Accountability Mechanism (MD0073)

5. Strengthen the accountability mechanism of public authorities
Lead implementing
agency/actor State Chancellery, E-Governance Agency, Ministries, other central administrative authorities
Commitment description
What is the public problem that the commitment will address? An efficient and accountable public sector is a precondition for a well-functioning public system. Thus, it is necessary to train civil servants in the areas related to open government/open governance, as well as ensure the implementation of the recommendations of the Court of Accounts (authority that oversees the good functioning of the public sector). Moreover, the commitment addresses the inefficiency of authorities responsible for public service delivery.
What is the commitment? Commitment refers to strengthening the accountability of public authorities.
How will the commitment contribute to solve the public problem? Commitment contains activities related to the improvement of the capacities of public servants both central and local levels, in the areas such as open government/open governance, implementation of recommendations of the Court of Accounts and adjustment of the individual and institutional performance assessment system among authorities responsible for public service delivery.
Why is this commitment relevant to OGP values? Public sector accountability
Milestone Activity with a verifiable deliverable Responsible authority Deadline Progress indicators
Strengthening the capacities of public servants within the central and local public authorities in the field of transparency, access to information, promotion of ethical behavior and integrity of civil servants, etc. State Chancellery, Academy of Public Administration,
ministries,
other central administrative authorities
Annual Number of trained public servants
Ensuring the implementation and monitoring of recommendations of the audit reports of the Court of Accounts Ministries,
other central administrative authorities, State Chancellery
Annual Number of forwarded recommendations,
Share of recommendations implemented
Adjustment of the system for assessing the individual and institutional performance of authorities responsible for public service delivery in terms of quality in the context of providing beneficiary-centered public services State Chancellery,
E-Governance Agency Quarter I, 2020 Individual and institutional performance assessment system developed by including the beneficiary-centered approach

5. Accountability of public authorities

Language of the commitment as it appears in the action plan: Commitment refers to strengthening the accountability of public authorities. [69]

Milestones

5.1 Strengthening the capacities of public servants within the central and local public authorities in the field of transparency, access to information, promotion of ethical behavior and integrity of civil servants, etc.

5.2 Ensuring the implementation and monitoring of recommendations of the audit reports of the Court of Accounts

5.3 Adjustment of the system for assessing the individual and institutional performance of authorities responsible for public service delivery in terms of quality in the context of providing beneficiary-centered public services

Start Date: 2019          

End Date: 2020

Context and Objectives

The lack of government accountability in Moldova has led to a decrease in public trust in the government and an increased risk of corruption. According to the 2016 Global Corruption Barometer, more than half of Moldovan citizens rated the government poorly in fighting corruption, and around two-thirds consider corruption as one of the major issues in the country. [70] This commitment aims to strengthen the accountability of public authorities by building capacities of public servants in areas related to open government and transparency. It also plans to ensure the implementation of the Court of Accounts’ recommendations and adjust the individual and institutional performance assessment system of public authorities.

In Moldova, the professional development of public servants is regulated by law, [71] and the government has approved a professional development plan 2016-2020 for public servants. [72] The IRM Progress Report for the third action plan (2016-2018) noted that the understanding of open government and transparency among public servants in Moldova was insufficient. Therefore, a focus on strengthening capacities in these areas could lead to a better understanding of the concepts and their use, and potentially strengthen accountability of public institutions. The Academy of Public Administration, [73] introduced in the curriculum topics and courses to address these issues, and other institutions are expected to be involved in the process. [74] As written in the action plan, however, this activity is too broad to determine its potential impact. Moreover, the action plan does not include statistics on the number of public servants that will be trained. A needs assessment for training was also not available. Additionally, as of April 2019, there are no consolidated lists of courses or activities in this regard. [75]

Milestone 5.2 deals with the Court of Accounts’ annual audits. The Court of Accounts conducts annual audits of public authorities and provides recommendations on how to best use the public funds. [76] The State Chancellery previously monitored the implementation of these recommendations. According to the former OGP point of contact at the State Chancellery, in the context of the action plan, the ministries will now report to the State Chancellery on their progress, and the Chancellery will follow up with those who did not implement the recommendations. [77] Thus, the Chancellery plans to institutionalize an internal monitoring system for the implementation of the recommendations provided by the Court of Accounts. It expects that public authorities will become more accountable in terms of how public money is spent by the respective ministries and for which activities.

