The profile of the FEAC

1. Message of the Commissioner, H.E Mr. Ali Sulaiman

"You are the driving force in the struggle against corruption!"

It is no more contentious that corruption has become one of the major global threats. As in many other parts of the world, there are signs that it has been taking roots and causing certain problems in Ethiopia as well. Cognizant of the growing danger, the Ethiopian Government established the Federal Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission of Ethiopia (FEACC) in May 2001 to tackle corruption and impropriety before it became rampant and widespread. Additionally, seven of the nine regional states have established their own ethics and anti-corruption commissions to fight and prevent corruption in their respective regions.

Since its establishment in 2001 with the objectives of expanding ethics and anti-corruption education, preventing corruption, and investigating and prosecuting alleged corruption offences, the Commission made encouraging achievements. In an effort to prevent corruption before it is committed by plugging loopholes that were believed to be conducive to it, the FEACC examined the working procedures and practices in more than 117 public offices and public enterprises. It then put forward corrective measures and followed up their implementation. Regarding curative measures, it investigated more than 1,200 alleged corruption offences and prosecuted a number of offenders some 300 of whom received from 1-19 years of imprisonment.

Particularly, the achievements made in tackling the rampant corruption in the Metropolis in the areas of land administration and leasing are worth mentioning. More than 1,162,345 square metre of land (worth more than 2 billion Ethiopian Birr), 32 residential houses and four other buildings and 37 vehicles, among others, have also been restrained through court order. What is more, the FEACC was able to offer ethics and anti-corruption education for hundreds of thousands of Ethiopians using various channels of communication.

As you may be well aware, our country is making significant economic progress. There is a strong determination and commitment on the part of the Government to ensure the sustainability of the development process. One of the most important measures to ensure the sustainability of the overall development of the Country is to redouble efforts in the combat against corruption. We will, for that reason, continue to put maximum effort in the national struggle against corruption and impropriety.

Despite the above-mentioned achievements and sustainable improvements in the struggle against corruption, some global anti-corruption organizations that make corruption perceptions index have been ranking

Ethiopia

unfairly. The level of corruption in Ethiopia is not that significant. Besides, the Ethiopian Government is making its level best to do away with corruption in a sustainable manner, despite the fact that its efforts have not been appreciated by some global anti-corruption actors. This is the objective reality. Unfortunately, those organizations hold other wise without any convincing reason. We believe that it is not fair to impute a corrupt perception to a country that is doing every thing in its capacity to contain corruption at all levels. At the same time, we appreciate the efforts they have been making in the global struggle against corruption.

The good news is we have been improving our rating from year to year, even by the allegedly biased judgments of such organizations. Ethiopia has a better ranking (120) in 2009 than it had two years ago which was 138. One can, therefore, see that we have been making improvements even by their standards. Whatever the judgments may be, we will continue to work hard to change the wrong perceptions, to further improve our rank in the international arena, and most importantly to make sure that corruption doesn’t stand in the way of the development and democratization processes in our Country.

We have also been able to forge a strong and healthy relationship with a number of regional and global actors in the struggle against corruption. A draft of a broad national anti-corruption policy framework which governs and guides all anti-corruption initiatives and activities in the Country has already been developed. Once it receives the approval of the Council of Ministers, the policy is believed to significantly contribute to the success of the on-going national anti-corruption struggle.

Cognizant of the serious efforts we have been making, the public has begun to rally behind us in the fight against corruption. They have come to realize that we are there to serve their interests. They have come to realize, more than ever, that the anti-corruption struggle will not succeed without their active participation. In short, we have managed to make the anti-corruption struggle a popular agenda. We consider such a shift in popular thinking as the most important of all our achievements. The FEACC also established joint forums with the media institutions and associations, religious organizations, mass organizations, Ethiopian Chamber of Commerce and Sectoral Associations, federal institutions engaged in promoting rule of law, non-governmental organizations that incorporate anti-corruption as one of their objectives, and professional associations. Establishing bilateral forums has proved to be a good beginning. However, it is the Commission’s strong conviction that the process of coalition building should be elevated to the next level.

We believe that it is a necessity for a country to have one national vision in addressing corruption. It needs to have a consensual national strategy devised by all stakeholders in the struggle against corruption. There should be a united front against corruption, which, in turn, necessitates the establishment of a national coalition against corruption. It is for this very reason that the FEACC facilitated the establishment of a national anti-corruption coalition back in July 4, 2009 .

Despite the afore-mentioned achievements, the Commission strongly believes that a lot more remains to be done in the fight against corruption and impropriety in this country in the years to come. With a view to enhancing its performance in the years to come, therefore, the FEACC conducted Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) on its core functions for the second time in two years, put in place new working procedures and structures based on the BPR, and made the necessary preparations to implement the vitally important project.

In the years to come, the FEACC is determined and more than prepared to do more in partnership with all stakeholders in general and the Ethiopian public in particular to make sure that corruption cannot impede the on-going development and democratization processes. It is the Commission's strong conviction that the national anti-corruption struggle will not be a success without the active participation of the public. The public is the driving force in the struggle against corruption in this Country. At the end of the day, the general public is the general anti-corruption watchdog that monitors, checks and exposes corruption. To put it more bluntly, your support in our fierce fight against corruption is indispensable. Without your sustainable support and participation, the national anti-corruption drive will, no doubt, be doomed to failure. You are the ultimate power in the combat against corruption.

