Today is the international day against corruption. Corruption is a complex social, political and economic phenomenon that affects all countries. At times, it even undermines democratic institutions by distorting electoral processes. For this reason, it perverts the rule of law and creates bureaucratic quagmires, whose sole reason for being is to solicit bribes. International Anti-Corruption Day 2022 aims to highlight the crucial link between the fight against corruption and peace, security and development. Its core is the notion that the fight against this crime is a right and a responsibility of all. Only through the cooperation and involvement of each and every person and institution will we be able to overcome the negative impact of this crime. And of course, Spain is no stranger to this phenomenon and, therefore, neither is our Community.
I am not going to write about brothers, nor cousins, nor about young people under guardianship, nor about hits with the purchase of masks, nor about minor contracts awarded by hand. I want to comment on some issues that, in my opinion, are of interest, about the only public body that exists in our community to fight against corruption and its relationship with the citizenry, and which is none other than the Agency for the Prevention and Fight against Fraud and Corruption in the Valencian Community. This was created on November 28 with its accompanying law (11/2016).
In the first paragraph of its preamble, it emphatically emphasizes that many of the causes of corruption are due to the lack of development of the democratic system. This happens because no real mechanisms for citizen participation have been created. In its section IV, it stands out that said agency was created as an instrument for the prevention, investigation and combat of fraud and corruption and, in addition, it was created in order to protect whistleblowers. Already in its article 1, in its 3rd section, it states that it is created to prevent and eradicate fraud and corruption in Valencian public institutions. That said, we can undoubtedly highlight the relevance of citizen participation and the prevention of corruption as major objectives of this agency.
So much so, that following the first paragraph of the law of October 15, 2019, three years after its creation, the first members of the participation council were appointed. All of this had a clear and specific objective, to promote the real participation of citizens and to be an advisory body. Everything indicated that it would be so, but it only pointed it out. I must be critical regarding the fulfillment of its objectives, not only of the council, but of the agency itself in matters of corruption prevention. Go ahead my total and absolute support for this type of organizations, I have been promoting and encouraging them since 2014 when almost nobody spoke about them.
For me, public-private collaboration is not a concept empty of content, moreover, it is the future of public administrations and this is sometimes not clear. But I am not talking about a submissive and alienated collaboration with the administration or its leaders, but rather a collaboration that provides different points of view, along with professional experiences to add and grow. In short, efforts and solutions must be added. In my opinion, real citizen participation is one that once assumes the problems and interests of society, has the task of generating effective development policies in the areas of its action, and is not satisfied with just complying with the formality. to meet 2/3 times a year (for mere cosmetic purposes and not real).
For sample, a button. The prevention of corruption in public administrations should be an absolute priority and believe me, it is not that complicated. In the private part, the obligation to prevent crime already exists, and it could be defined as follows: “it would be a series of administrative processes, to hinder or prevent access to public administration. As well as other sectors of it, companies or other commercial instruments used as a vehicle (weapon) for the looting of public money. Through the imposition of a series of obligations to certain persons or entities of the public administration that operate in said sectors, in such a way that the breach of these obligations would constitute an administrative offense. Punishing themselves with sanctions of a high amount of fines, professional disqualifications and their publications”. We should only have set about defining them, and promoting their legislation.
We should not settle for just promoting whistleblower protection, as if there were no tomorrow, as if it were a panacea and that, with this, corruption processes could be ended. Reporting channels are important, but in themselves they neither slow down nor hinder criminal processes, since they do not affect the initial phase of their commission and, therefore, the opportunity to commit them continues to exist. Of course, I will not deny its usefulness, but it arrives (in a very high percentage) when the crime has already been committed. We keep running late. And three mouse clicks away, and there is no trace of the money.
The agency is 6 years old. In all this time its benefits and its defects have been seen. It would therefore be interesting to be able to enhance its strengths and correct its weaknesses. You could start with the participation council, which needs a good dose of real and non-formal participation. It is not just about reaching prestigious European institutions, we are talking about citizen participation. We talked about letting my neighbors from Torrefiel and Orriols know about the agency. On the other hand, the agency itself should add to its discourse, something that it only boasts in its name, which is "the prevention of corruption in public administrations". To date, it is only focused on investigating those complaints that enter through its complaint mailbox and the whistleblower protection law. A pity. We remain reactive.
The agency was created in the hardest years of public corruption. Perhaps, using this issue as an excuse, from the party that created it, there was the conviction that the private party should not be present in any way, in the anti-fraud agency (once again, ideology prevailed over common sense). In fact, you cannot by law hire anyone who is not a civil servant. What it entails, that within it there is a very particular and uniform vision, without any other point of view with which to contrast. The wealth provided by a joint vision (public-private) of criminal processes is essential for functioning in line with reality. The Valencian anti-fraud agency needs changes and some major ones. There is little point in having a participatory council, so as not to use it as such.
I cannot finish without saying that this is not about people, that nobody understands my criticism of them. Quite the contrary, the agency's staff has left their skin, (and leaves it) in the performance of their duties. All my admiration for them. Long live Antifrau!
