Circular No. 04/2014/TT-TTCP on assessing the situation of corruption and evaluating anti-corruption efforts

CIRCULAR

Article 24Regarding the assessment of corruption situations

and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts prevention and suppressiong

________________

Pursuant to the Anti-Corruption Law No. 55/2005/QH11 amended and supplemented by Law No. 01/2007/QH12 and Law No. 27/2012/QH13;

Pursuant to Decree No. 59/2013/NĐ-CP dated June 17, 2013 of the Government detailing certain provisions of the Law on Prevention and Suppression of Corruption;

Pursuant to Decree No. 83/2012/NĐ-CP dated October 9, 2012 of the Government stipulating the functions, tasks, powers, and organizational structure of the Government Inspectorate;

At the proposal of the Director of the Anti-Corruption Department and the Head of the Legal Affairs Department;

The Chief Inspector of the Government issues this Circular on the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts.

PART I

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 1. Scope of Regulation

This Circular provides for the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts; the responsibilities of ministries, sectors, localities, agencies, organizations, units related to the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts.

Article 2. Applicability

This Circular applies to ministries, ministerial-level agencies, agencies under the Government, provincial People's Committees, municipal People's Committees directly under the Central Government, and agencies, organizations, units, and individuals related to the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts.

Article 3. Principles for assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption efforts

1. In accordance with the Party's guidelines and policies, complying with state policies and laws in the field of anti-corruption and other relevant management fields.

2. Ensuring objectivity, comprehensiveness, honesty, transparency, and clarity in assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption efforts.

3. Promoting the role, responsibility, and participation of citizens, businesses, civil servants, public officials, and related agencies and organizations in assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption efforts.

4. Results and information, data related to the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts must be made public, except for contents classified as state secrets according to the law.

5. Ensuring the combination between self-assessment results of state agencies and the perceptions and experiences of citizens, businesses, civil servants, public officials regarding corruption situations and anti-corruption efforts.

6. The results of assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption efforts serve as reference material for analyzing and proposing measures to enhance the effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts; they do not have a classification or ranking nature among ministries, sectors, and localities.

Article 4. Collection of Information, Data, and Reporting on Assessment Results of Corruption Situations and Evaluation of Anti-Corruption Efforts

1. The collection of information, data, and reporting on the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts shall be carried out in accordance with the reporting system prescribed in Circular No. 03/2013/TT-TTCP dated June 10, 2013 of the Government Inspectorate on the reporting system for inspection work, handling complaints and denunciations, and anti-corruption efforts, and guidance from the Government Inspectorate.

2. In addition to Clause 1 of this Article, during the annual assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts, ministries, sectors, and localities shall implement the collection of information and data through surveys of citizens', businesses', civil servants', and public officials' perceptions and experiences using sociological survey methods, direct interviews, or other online survey forms.

3. The period for collecting data for reporting runs from December 16 of the previous year to December 15 of the reporting year. Based on the reports on the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption efforts submitted by ministries, sectors, and localities, the Government Inspectorate will compile and assess the corruption situation and evaluate anti-corruption efforts nationwide. In necessary cases, the Government Inspectorate may decide to conduct surveys with appropriate scales, subjects, and contents to collect additional verification information and data.

Chapter II

ASSESSMENT OF CORRUPTION SITUATIONS

Article 5. Content on assessing the situation of corruption

1. The assessment of the situation of corruption shall be carried out according to the following specific contents:

a) The extent of prevalence of corrupt acts;

b) The economic damage caused by corruption;

c) The severity of corrupt acts.

2. Based on the provisions of Clause 1 of this Article, ministries, sectors, and localities may supplement or specify the contents of assessing the situation of corruption in accordance with the requirements of anti-corruption work within their respective fields, sectors, or localities.

