Strengthening the foundations of anti-corruption work 32 recommendations from the forum for cooperation against corruption

Sweden has long been ranked as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, with a strong culture of public integrity and high levels of trust both among citizens and for public institutions. However, this does not mean that corruption never occurs, or that anti-corruption work in Sweden is without flaws. For example, statistics on convictions for corruption-related offences show that corruption exists at all levels of society. Although preventative work rests on a solid foundation, there is room to develop anti-corruption work in Sweden. This follows not least from new challenges associated with the growth of organised crime. 

The Agency for Public Management has been assigned by the Government to support the anti-corruption work in public administration. Within the framework of this assignment, the Agency for Public Management must present the government offices (Treasury Department) with proposed measures for the Government to strengthen its ability to prevent corruption in public administration. We set out these proposals in the present report. In accordance with the assignment, the proposals were developed by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, the Swedish Economic Crime Authority, the Swedish National Financial Management Authority, the Swedish Competition Authority, the Swedish Police Authority, the Swedish Agency for Public Procurement and the Agency for Public Management. As these public authorities participate in the cooperative anti-corruption forum, we refer to them here as “Forum Authorities”.

Following consultations and based on their respective responsibilities, the Forum Authorities, individually or jointly, have developed 32 proposed measures for the Government to strengthen its ability to prevent corruption. These proposals are a combination of various measures which together aim to strengthen the prevention of corruption in public administration. The proposals are mainly in four areas: strategic work to improve the basis for the public administration’s work against corruption at a comprehensive level; tools for detecting and dealing with corruption; preventing, detecting and dealing with corruption in public procurement; and anti-corruption work by municipalities and regions.

Strategic measures to improve the basis for work against corruption

The availability of appropriate support is fundamental to the effective functioning of the public administration’s work against corruption. A good understanding of the state of and risks to administration is important for the development of Government policy in this area and for supporting authorities in their work to develop support. However, the proposals of the Forum Authorities make it clear that both a long-term approach and a clear division of responsibilities, in terms of support, co-operation and knowledge development, are lacking for this work. This means that there is no strategic basis for effective work.

The Forum Authorities propose several measures to strategically improve the basis for anti-corruption work (see Table 1). The proposals concern measures to promote more effective, clearer and longer-term support and cooperation among expert authorities. This is to ensure that the entire public administration receives appropriate support in its work against corruption. The proposals also involve systematic and regular monitoring of the incidence of corruption and how the administration develops its preventive work. Such monitoring can increase knowledge about corruption and improve the administration’s ability to address challenges and emerging corruption risks. For example, it provides the Government, supporting authorities and public administration as a whole with improved opportunities to remain informed about development needs.

Table 1. Proposals in the area of strategic work to improve the basis for anti-corruption work throughout public administration. 

Needs	Forum Authorities propose:
More effective and longer-term support and cooperation	granting public authorities which are part of the anti-corruption cooperation forum clear responsibility to support other authorities, municipalities and regions in the work against corruption (proposed by Agency for Public Management and Agency for Public Procurement) giving the anti-corruption cooperation forum a long-term mandate (proposed by Agency for Public Management).
Greater awareness to strengthen corruption prevention	producing status reports describing corruption and the state of anti-corruption work in the administration. The reports shall, among other things, identify and monitor risks of corruption (proposed by Agency for Public Management) analysing how Swedish administration can be strengthened through lessons learned from Sweden’s management of EU aid (proposed by National Financial Management Authority).

Tools for detecting and dealing with corruption

Public administration needs better means and more effective powers both to detect corruption and to act when suspicions of corruption arise. This is reflected in the reasons given by Forum Authorities for their proposals. 

The Forum Authorities propose several measures to develop tools to detect and deal with suspected corruption (see Table 2). The proposals include clarifying how public-sector employers can use information about staff to investigate suspicions of corruption, among other things. They also include a Government inquiry and review of whether public-sector employers need additional tools to investigate suspected internal irregularities. In addition, there are proposals to extend the powers of law enforcement authorities to prevent, deter and detect the serious taking or giving of bribes. 

Table 2. Proposals in the area of tools to detect and deal with corruption. 

Needs	Forum Authorities propose:
Improved possibilities to report suspicions	evaluating the implementation of ‘whistle-blower’ legislation in public administration (proposed by Agency for Public Management)
Enhanced possibilities to use information to detect and deal with corruption	clarifying how public-sector employers may use information on staff to fight corruption (proposed by National Council for Crime Prevention and Economic Crime Authority) investigating the possibility of granting public-sector employers greater powers to obtain evidence in cases of suspected corruption (proposed by National Council for Crime Prevention) expanding the powers of the Police Authority, the Security Service and Customs to collect information under the Collection Act to prevent, deter and detect serious corruption offences (proposed by Police Authority) investigating how facilitators of false payments can be prevented, detected and investigated at the Swedish Public Employment Service, the Swedish Board of Student Finance, the Swedish Social Insurance Agency, the Swedish Migration Agency and the Swedish Pensions Agency (proposed by National Financial Management Authority).

