A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of Warwick Permanent WRAP URL: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/90325 Copyright and reuse: This thesis is made available online and is protected by original copyright. Please scroll down to view the document itself. Please refer to the repository record for this item for information to help you to cite it. Our policy information is available from the repository home page. For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: [email protected] warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications Anti-Corruption Policy in the EU and Reflexive Governance by Andi Hoxhaj Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Degree in Law University of Warwick School of Law Supervisor: Ralf Rogowski March 2017 I Table of Contents Dedication VI Acknowledgments VII Declaration VIII Abstract IX Introduction 1 1. History of the EU Anti-Corruption Policy 5 1.1 The first phase 6 1.2 The second phase 11 1.3 The third phase 17 1.4 Fourth phase 26 2. The EU Anti-Corruption Report 38 2.1 The objectives of the EU Anti-Corruption Report 40 2.2 Perceptions of corruption and experience of corruption in the EU 43 2.3 Public Procurement 48 2.4 Country chapter recommendations 54 2.4.1 Austria 54 2.4.2 Belgium 55 2.4.3 Bulgaria 55 2.4.4 Croatia 56 2.4.5 Cyprus 57 2.4.6 Czech Republic 57 2.4.7 Denmark 58 2.4.8 Estonia 59 2.4.9 Finland 59 2.4.10 France 60 2.4.11 Germany 61 2.4.12 Greece 61 2.4.13 Hungary 62 2.4.14 Ireland 63 II 2.4.15 Italy 64 2.4.16 Latvia 65 2.4.17 Lithuania 66 2.4.18 Luxembourg 67 2.4.19 Malta 67 2.4.20 Netherlands 68 2.4.21 Poland 69 2.4.22 Portugal 70 2.4.23 Romania 71 2.4.24 Slovakia 72 2.4.25 Slovenia 73 2.4.26 Spain 74 2.4.27 Sweden 75 2.4.28 The United Kingdom 75 3. The EU Anti-Corruption Report and Reflexive Governance 77 3.1 Introduction 77 3.2 New Governance in the European Union 77 3.3 The Open Method of Coordination 80 3.4 Reflexive governance 86 3.5 Reflexive law 92 3.6 An analysis of EU Anti-Corruption Report as Reflexive Governance 98 4. Country Case Studies 109 4.1 Introduction 109 4.2 The United Kingdom 110 4.2.1 The EU Anti-Corruption Report for the United Kingdom 110 4.2.2 Political Corruption in the United Kingdom 111 4.2.3 Implementing a Donation Cap in the UK 116 4.2.4 Integrity in Elected officials 117 4.2.5 UK attitude to Ethics 119 4.2.6 Foreign bribery in the United Kingdom 122 4.2.7 Risk-based principles for preventing bribery 125 4.2.8 Bribery of foreign public officials 127 III 4.2.9 Improving the Accountability in the Governance of Banks 130 4.2.10 A review of the financial system failure 132 4.2.11 UK responds to the EU Anti-Corruption Report 136 4.3 Romania 141 4.3.1 The EU Anti-Corruption Report for Romania 141 4.3.2 The EU anti-corruption strategy towards Romania 150 4.3.3 The Mechanism for Cooperation and Verification for Romania 153 4.3.4 The EU Anti-Corruption Report for Romania 159 4.3.4.1 The Judicial System 159 4.3.4.2 The Political System 163 4.3.4.3 Public procurement 169 4.3.4.4 Threat of Corruption in the Healthcare 174 4.4 Albania 180 4.4.1 1990-1997: Corruption as a new political chess game 180 4.4.2 International support to fight corruption in Albania, 1997-2009 188 4.4.3 The EU conditionality and anti-corruption policy in Albania 194 4.4.4 Albanian relations with the European Union 196 4.4.5 Chronology of the relations of Albania with the European Union 197 4.4.5.1 Reforming the Public Administration 204 4.4.5.2 Reforming the Justice system 212 4.5 Chapter 4: Conclusion 219 5. Chapter 221 5.1 Introduction 221 5.2 The impact of the EU Anti-Corruption Report 221 5.3 General limitations of the EU Anti-Corruption Report 230 5.4 General improvements for future EU Anti-Corruption Reports 232 5.5 Protection of Whistleblowers 236 5.6 The legal background of whistleblowers in the EU Member States 239 5.7 Empowering Specialised Anti-Corruption Institutions in the Member State 245 5.8 Supporting a full E-Procurement in the EU and the Member States 252 5.9 Including Organised Crime to the EU Anti-Corruption policy objectives 255 IV 5.10 Inclusion of EU Candidate Countries in the EU Anti-Corruption Report 259 5.11 Conclusion 264 Bibliography 268 V Dedication To my parents, sister, extended Albanian family and my PhD supervisor. I would not have been able to do this without all of your help and unconditional support. VI Acknowledgments I have drawn