AWS' special bureau not expected to curb corruption
Business leaders and public officials were skeptical last week about a proposed bill by Solidarity Election Action (AWS) deputies that would set up a special office charged with stamping out corruption.
Business leaders and public officials active in the fight against the corruption that many international agencies see as rampant said the deputies' proposal would waste taxpayer money because it would simply duplicate tasks already handled by other bodies. They also said the proposed anti-corruption bureau would do little to diminish the country's under-the-table dealings or end the practice of politicians being involved in the private sector while also writing legislation that benefits their own businesses.
"Creating a new institution will be less effective than using the existing ones," said Jeremi Mordasewicz, the Business Center Club president and a construction company owner. "What can an anti-corruption office do if one has to wait for a court ruling for years?"
Many AWS deputies also oppose the idea. One of these is Marek Kempski, head of the Silesian voivodship. Kempski led the fight against corruption in his region last September by establishing a telephone line that allows citizens and officials to report cases of bribery and graft.
Kempski said creating another bureau on top of efforts such as his will just add layers of unneeded bureaucracy. "What may solve the problem are changes in the law and an implementation of existing acts," he said.
As of March 20, 2000, the anti-corruption telephone line registered 1,235 recordings, of which 76 were anonymous. Out of the registered recordings, 52 were forwarded to regional courts and tax offices and 288 were passed on to the police. According to a Dec. 6, 1999 press release from the Silesian voivodship office, six of the recordings turned up credible corruption cases. "We don't know details because the cases are now being investigated, but I expect that some of the offenses may involve the embezzlement of millions of zloty," said Pawel Wieczorek, Kempski's spokesman. "Many of the cases may involve not single persons but entire criminal structures within former state mammoths linked with the coal trade."
In presenting their draft bill, AWS parliamentarians said the country's existing institutions have failed to curb corruption, bribery and graft. What is needed, they argue, is a special agency that focuses on eliminating the problem. In addition to the bureau, AWS deputies also want to employ several hundred well-paid staff who would enjoy basically the same authority as the police, the Supreme Audit Chamber (NIK) and the State Security Office (UOP). The former conducts investigations into the dealing of state bodies, while the latter coordinates special services work. The new office would report directly to the internal affairs minister.
The bureau would focus on monitoring public officials, analyzing areas susceptible to corruption and reporting on revealed corruption cases. Internal Affairs Minister Marek Biernacki said the body could use the framework and infrastructure abandoned by the defunct military police. "Our intention is to provide the government with a tough instrument so it could defend society against corruption," said Mariusz Kaminski, an AWS deputy who presented an outline of the bill.
Corruption appears to be a problem on all levels of Polish society. CBOS, the public opinion studies center, conducted a survey on the issue last September. The majority 68% of respondents said many everyday legal problems such as traffic tickets can be solved with a bribe. They also said corruption has infiltrated institutions ranging from health care to national administration.
Bribes became part of everyday life under communism, when hospital patients had to pay their nurses and doctors to eat and any administrative task could be dealt with for a price. The problem now, business owners said, is that the country's regulatory structure is so bureaucratic and slow that many enterprises pay bribes simply to be able to continue their day-to-day business.
"You pay for express," Mordasewicz said. "Either complying with necessary regulations takes months or you deal with it quickly thanks to a bribe."
Mordasewicz said the construction industry is particularly vulnerable to corruption. "Anything that is not clearly described in law can be an object of manipulation of public officers," he said. "That's the case with the purchase of real estate, (particularly when) ownership is unclear."
AWS deputies said they began moving on the bill after the World Bank released its October 1999 report on corruption in Poland. The report, based on a cross-country survey of entrepreneurs, found corruption to be more prevalent in former Soviet satellites in Central Europe than in any other single area of the world.
"I felt humiliated by the report and by the silence that followed its publication," Kaminski said. "The best reaction to facts described in the report would be the introduction of tough anti-corruption acts and the creation of an anti-corruption office."
One of the most recent Polish examples to come to light is the case in Lodz, where local government officials were paid to avoid enforcing taxes, duties and other regulations.
The report also said one of the most damaging types of corruption in Poland is the financing of a political party in exchange for promises to block or push through particular legislation. Instances of lobbyists paying bribes to politicians is on the rise, according to the report, with the price for blocking amendments to laws having risen from $500,000 in 1992 to approximately $3 million today.
Kaminski acknowledged that the dealings the report outlines do happen in Parliament. "It's common knowledge that there are deputies sponsored by various businesses, including owners of electronic media," he said. "They (businessmen) sponsored the electoral campaigns of some deputies who now protect their interests."
Kaminski said the recent media bill is a prime example. "The government proposed to raise the share of foreign capital in media companies from 33% to 49% to prevent a market monopoly," he said. "But the amendment was rejected. At the same time, lobbying from domestic media businesses was very strong."
