Parliamentary Ethics Committees

PARLIAMENTARY ETHICS COMMITTEES QUERY SUMMARY Can you help identify good practice in organising Parliaments have a key role to play in the fight against parliamentary ethics commissions? corruption and the duty to uphold to the highest standards of integrity. In recent years, many countries PURPOSE have established comprehensive ethics regimes to ensure that MPs perform their functions in an ethical Our National Assembly is adopting a code of ethics manner, and that encompasses a code of conduct, and asked for our help in setting up a parliamentary specific ethic rules detailing the requirement to fulfil ethics committee. the code and a regulatory institution to enforce these rules. CONTENT The institution charged with monitoring and enforcing 1 Parliamentary ethics: role and organisation of the code is a key contributing factor to its oversight bodies effectiveness. There are three major approaches to 2 Country examples enforcement, including: self-regulation – the 3 References regulatory body is created within the legislature, such as in Poland and Ireland; external regulation – an \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ external body, independent from the legislature, is created; a combination of both – elements of self- Author(s): regulations are combined with an external, Marie Chêne, [email protected] independent regulatory body, such as in France, the United Kingdom and the United States. Date: 25 November 2016 © 2016 Transparency International. All rights reserved. This document should not be considered as representative of the Commission or Transparency International’s official position. Neither the European Commission,Transparency International nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. This Anti-Corruption Helpdesk is operated by Transparency International and funded by the European Union. PARLIAMENTARY ETHICS COMMITTEES 1 PARLIAMENTARY ETHICS: ROLE Irrespective of the approach, it is important to ensure AND ORGANISATION OF that the institution in charge of enforcing OVERSIGHT BODIES parliamentary ethical standards is perceived as legitimate and that its procedures are transparent. In Parliaments have a key role to play in the fight terms of resources, the funding allocated to an ethics against corruption. In most countries they have the committee or regulator are also essential to enable it constitutional mandate to oversee and hold to fulfil its role and ensure its independence. The government to account through their roles in budget should be stable and secure, with the legislation, representation, allocation of resources flexibility to secure additional resources in periods and oversight functions in sensitive areas such as where there are an unusually high number of budget processes. As such, parliaments have the investigations (OSCE 2012). duty and responsibility to set an example of incorruptibility to foster the legitimacy of and citizens’ Self-regulation confidence in the institution and ensure that MPs perform their functions in the public interest instead The first “self-regulation” model has been the of private or partisan political interests (The preferred option in countries such as Greece, International Bank for Reconstruction and Ireland, Germany and Poland (Council of Europe Development/The World Bank 2006). 2009). This involves establishing a regulatory system within the legislature model, either through The adoption of ethics codes can greatly contribute political groups or at the parliamentary assembly to the promotion of high standards of integrity in level. parliaments by establishing a standard for parliamentarians’ behaviour, clarifying acceptable This model typically involves the creation of a special and unacceptable forms of behaviour, and creating ethics committee in charge of dealing with the an environment that is less likely to tolerate unethical reporting, investigations and sanctioning of MPs behaviour (Pelizzo and Stapenhurst 2006). While the breaching the code and relies on the collective self- content of the ethics code provides guidance for control of MPs (OECD 2011). Such standing parliamentarians on ethical conduct, an effective committees typically include members or is even ethics regime also needs to include systems for chaired by members of the opposition. The powers enforcement and sanctions to deter potential to summon and question parliamentarians varies offenders. Thus, comprehensive parliamentary greatly across countries (King Prajadhipok’s Institute ethics regimes usually comprise three key elements: 2009). 1) a code of conduct outlining expected behaviours of legislators; 2) formal and specific ethical rules Another form of oversight involves having the detailing the requirements necessary to fulfil this president of parliament or the house speaker to code, including financial disclosure guidelines; and oversee the code, but this model is not widespread. 3) a regulatory institution to enforce these rules and provide parliamentarians with advice on ethical In the United States, for example, a special ethics conduct (National Democratic Institute 1999). committee comprised of parliamentarians oversees all aspects of ethics violations, from receiving the The institutionalisation of the code – in other words, complaints to recommending appropriate sanctions. which institution is in charge of sanctioning members It has jurisdiction over members and officers of the violating the code – is a major factor affecting the House, can investigate allegations of unethical effectiveness of the code of ethics (Pelizzo and conduct, provides interpretary and advisory rulings Stapenhurst 2006). The key question in this regard and can impose sanctions, but refers the issue to the is to determine whether parliaments can be trusted entire chamber for a final vote (National Democratic to police themselves through a special ethics Institute 1999; Pelizzo and Stapenhurst 2006). committee or whether investigations should be handled by an external, independent body, such as In Germany, the speaker of the parliament is the anti-corruption agency. charged with regulating minor matters (for example, conduct in the chamber, use of improper language or There are three major models for establishing the failure to obey the rules of procedures) while more institution in charge of advising parliamentarians and severe breaches are handled by a dedicated enforcing the rules, with some variations across committee (OSCE 2012). countries, including: 1) self-regulation; 2) external regulation; and 3) a combination of the two. PARLIAMENTARY ETHICS COMMITTEES Self-regulation may be an appropriate option in External regulation by an independent oversight countries where the executive has a tendency to body or individual is perceived by many as more dominate parliaments, and has traditionally been the credible than oversight by an internal parliamentary preferred option to protect parliaments’ committee as it limits the risks of politicisation (OSCE independence from the executive branch (OSCE 2012; King Prajadhipok’s Institute 2009). 2012). In countries where the policies and principle of public accountability are already mainstreamed In 2006, the OSCE parliamentary assembly throughout the public sector, and institutions have recommended participating states to establish an reached a sufficient degree of professionalism, “office of public standards to which complaints about parliamentary ethics committees may be a viable violations of standards by parliamentarians and their option due to their knowledge of their field and staff may be made”, specialised in parliamentary stronger legitimacy. conduct or a general anti-corruption agency upholding standards in all areas of public office The OECD recommends that self-regulation be (OSCE 2012). Similarly, the OECD suggest that supported by “real transparency” and long-term centralised bodies are more suitable for emerging democratic practices of fair and free elections, democracies because they enable greater suggesting that such an approach can best be systematisation and professionalisation of oversight effective and inspire confidence in the context of functions (OECD 2011). stable and democratic tradition, a trusted electoral system and a free media (OSCE 2012; OECD 2011). A key question for external regulation remains to determine to whom external regulators should be However, the capacity of MPs to provide effective accountable. If the body reports to the executive self-control is increasingly questioned as a model branch and/or has judicial powers, this could aimed at restoring public trust in politicians, as the undermine the separation of powers and idea of politicians regulating themselves is unlikely to independence of the legislature (OSCE 2012). retain public credibility. The model has also been criticised for turning legislators into investigators, However, with this approach, the challenge is that it judges and juries, rather than limiting their role to the breaches of the regulations subject to criminal ratification of a judgement reached by an impartial proceedings and therefore may interfere with the adjudicator (GOPAC 2009). As a result, recent years provisions of rules of parliamentary immunity. In have seen a move towards external regulation, partly addition, as an externally-enforced regime, it is likely reflecting a loss of confidence in parliaments’ ability to limit the sense of ownership of the provisions by to regulate themselves

Load more