Article 6. Methods for Assessing the Situation of Corruption

1. Ministries, sectors, and localities shall assess the situation of corruption based on the contents prescribed in Clause 1 of Article 5 of this Circular, calculated according to a scale of 100 points, specifically as follows:

a) Component point 1 is calculated at a maximum of 30 points and a minimum of 0 points based on statistical data compiled by sector, field, or locality as stipulated in Point a, Clause 3, Article 7, Point a, Clause 3, Article 8, and Point a, Clause 3, Article 9 of this Circular;

b) Component point 2 is calculated at a maximum of 40 points and a minimum of 0 points based on the results of surveys measuring public perception and experience of citizens, businesses, civil servants, and officials as stipulated in Point b, Clause 3, Article 7, Point b, Clause 3, Article 8, and Point b, Clause 3, Article 9 of this Circular;

c) The total score is calculated as follows: Total Score = (2) x Component Point 1 + (1) x Component Point 2.

Example: If the aggregated statistical data shows that component point 1 is 20 points and component point 2 is 30 points, then the total score will be: 2 x 20 + 1 x 30 = 70.

2. Based on the total score, ministries, sectors, and localities shall assess the situation of corruption according to the contents prescribed in Clause 1 of Article 5 of this Circular with the following specific levels:

a) Regarding the extent of prevalence of corrupt acts:

- Very prevalent;

- Prevalent;

- Less prevalent;

- Not prevalent.

b) Regarding the economic damage caused by corruption:

- Very significant damage;

- Significant damage;

- Moderate damage;

- Low damage;

- No damage.

c) Regarding the severity of corrupt acts:

- Particularly serious;

- Very serious;

- Serious;

- Less serious;

- Not serious.

3. Annually, ministries, sectors, and localities shall submit the results of their self-assessment of the situation of corruption and related information and data to the Government Inspectorate for the purpose of state management in anti-corruption work.

Article 7. Extent of Prevalence of Corrupt Acts

1. The extent of prevalence of corrupt acts reflects the frequency of occurrence of corrupt acts within the scope of a sector, field, locality, or nationwide, measured by the number of cases involving corrupt acts discovered and handled by competent state agencies and the perception and experience of citizens, businesses, civil servants, and officials.

2. The number of cases involving corrupt acts discovered and handled by state agencies is the total number of cases concluded as involving corrupt acts through state management activities, inspection, examination, auditing, investigation, prosecution, and trial as provided for by law, compiled by sector, field, locality, and aggregated nationwide.

3. The scoring and determination of the extent of prevalence of corrupt acts shall be carried out as follows:

a) Component point 1 is determined based on the number of cases involving corrupt acts concluded through state management activities, inspection, examination, auditing, investigation, prosecution, and trial.

- From 10 cases or more: 30 (points);

- From 5 to 9 cases: 20 (points);

- From 1 to 4 cases: 10 (points);

- No cases: 0 (points).

b) Component point 2 is determined based on the perception and experience of citizens, businesses, civil servants, and officials regarding the extent of prevalence of corrupt acts.

- Very prevalent level: 40 (points);

- Prevalent level: 30 (points);

- Less prevalent level: 20 (points);

- Not prevalent level: 0 (points).

c) Determination and assessment of the extent of prevalence of corrupt acts:

- A total score of over 70 (points) to 100 (points) corresponds to the level "Very prevalent";

- A total score of over 40 (points) to 70 (points) corresponds to the level "Prevalent";

- A total score of over 0 (points) to 40 (points) corresponds to the level "Less prevalent";

- A total score of 0 (points) corresponds to the level "Not prevalent".

Example: If a province has 10 cases concluded as involving corrupt acts and the survey results on the perception and experience of citizens, businesses, civil servants, and officials regarding the extent of prevalence of corrupt acts show it to be very prevalent, then the component points and total score would be as follows: component point 1: 30 (points); component point 2: 40 (points), and the total score will be: 2 x 30 + 1 x 40 = 100 (points); thus, the assessment of the situation is that the "corrupt acts are Very prevalent".

