What happened to the corruption prevention reform?
Appeal to the Government
by Libenter ATS (Catholic University, Libera, Ethical Foundation)
with ASeS – Farmers Solidarity and Development, ISTeA, Gran Sasso Science Institute (GSSI), Monithon, Reactive Citizens, Renaissance Green, University of Turin
The transparency must be the essential premise for the success of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan, but the perception is strong is putting himself in danger the possibility of "widespread control" of citizens over the PA, which Italian law recognizes as an institution belonging to the corruption prevention family and that we are setting out on the first dangerous road than how Italy will go to spend the approximately 235 billion of resources (European and Italian) for the many reforms and the even more numerous investment projects envisaged by our National Recovery and Resilience Plan. To prevent this from happening, transparency must be effective, detailed and timely. Starting, for example, with the reforms that Europe is asking of us by the end of 2021: who is writing them? With what idea of country? More precisely, we think the announced revision of the so-called anti-corruption law (190/2012) and of the so-called transparency decree (33/2013): how is it justifiable for the public decision-maker to get involved without even consulting the citizens, who are directly interested in it? The complaint comes from Libera, Ethics Foundation and Libenter ATS, ASeS – Farmers Solidarity and Development, ISTeA, Gran Sasso Science Institute (GSSI), Monithon, Reactive Citizens, Renaissance Green, University of Turin
“The Italian National Recovery and Resilience Plan itself- they write in a note Libera, Ethics Foundation and Libenter ATS, ASeS – Farmers Solidarity and Development, ISTeA, Gran Sasso Science Institute (GSSI), Monithon, Reactive Citizens, Renaissance Green, University of Turin – in fact provides (among others) the reform of that body of rules (Law 190 of 2012 and subsequent application decrees) which makes the management of the common good fully accessible, usable, accountable, monitorable and assessable both by the institutions in charge and by the citizens. But we are concerned about that our PNRR looks at the law for the prevention of malfeasance as one of the "regulations that fuel corruption" (this is precisely the title of the chapter in which this reform provision is contemplated, on page 69 of the PNRR), specifying that these provisions "from antidotes to corruption they have often become an occasion for corruption”. It is true that it introduces excessive bureaucracy. But discrediting a whole body of law that allows the public machine to evaluate itself and be evaluated risks "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". This in favor of a formula that looks at simplification as the only antidote: an antiquated vision already condemned by history and sector studies. Second the timetable of the PNRR, this reform was to see the light in June 2021. Five months after deadline still nothing is known about the process of modifying the law 190: this increases our fears. The perception you get – the signatories denounce– is that the prevention of corruption is not one of the main priorities of the moment, with a consequent lack of commitment on the matter by our State. Despite the many alarms that come from the agencies of llaw enforcement national and international, as well as by the judiciary regarding the risks of infiltration into the legal economy of the criminal enterprise and, through corruption, of mafia infiltration, for the umpteenth time in history our country risks having to act when it is already too late , with only the weapons of repression.
Libera, Ethics Foundation and Libenter ATS, ASeS – Farmers Solidarity and Development, ISTeA, Gran Sasso Science Institute (GSSI), Monithon, Reactive Citizens, Renaissance Green, University of Turin they ask the President Mario Draghi, to the Italian government and parliamentarians not to contravene what the Union Treaty (Articles 1 and 15) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union (Articles 41 and 42) proclaim on several occasions that the European Administration, including that of each of the Member States, it must be complete and transparent.
We remind the Government that the EU regulation 2021/241 (so-called "resilience and recovery device") calls for the involvement of stakeholders in the phase (as well as drafting) of execution of the PNRR. In particular we askor to be able to know the progress of the reform, announced and then disappeared from the information radar, also providing for civic involvement through hearings; boost up, and not weaken, the institutions related to right to know provided for by Law 190/12 (i.e. all forms of civic access) and the institutes of self-monitoring envisaged by the State bodies also taking into account the relational nature of the corruption phenomenon; strengthen the section “Transparent Administration” on PA websites, with a major standardization and usability of published data, at the same time facilitating the PAs in their transparency obligations through technological innovation, in particular with the computerized feeding of the information flows in the AT section. In this regard, a single must also be guaranteed PNRR data portal, which is also designed by collecting the many civic proposals already available; provide specific obligations also in terms of simplicity/usability, so that transparency means not only open data (which are the basis), but also the organization of data "in the shape of an ordinary citizen".
In conclusion- they write Libera, Ethics Foundation and Libenter ATS, ASeS – Farmers Solidarity and Development, ISTeA, Gran Sasso Science Institute (GSSI), Monithon, Reactive Citizens, Renaissance Green, University of Turin it's not just the “what” is missing from the PNRR – transparency, in fact – but also the "who" is missing - civil society - which must be urgently put on the table of the Government.