on the help of many people during the writing of my thesis. I would like to thank my supervisor Professor Ralf Rogowski for his unconditional support and guidance throughout the PhD, and having more confidence in me than I had in myself at times. Without your patient and support it would have not been impossible. I will always be grateful to you for your unconditional support throughout my PhD and my time at Warwick. Patrycja Szarek-Mason, who inspired me to write this thesis and was a source of inspiration for my PhD research. I enjoyed co-hosting Dr. Szarek-Mason at a workshop with Professor. Rogowski at the University of Warwick in February 2014. Colleagues and fellow PhD students at the School of Law and the other departments thank you for your support over the course of the PhD. I would like to thank in particularly the EU Law team, Professor Dora Kostakopoulou. Dr. Ben Farrand, and Dr. Giuliano Castellano for all of your support and guidance. I am indebted for the opportunities you provided and for the conversations that gave me valuable insights into research questions. Gratitude is also due to the following members of Warwick Law School for according me considerable support, guidance, and kindness. Dr. Andrew Williams for his guidance and advice and practical help during the PhD. Dr. Jill Wakefield and Dr. Helen Toner who supported me in my teaching duties. I also would like to thank Dr. William O'Brian and Professor. John McEldowney for giving me the first opportunity to teach at Warwick School of Law. I would also like to thank all the other staff at Warwick School of Law for their friendship and goodwill through the years. Finally, I would like to thank my parents, my sister and my uncles for believing in me throughout the years and supporting me on my studies in the U.K. I would have not been able to study abroad without your unconditional support. I will always be there for you as you sacrificed for me to get a better education than you could. VII Declaration I declare that this thesis is my original work and that it has never been submitted for publication or for examination in any institution of higher learning. Andi Hoxhaj VIII Abstracts This thesis, by evaluating the EU Anti-Corruption Report 2014 and its impact, analyses the development of EU anti-corruption as a policy field. In order to identify key factors that shape anti-corruption policy in Europe, it applies the theory of reflexive governance to anti-corruption policymaking in the EU. The approach of reflexive governance focuses on the new form of interaction between the EU, Member States and Candidate States, in particular the dialogical nature of their relationships and how they influence each other in building ground and incentives for the sustainable development of anti- corruption as a policy field. The dissertation begins with an examination of the four stages of the development of anti-corruption as a policy field in the EU so far. Questions are asked about the involvement of non-state actors in anti-corruption policy making and to what extent Member States and Candidate States have involved non-state actors in shaping anti-corruption policy in the national context. The main part of the thesis is devoted to presenting and applying the theory of reflexive governance in analysing the EU Anti-Corruption Report and its impact and achievement in the UK, Romania and Albania. In its last part, the thesis discusses insufficiencies of the EU Anti-Corruption Report 2014 and offers recommendations for future EU Anti- Corruption Reports, in particular by making proposals how the legal framework can be improved in relation to the protection of whistleblowers. The thesis also makes suggestions how the EU, Member States and Candidate States can make further use of reflexive governance in order to enhance their anti-corruption policies. IX Introduction Since the fall of the iron curtain and the subsequent attempts to enlarge the EU towards Central and Eastern Europe, corruption has emerged as a major policy issue. The EU has engaged with Member States and Candidate States in improving their social and economic developments that are affected by corruption. In its Communications on corruption in 1997 and in particular in 2003 the EU Commission has encouraged Member States and Candidate States to implement international anti-corruption measures promulgated by the UN, the OECD, and the Council of Europe.