Article 8. Degree of Economic Damage Caused by Corruption

1. The degree of economic damage caused by corruption is the value of the violation caused by acts of corruption that has been concluded by competent state agencies and decided to recover or handle economically in cases involving acts of corruption, and the perception and experience of citizens, businesses, officials, civil servants, and public employees. In cases where the economic damage caused by corruption is not money or negotiable instruments, it must be converted into Vietnamese currency based on the market price of equivalent goods or according to the exchange rate published by the State Bank of Vietnam at the time of assessment for consolidation.

2. The value of the violation caused by acts of corruption that has been concluded by competent state agencies and decided to recover or handle economically in cases involving acts of corruption through activities such as inspection, examination, auditing, investigation, prosecution, trial, supervision, and complaint resolution under the law shall be determined and consolidated by sector, field, locality, and nationwide.

3. The calculation of points and determination of the degree of economic damage caused by corruption shall be carried out as follows:

a) Component point 1 shall be calculated based on the value of the violation caused by acts of corruption that has been concluded by competent state agencies and decided to recover or handle economically in cases involving acts of corruption through activities such as inspection, examination, auditing, investigation, prosecution, trial, supervision, and complaint resolution.

- The value of the violation over 10% of total government spending in the year immediately preceding the period of consolidated assessment by sector, field, and locality: 30 (points);

- The value of the violation from 5% to less than 10% of total government spending in the year immediately preceding the period of consolidated assessment by sector, field, and locality: 20 (points);

- The value of the violation from 1% to less than 5% of total government spending in the year immediately preceding the period of consolidated assessment by sector, field, and locality: 10 (points);

- The value of the violation below 1% of total government spending in the year immediately preceding the period of consolidated assessment by sector, field, and locality: 5 (points);

- The value of the violation equal to 0% of total government spending in the year immediately preceding the period of consolidated assessment by sector, field, and locality: 0 (points).

In cases where ministries, ministerial-level agencies, agencies under the Government, provincial and municipal people's committees are entrusted with the right of ownership over state capital in enterprises, component point 1 will be calculated based on the value of the violation over total government spending in the year immediately preceding the period of consolidated assessment by sector, field, and locality and the total value of assets of state-owned enterprises at the time of assessment.

b) Component point 2 shall be determined based on the results of surveys regarding the perception and experience of citizens, businesses, officials, civil servants, and public employees concerning the degree of economic damage caused by corruption.

- Very high level of damage: 40 (points);

- High level of damage: 30 (points);

- Medium level of damage: 20 (points);

- Low level of damage: 10 (points);

- No damage: 0 (points).

c) Determination and assessment of the degree of economic damage caused by corruption:

- A total score of over 70 (points) to 100 (points) corresponds to the level "Very High Damage";

- A total score of over 40 (points) to 70 (points) corresponds to the level "High Damage";

- A total score of over 20 (points) to 40 (points) corresponds to the level "Medium Damage";

- A total score of over 0 (points) to 20 (points) corresponds to the level "Low Damage";

- A total score of 0 (points) corresponds to the level "No Damage".

Example: If the economic damage caused by corruption accounts for 10% of total government spending in the sector, field, or locality, and through surveys of the experience of citizens, businesses, officials, civil servants, and public employees regarding the degree of economic damage caused by corruption, it is determined to be very high, then the component points and total score will be as follows: component point 1: 30 (points); component point 2: 40 (points), and the total score will be: 2 x 30 + 1 x 40 = 100 (points); therefore, the assessment of economic damage caused by corruption is "Very High".

Article 9. Severity of Corruption Acts

1. The severity of corruption acts reflects the level of danger and harm caused to society generally, measured through the results of handling by competent state agencies for persons committing corruption acts and the perceptions and experiences of citizens, businesses, officials, civil servants, and public employees.

2. The results of handling persons committing corruption acts are determined based on the consolidation of data on the number of people disciplined, criminally prosecuted with specific forms applied by competent state agencies in each sector, field, locality, and nationwide, through state management activities, inspection, audit, investigation, prosecution, and trial.

