted as the result of anticorruption proofing; - Analysis and economic assessment of the (substantial) prejudice of legal and normative acts adopted in spite of the anticorruption proofing conclusions/recommendations 3) A typology of draft normative acts generating prejudice; 4) A list of draft normative acts that eluded anticorruption proofing; 5) A set of recommendations on improving current process of proofing to ensure the highest possible impact on corruption prevention. For detailed information, please refer to Annex 1 – Terms of Reference. Requirements for experience
For the legal consultant/team leader
2. Years and sphere of experience:
3. Competencies:
4. Personal qualities:
For economic consultant
2. Years and sphere of experience:
3. Competencies:
4. Personal qualities:
The United Nations Country Team in the Republic of Moldova is committed to workforce diversity. Women, persons with disabilities, Roma and other ethnic or religious minorities, persons living with HIV, as well as refugees and other non-citizens legally entitled to work in the Republic of Moldova, are particularly encouraged to apply. Documents to be included
Financial proposal
The financial proposal shall specify a total lump sum amount, and payment terms around specific and measurable (qualitative and quantitative) deliverables. Payment will be made upon the successful completion of the tasks assigned and submission of the assessment report. Payments are based upon output, i.e. upon delivery of the services specified in the TOR. In order to assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals the financial proposal shall include a breakdown of this lump sum amount (including fee, taxes, communication costs, travel, per diems, and number of anticipated working days). Travel All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal. This includes all travel to join duty station/repatriation travel. In general, UNDP should not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket. Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources. In the case of unforeseeable travel, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses should be agreed upon, between the respective business unit and Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed. No travel is envisaged under this assignment | |||||||||||||||||||
|
2010-2024 UNDP Moldova, Copyright and terms of use | |||||||||||||||||||