Preventing and dealing with corruption in public procurement

Public procurement is associated with certain risks of corruption, partly because it involves large sums of money that create incentives and opportunities for corrupt behaviour. Risks have also increased in recent years due to the rise of organised crime. At the same time, public actors need to strengthen their efforts in general in order to prevent and detect corruption in their procurement processes.

The Forum Authorities propose several measures to prevent and deal with corruption in procurement (see Table 3). The proposals involve raising awareness of corruption among buyers and contracting authorities, improving supervision of procured suppliers and contract monitoring, improving both the information and documentation of procurements, and improving corruption risk-management in certain procurements. Several of the Forum Authorities’ proposed measures in other areas are also relevant to combating corruption in public procurement.

Table 3. Proposals in the area of preventing and dealing with corruption in public procurement. 

Needs	Forum Authorities propose:
Increased awareness of corruption among buyers, contracting authorities and others	developing and managing a freely available web-based training programme for a broad target group, including purchasers and contracting authorities, on the topic of countering corruption in public procurement and contract management (proposed by Agency for Public Procurement and Competition Authority).
Improved tools for exclusion, supervision and monitoring	improving the conditions for contracting organisations to exclude criminal actors from public procurement (proposed by Economic Crime Authority) strengthening contract monitoring by contracting organisations (proposed by Competition Authority)  investigating how the Swedish Competition Authority can gain better and more efficient access to procurement data (proposed by Competition Authority).
Improving information and documentation in public procurement	reconsidering the creation of a national public procurement website (proposed by Agency for Public Procurement and the Competition Authority) investigating the possibility of introducing sanctions in the event of inadequate procurement documentation (proposed by Competition Authority) investigating the possibility of imposing sanctions on contracting organisations that fail to advertise procurements investigating the possibility of imposing sanctions on contracting organisations that fail to advertise changes to awarded contracts and framework agreements (proposed by Competition Authority).
Managing risks in direct awards and defence materiel purchases	evaluating the increased direct-award limits from 2022, with a particular focus on their impact on the risk of corruption (proposed by Competition Authority and Agency for Public Procurement). analysing the need to increase statutory control of contracting organisations’ formulation of guidelines (proposed by Competition Authority and Agency for Public Procurement).    reviewing the rules for defence procurement (proposed by Competition Authority).

Anti-corruption work by municipalities and regions

Municipalities and regions are at particularly high risk of being victims of corruption, face particular challenges in their work and generally lag behind in their preventive work compared to government agencies. For example, much of the work of municipalities and regions consists of providing welfare, and these organisations have numerous, close contacts with users as well as companies, which in itself constitutes a risk. Working uniformly and reaching out with preventive measures in municipal and regional operations is also difficult due to the extensive nature of these operations, their broadly delegated powers and the varying nature of their governance models.

Forum Authorities make several suggestions for measures to prevent and deal with corruption in municipalities and regions (see Table 4). The proposals aim to strengthen the anti-corruption work of municipalities and regions in various ways. It is about providing them with better basic support in their anti-corruption work and in promoting good administrative culture. Among other things, it is proposed to revise the fundamental values of government to apply to municipalities and regions as well. Proposals also involve clarifying the responsibility of municipalities and regions to work to prevent corruption and to report suspected corruption offences. Note that several proposals in other areas are also addressed to municipalities and regions, but also to government agencies.

Table 4. Proposals in the area of anti-corruption work by municipalities and regions 

Needs	Forum Authorities propose:
Basic support to municipalities and regions	adapting the fundamental values of government to apply to the entire public administration (proposed by Agency for Public Management)  adapting the Agency for Public Management’s support material on good administrative culture and corruption to include municipalities and regions as well (proposed by Agency for Public Management)  in the long term, tasking the appropriate authority with promotion, coordination and monitoring of work for a good administrative culture and anti-corruption work in municipalities and regions (proposed by Agency for Public Management) tasking the appropriate authority with developing support for municipalities and regions to improve their analysis and management of corruption risks (proposed by Economic Crime Authority).
Strengthened responsibility of municipalities and regions to prevent and report corruption offences	clarifying the responsibility of municipalities and regions to work on crime prevention against corruption (proposed by Police Authority)  examining possibilities to require municipalities and regions to report suspected corruption offences (proposed by National Council for Crime Prevention and Police Authority).
Better protection against unlawful influence	investigating which additional categories of elected representatives need protection to prevent ill-health and accidents as a result of threats and violence (Chapter 4, Section 18a of the Local Government Act) (proposed by Council for Crime Prevention).