3. The calculation of points and determination of the severity of corruption acts are carried out as follows:

a) Component 1 points are determined based on the forms of handling for persons committing corruption who are held responsible according to sectors, fields, localities, through state management activities, inspection, audit, investigation, prosecution, and trial.

- If among the forms of handling for persons committing corruption, there is someone sentenced to a penalty range equivalent to the category of especially serious crimes: 30 (points);

- If among the forms of handling for persons committing corruption, there is someone sentenced to a penalty range equivalent to the category of very serious crimes: 20 (points);

- If among the forms of handling for persons committing corruption, there is someone sentenced to a penalty range equivalent to the category of serious crimes: 10 (points);

- If among the forms of handling for persons committing corruption, there is someone sentenced to a penalty range equivalent to the category of less serious crimes or disciplined: 5 (points);

- If no cases are handled due to corruption acts: 0 (points).

b) Component 2 points are determined based on the results of surveys regarding the perceptions and experiences of citizens, businesses, officials, civil servants, and public employees about the severity of corruption acts as follows:

- Especially serious level: 40 (points);

- Very serious level: 30 (points);

- Serious level: 20 (points);

- Less serious level: 10 (points);

- Not serious level: 0 (points).

c) Determination and assessment of the severity level:

- A total score above 70 (points) to 100 (points) corresponds to the "Especially Serious" level;

- A total score above 40 (points) to 70 (points) corresponds to the "Very Serious" level;

- A total score above 20 (points) to 40 (points) corresponds to the "Serious" level; - A total score above 0 (points) to 20 (points) corresponds to the "Less Serious" level;

- A total score of 0 (points) corresponds to the "Not Serious" level.

Example: If the results of handling corruption in a sector, field, or locality include disciplinary actions and criminal prosecutions, including someone sentenced to a penalty range equivalent to the category of especially serious crimes, and through surveys of the perceptions and experiences of citizens, businesses, officials, civil servants, and public employees about the severity of corruption acts, it is determined to be especially serious, then the component points and total score will be as follows: component 1 points: 30 (points); component 2 points: 40 (points), and the total score will be: 2 x 30 + 1 x 40 = 100 (points); thus, the situation of corruption is assessed as "especially serious."

Chapter III

ASSESSMENT OF ANTI-CORRUPTION WORK

Article 10. Contents of Anti-Corruption Work Evaluation

1. The evaluation of anti-corruption work shall be carried out according to the following specific contents:

a) Guidance and management of anti-corruption work;

b) Construction and implementation of laws on anti-corruption;

c) Implementation of preventive measures against corruption;

d) Detection, handling of acts of corruption, and recovery of corrupt assets.

2. Based on the provisions of Clause 1 of this Article, ministries, sectors, and localities may supplement the contents of the evaluation of anti-corruption work to suit the requirements of state management in their respective fields, sectors, or localities.

Article 11. Methods for Evaluating Anti-Corruption Work

1. Ministries, sectors, and localities conduct self-evaluation of anti-corruption work within their respective fields, sectors, or localities under their jurisdiction based on the total score out of 100 points, specifically as follows:

a) Component point 1 is calculated with a maximum of 30 (points) and a minimum of 0 (points) based on the total score of the evaluation contents specified in Clause 1 of Article 10 of this Circular;

b) Component point 2 is calculated with a maximum of 40 (points) and a minimum of 0 (points) based on the perception and experience of citizens, businesses, civil servants, and public officials regarding anti-corruption work;

c) The total score is calculated as follows: Total Score = (2) x Component Point 1 + (1) x Component Point 2.

Example: If the total statistics show that component point 1 is 20 (points) and component point 2 is 30, then the total score will be: 2 x 20 + 1 x 30 = 70.

2. Annually, ministries, sectors, and localities submit the results of their self-evaluation of anti-corruption work and related information and data to the Government Inspectorate for the purpose of state management in anti-corruption.