The government also plans to adjust the system for assessing the individual and institutional performance of authorities responsible for public service delivery (5.3). This performance assessment was introduced in Moldova in 2010. [78] Through this milestone, the government will introduce a more transparent framework for performance assessment. This activity is part of a project of the Government of Moldova, financed by the World Bank and implemented by the E-Governance Agency. [79]

In the long term, targeted trainings of public servants, as well as the new individual and institutional assessments on public service delivery, could improve citizens’ experiences with the public sector. Also, the monitoring and supervision conducted by the State Chancellery on the implementation of the Court of Accounts’ recommendations by public authorities could lead to more efficient use of public funds and more visibility of how the public sector functions. However, as written, the relevance of this commitment to OGP values is unclear. The milestones represent internal government activities (namely civil servant training, implementation of recommendations, and adjustment of systems). Furthermore, given the lack of details, the potential impact cannot be assessed as higher than minor.

Next steps

The IRM recommends dividing this commitment into more manageable parts, as the current milestones cover a wide area. Furthermore, better cohesion between the milestones could be achieved, even if activities from other strategies or programs are integrated in the action plan.

For successful implementation of this commitment, the government could ensure that a clear plan is created for the professional development curriculum, and that an assessment of the training needs of public servants is conducted in order for the resources to be efficiently directed. Also, the government could develop a follow-up mechanism to ensure that all Court of Accounts’ recommendations are correctly understood and implemented.

[69] OGP, Moldova Action Plan 2018-2020, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/moldova-action-plan-2018-2020

[70] Transparency International (2016), People and Corruption: Europe and Central Asia, Global Corruption Barometer, http://transparency.ee/cm/files/lisad/gcb_eca_report_web.pdf

[71] Government Decision no. 201 of 11.03 2009 on the enforcement of Law no 158-XVI of 4 July 2008 on the public service and the status of the public servant, http://lex.justice.md/index.php?action=view&view=doc&lang=1&id=331023

[72] Government Decision no.970 of 11 August 2016 on the approval of the training program for public servants 2016-2020, http://lex.justice.md/index.php?action=view&view=doc&lang=1&id=366277

[73] Public Administration Academy of the Government of the Republic of Moldova, http://www.aap.gov.md/

[74] Interview Natalia Bejenar, State Chancellery, OGP Point of Contact, 2 April 2019.

[75] Ibid.

[76] The Court of Accounts of the Republic of Moldova, national legal framework, http://www.ccrm.md/cadrul-legal-1-32

[77] Interview with Natalia Bejenar, State Chancellery, former OGP Point of Contact, 2 April 2019.

[78] Methodological Guide of the Public Servant Assessment, State Chancellery, 2010, http://rapc.gov.md/file/Ghid%20EPPFP%20final.PDF

[79] Modernization of government services project, http://www.egov.md/en/file/4484/download?token=MxH7-NMi; E-Government Agency, News on the modernization of government services project, http://www.egov.md/en/communication/news/modernization-government-services-improved-accessibility-efficiency-and-quality

5. Accountability of public authorities

Completion: Limited

During the implementation period, governmental agencies and civil society organized many professional development trainings for public servants. [93] However, since this commitment was vaguely formulated, the IRM has only identified the capacity-building activities of the Academy of Public Administration as having been carried out under the scope of the OGP action plan. [94] The Academy of Public Administration routinely provides professional development courses for public servants according to an annual plan agreed with the government. [95] It also submits an internal report to the State Chancellery on its achievements. [96] According to the State Chancellery, [97] the Academy organized 13 professional development courses in 2019 for public servants in areas related to transparency, access to information, ethical behavior, and integrity. 325 public servants attended these trainings. [98] In 2020 the Academy provided 17 professional development activities, training 577 persons. [99]

According to the point of contact to OGP, the State Chancellery developed a concept mechanism to monitor the implementation of the Court of Accounts recommendations. [100] On 21 December 2020, the Prime-Minister issued Decision no. 39 on the approval of the Regulation Format (template). The Decision regulates and describes the internal procedure for communication between the structural subdivisions of Central Public Authorities (CPA) with the audit teams of the Court of Accounts during audit missions. At the same time, the Decision regulates the mechanism for monitoring and reporting on the implementation recommendations and requirements issued by the Court of Accounts and submitted to CPA. [101] During the reporting period, to the State Chancellery received 73 Court of Accounts Resolutions for monitoring and oversight. [102]

EGA worked on developing the system for assessing the individual and institutional performance of authorities responsible for public service delivery as part of a World Bank-financed program. [103] With the support of two consultants, [104] EGA finalized the methodology of the assessment, [105] and 32 civil servants were trained on how to conduct the assessment. [106]