Promotion of Professional Ethics in the Public Service

1. Promotion of Professional Ethics in the Public Service 27 November 2009

2. Presentation outline • Introduction • Context • Background • Observation regarding implementation of MACC • Accounting Officers • Ethics Officers • Ethics Committee • Conclusion

3. Introduction • In 2001, Cabinet instructed the dpsa to develop a strategy to fight corruption in the public service. • In January 2002, The Public Service Anti-corruption Strategy was approved by Cabinet. • The strategy is aimed at fighting corruption in a coordinated manner. • One of the requirements of the Strategy is that departments should establish the requisite capacity to prevent and combat corruption in their spheres of operation.

4. Context • An ethical organisational culture is crucial to the success on any anti-corruption strategy, since it is against this backdrop that all the other departmental actions take place • Therefore, the focus should be on organisational culture. Organisational culture is often explained as “theway we do things around here”. • The best set of policies will have little impact where there is an unethical organisational culture. • Obviously, where there is a culture of doing things fairly and transparently, corruption will be less likely to happen – even if the policies are not in place.

5. Background • In September 2003, Cabinet approved the requirements for minimum anti-corruption capacity for departments in the Public Service. • In terms of these minimum anti-corruption standards, departments are required to create and promote an ethical organisational culture and to provide guidelines for how every member of the department should behave. • Ethical conduct in the public service is required by the Constitution. • The minimum anti-corruption capacity requirements call for the appointment of an “ethics champion” in departments who is responsible to drive ethics and anti-corruption initiatives. • This capacity will differ from one department to another because of differences in their risk assessments

6. MACC Requirements • Accounting officers • Establish a system(s) that encourages employees to report corruption • Establish capacity to detect corruption • Establish programmes for employees to report corruption • Establish programmes that inform employees on the nature and workings of protected disclosures

7. MACC Requirements (cont …) Ethics Officer • Accounting officers are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the frameworks are successfully implemented BUT they often don’t have the time for hands on involvement. • AO must appoint Ethics Officer (Champion) at an appropriate level • An Ethics Officer is (preferably) a well-respected member of top management (or a person that functions close to them) who visibly embodies the department’s ethics drive. • Ownership of the ethics drive is given to them by top management and they then ensure that the ethics and anti-corruption initiatives retains its momentum

8. Ethics Officer (cont…) When considering people for the position of Ethics Officer you will be looking for someone who: • Has high integrity; • Is trusted / will be trusted by staff members; • Has a strong personality – will stand up for ethics in the department; • Is knowledgeable on ethics and anti-corruption issues.

9. Ethics Officer (cont…) • Ethics Officers will perform the following functions: • Foster and maintain integrity and ethical behaviour in departments through education and awareness • Advise public servants on ethical dilemmas and decision-making; • Ensure organisational integrity of policies, procedures and practices; • Identify predisposing and precipitating factors of unethical behaviour and corrupt activities, and report all unethical practices to the ethics committee for the necessary action by the Head of Department; • Administer and manage the implementation of the conflict of interest policy in departments; and • Monitor and evaluate the implementation of the policy and report progress to the Ethics Committee and bring about changes in the implementation plan in line with the findings

10. Ethics Officer (cont…) Location of Ethics Officer within the organisation • Ethics officer can be located within internal audit, legal services, labour relations, and human resources or any functional area where the work relate to issues of ethics, transparency and accountability. • The Executive Authority shall determine the location of the ethics officer in line with the department organisational structure and functions.

11. MACC Requirements (cont …) Ethics Committee • It is proposed that Ethics Committees be created in departments to oversee the implementation of ethics and anti-corruption initiatives. • In a case where there are existing committees such as risk, integrity management or audit committees, the proposed functions of the ethics committee shall be incorporated into the functions of those committees. • Heads of Departments to chair the Ethics Committee or assign the role to the relevant senior official. • The Committee should comprise of members of high integrity and credibility, who always embody the department’s ethics drive.

12. Ethics Committee (cont…) The Ethics Committee shall perform the following functions: • Ensure that ethics and anti-corruption policies are drafted and adopted; • Compile an implementation plan to give effect to the policy; • Monitor the implementation of the plan; • Monitor the resolution of corruption cases; • Report to internal and external stakeholders on implementation progress and resolution of cases; and • Evaluate the effectiveness of the programme from time to time, and bring about changes in the implementation plan or policy in line with their findings.

13. Observation regarding implementation of MACC Anticorruption unit or unit that does similar work • 57% of departments have a dedicated anti-corruption unit Existence of whistle blowing policy and mechanism • 35% have only a policy in place and • 30% of departments have a mechanism and policy in place. Departmental policy or mandate on anticorruption • 40% of departments have a fairly comprehensive mandate or policy of reasonable quality, together with evidence of implementation in place • The remaining 60% have no or very basic policies, of poor quality

14. Observation regarding implementation of MACC (cont…) Fraud prevention plans • 15% of the departments have fraud prevention plans of excellent quality together with evidence of implementation and integration. • 40% have fairly good policies in place whilst the remaining 45% have no or poor quality fraud plans. • 71% of unit heads have relevant experience, Strategic objectives related to fighting corruption • 10% of departments have clear written objectives which are well integrated with other objectives and with evidence of planning and monitoring against the objectives. • 45% of departments have written objectives where the strategy can be deduced from • 45% have poorly formulated and applied objectives or no strategic objectives in place

15. Current Initiatives MACC Audit • Identify shortcomings and implementation challenges • Uproot causes • Assist the departments in plugging the identified gaps Development of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Capacity Building Programme • Development and production of video case studies for training of general employees • Designing training materials and training of anti-corruption practitioners • Developing a unit standard for training of law enforcement officials

16. Paradigm Shift in the Approach to Fight Corruption Improve the integrity and confidence in the Public Service by reducing the incidents of Corruption Entrenching a Culture and Practice of Efficient, Transparent, Compassionate Public Service Framework Drive Approach Paradigm Shift to Impact Driven Approach Analytical Perspective Translation of Frameworks into Measurable Projects Impact Related Activities Awareness Raising

17. Conclusion • The fight against corruption does not end with the development of policy instruments • Policies and frameworks need to be translated into projects and programmes • These programmes and/or initiatives need to be evaluated in order to know if they really make a difference • Awareness raising (within public service and society) is key in making these initiatives to work • There is a need to invest in capacity building to succeed in this fight against corruption.

18. Your NO Counts Ke a leboga – Thank you