Article 12. Evaluation of Content Regarding Guidance and Management of Anti-Corruption Work

1. The evaluation of guidance and management of anti-corruption work is carried out according to the following criteria:

a) The construction, issuance, and implementation of annual inspection plans and audit plans on the implementation of laws on anti-corruption;

b) The implementation of reporting systems on anti-corruption work as required by law;

c) The construction, issuance, and implementation of plans for propaganda and raising awareness about anti-corruption;

d) The evaluation of the effectiveness of anti-corruption work and linking the results of anti-corruption with commendation and reward activities.

2. The scoring for the evaluation of the content regarding guidance and management of anti-corruption work is conducted as follows:

a) The maximum score obtainable is 6 points, and the minimum score is 0 points;

b) Failure to implement any of the criteria stipulated in Clause 1 of this Article: deduction of 1.5 (points);

c) Incomplete or incorrect implementation of any of the criteria stipulated in Clause 1 of this Article: deduction of 0.75 (points).

Article 13. Evaluation of Content Regarding Construction and Implementation of Laws Related to Anti-Corruption

1. The evaluation of construction and implementation of laws related to anti-corruption is carried out according to the following criteria:

a) The construction, issuance, and implementation of plans for drafting normative legal documents generally, including those related to anti-corruption;

b) The construction, issuance, and implementation of plans for reviewing and systematizing normative legal documents generally, including those related to anti-corruption;

c) The construction, issuance, and implementation of plans for disseminating and inspecting the implementation of normative legal documents generally, including those related to anti-corruption.

2. The scoring for the evaluation of the content regarding construction and implementation of laws related to anti-corruption is conducted as follows:

a) The maximum score obtainable is 6 points, and the minimum score is 0 points;

b) Failure to implement any of the criteria stipulated in Clause 1 of this Article: deduction of 2 (points);

c) Incomplete or incorrect implementation of any of the criteria stipulated in Clause 1 of this Article: deduction of 1 (point).

Article 14. Evaluation of the Content on Implementing Anti-Corruption Measures

1. The evaluation of the implementation of anti-corruption measures shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Prevention and Combating Corruption and the following criteria:

a) Establishing, promulgating, and implementing plans to implement anti-corruption measures in accordance with the law and guidelines of the Government Inspectorate;

b) Applying and implementing anti-corruption measures in management activities when actual situations arise that require such application and implementation under the law;

c) Having mechanisms for collecting information, inspecting, and handling cases where anti-corruption measures are not implemented, implemented incorrectly, or not timely.

2. The scoring for the evaluation of the content on implementing anti-corruption measures shall be as follows:

a) The maximum score obtainable is 9, and the minimum score is 0;

b) Failure to implement any of the criteria stipulated in Clause 1 of this Article: 3 (points) shall be deducted;

c) Incomplete or incorrect implementation of any of the criteria stipulated in Clause 1 of this Article within the prescribed timeframe: 1.5 (points) shall be deducted.

Article 15. Evaluation of the Content on Detecting, Handling Acts of Corruption, and Recovering Stolen Assets

1. The evaluation of detecting, handling acts of corruption, and recovering stolen assets shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Prevention and Combating Corruption and the following criteria:

a) Establishing, promulgating, and implementing periodic inspection plans or regularly inspecting the performance of duties and powers of individuals, agencies, organizations, and units under their jurisdiction;

b) Establishing, promulgating, and implementing annual inspection work plans, including administrative inspections or surprise inspections aimed at detecting and handling acts of corruption;

c) Results of resolving complaints about acts of corruption and handling persons committing acts of corruption reported according to the authority prescribed by law;

d) Results of implementing decisions to recover money and assets and decisions to handle responsibilities of persons found to have violated laws through state management activities, inspection, and audit.

2. The scoring for the evaluation of the content on detecting, handling acts of corruption, and recovering stolen assets shall be carried out as follows:

a) The maximum score obtainable is 9, and the minimum score is 0;

b) Recovery of improperly obtained funds or assets or handling of individuals or organizations found to have violated laws through state management activities, inspection, and audit at a rate below 25%: 3 (points) shall be deducted;

c) Not issuing or implementing inspection plans, inspection plans, or conducting inspections; completing less than 25% of inspection plans, inspection plans; resolving less than 25% of cases of complaints about acts of corruption accepted within the jurisdiction; recovery of improperly obtained funds or assets or handling of individuals or organizations at a rate below 50%: 2 (points) shall be deducted;

d) Completing less than 50% of inspection plans, inspection plans; resolving less than 50% of cases of complaints about acts of corruption accepted within the jurisdiction; recovery of improperly obtained funds or assets or handling of individuals or organizations at a rate below 70%: 1 (point) shall be deducted;

đ) Completing less than 70% of inspection plans, inspection plans; resolving less than 70% of cases of complaints about acts of corruption accepted within the jurisdiction; recovery of improperly obtained funds or assets or handling of individuals or organizations at a rate below 80%: 0.5 (points) shall be deducted;

e) Completing less than 80% of inspection plans, inspection plans; resolving less than 80% of cases of complaints about acts of corruption accepted within the jurisdiction; delayed implementation of activities specified in Points a and b of Clause 1 of this Article: 0.25 (points) shall be deducted.

Chapter IV

IMPLEMENTATION

Article 16. Responsibilities of the Government Inspectorate

1. Guide, urge, and inspect ministries, ministerial-level agencies, government-affiliated agencies, provincial People's Committees, and centrally governed city People's Committees to implement the annual assessment of corruption situations and anti-corruption work as stipulated in this Circular.

2. Take the lead and coordinate with ministries, sectors, localities, and relevant agencies to mobilize, manage, and utilize necessary resources for assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption work in accordance with the law.

3. Conduct assessments of corruption situations within the State management fields of the Inspectorate sector and the Inspectorate's anti-corruption work; compile, assess, and evaluate the corruption situation and anti-corruption work nationwide.

Article 17. Responsibilities of Ministries, Ministerial-Level Agencies, Government-Affiliated Agencies, Provincial People's Committees, and Centrally Governed City People's Committees

1. Annually organize the implementation of the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption work within their respective sectors, fields, and localities under their jurisdiction as stipulated in this Circular and guided by the Government Inspectorate.

2. On the basis of coordinating with the Government Inspectorate, mobilize necessary resources for assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption work in accordance with current laws.

3. Coordinate and provide necessary information and data to the Government Inspectorate related to self-assessments of corruption situations and self-evaluations of anti-corruption work within their respective sectors, fields, and localities under their jurisdiction.

Article 18. Coordination with Relevant Agencies in Assessing Corruption Situations and Evaluating Anti-Corruption Work

Request the State Audit Agency, Supreme People's Court, Supreme People's Procuracy, Central Committee of the Vietnam Fatherland Front, and central agencies of political-social organizations to coordinate and direct subordinate agencies and units within their jurisdiction to cooperate with the Government Inspectorate and ministries, ministerial-level agencies, government-affiliated agencies, provincial People's Committees, and centrally governed city People's Committees in assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption work as stipulated in this Circular within the scope of their functions, tasks, and authorities.

Article 19. Financial Resources for Assessing Corruption Situations and Evaluating Anti-Corruption Work

1. Financial resources for assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption work shall be guaranteed by the state budget. Annually, the Government Inspectorate, ministries, ministerial-level agencies, government-affiliated agencies, provincial People's Committees, and centrally governed city People's Committees shall prepare state budget estimates for activities related to assessing corruption situations and evaluating anti-corruption work in accordance with current laws.

2. Ministries, ministerial-level agencies, government-affiliated agencies, provincial People's Committees, and centrally governed city People's Committees may mobilize official development assistance or other lawful sources to support the assessment of corruption situations and evaluation of anti-corruption work.

Article 20. Implementation Provisions

1. This Circular replaces Circular No. 11/2011/TT-TTCP dated November 9, 2011, and takes effect from January 1, 2015.

2. During implementation, if there are any difficulties, relevant agencies, organizations, and individuals should report to the Government Inspectorate for guidance or consideration of amendments and supplements as appropriate./.