Had it not been for the support and involvement of the public in the fight against corruption, we wouldn't have been able to make the achievements mentioned earlier. The support that the public has been extending to the Commission in blowing the whistle against corruption and serving as a witness has been increasing with the passage of time. To achieve its objectives and realize its vision, the FEACC seeks the full support of all stakeholders in general and the Ethiopian public in particular.

I, therefore, call upon all stakeholders in general and the Ethiopian public in particular to continue to participate in the struggle against corruption actively and support our efforts in a sustainable manner. I, hereby, call on them to remain in the driving seat and continue to energize and invigorate the national anti-corruption struggle. Together, we can defeat corruption!

The FEACC prepared this magazine to inform the public on the national campaign against corruption and thereby to enhance its participation in it. It would be much easier to mobilize an informed society than uninformed one in the fight against corruption. The information contained in the magazine was gathered from government departments, higher education institutions, the Commission's Departments, anti-corruption laws and proclamations, the Commission’s draft anti-corruption policy and training manual, surveys and researches, reports, and other sources. Then, the information was organized in a logical, coherent, and simple manner so that people from every cross-section of the society could read and understand it.

To begin from the very beginning, eight solid years have lapsed since the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia started to tackle corruption and impropriety at all levels by establishing the FEACC in May 2001. Since its inception, the FEACC launched a three-pronged (prevention, investigation and prosecution) attack on corruption and some encouraging achievements were made in those areas.

In an effort to raise its performance in fighting corruption in the years to come, the FEACC has found it absolutely necessary to enhance stakeholder participation in the fight against corruption. To this end, some awareness raising and informative programmes must be implemented aggressively so that public participation in the fight against corruption is boosted to the desirable level. To be actively engaged in fighting and preventing corruption, all stakeholders deserve to be informed about the level, causes, consequences, developments, manifestations, threats of corruption, and the preventive and curative measures that are being taken to tackle it effectively.

They also have every right to get current and up-to-date information about the on-going national struggle against corruption. They should also be well aware of the plans and programmes of the Country in dealing with corruption and impropriety. Having seriously assessed such fundamental concerns and requirements, the FEACC found it absolutely necessary to prepare and distribute publications like this on the national struggle against corruption to raise public awareness. Simply put, the magazine is all about raising public awareness on the threat of corruption and thereby intensifying the national campaign against it in a more participatory, coordinated, and organized manner. The document could also be of paramount importance for researchers, students, teachers, etc. who work in this area.

This document contains the major facts about the on-going anti-corruption campaign in Ethiopia , mainly in federal public offices and enterprises. It discusses the causes, manifestations, and consequences of corruption and impropriety in relation to the Ethiopian context and the existing objective reality. It also illustrates the policies, strategies, and mechanisms being employed to curb corruption. The historical background of corruption in Ethiopia and the reasons and justifications behind the establishment of the FEACC are also discussed. The Commission's structural organization, powers, duties, objectives, strategies, mission, and vision are fully dealt with as well.

The major tasks accomplished and the achievements made by the FEACC, the challenges faced and the appropriate solutions provided for those challenges, and the frequently asked questions and their full answers are also covered in the document. Enjoy reading the magazine and don’t hesitate to send us your comments at the following addresses:

Because of the many forms that corruption can take, there are as many definitions as there are types of corruption. An internationally accepted definition of corruption, which is also illustrated in the Commission’s Draft Anti-corruption Policy, is set out below.

Corruption is the offering, giving, soliciting or acceptance of an inducement, promise, or reward; the making of threats or the use of intimidation, in words or in behaviour; exerting influence by the abuse of authority or its inconsistent application; which may improperly influence the actions subsequently taken, or not taken, by a body, its members, or its officers; for the benefit or competitive advantage of self or another.

According to the corruption survey conducted by the Addis Ababa University (in collaboration with the FEACC) published in 2001 and other sources, fraud, trickery, embezzlement, abuse of power, extortion, nepotism, and theft are believed to be the principal features by which corruption has manifested itself in Ethiopia. If we look at the list of corruption offences that received verdict in 2007/8 budget year, it will simply corroborate what the above-mentioned sources have said. According to the Commission’s Annual Statistical Report on its activities in the same budget year, abuse of power, breach of trust, serious breach of trust, cheat, trickery, forgery, and bribery were the major manifestations of corruption in various public offices and enterprises.

When we look back at the development and emergence of corruption in Ethiopia in retrospect, we could see that there were times when bribery and nepotism were not considered to be serious corruption offences. In the old days, bribery was considered to be a ‘motivational factor’, not an offence. Nepotism was also mostly regarded as a positive approach to ‘help friends and relatives’. Things have changed now. People have begun to call a spade a spade and deal with it seriously.

As many scholars and researchers would agree, corruption is not a social phenomenon that can be explained by a simple cause/effect model. It is a complicated issue, often the result of many contingent circumstances, which produce varied and wide-ranging effects. Without limiting the generality of this argument, however, one can cite numerous factors that are widely believed to be the major causes of corruption in Ethiopia .

According to various sources, low level of democratic culture and tradition, lack of adequate citizen participation, lack of clear regulations and authorization, low level of institutional control, problems related to transparency and accountability in some areas, extreme poverty, and harmful cultural practices are the major causes of corruption in Ethiopia .

Family and ethnic loyalties and obligations, blurred distinction between private and public interests, privatization, weak financial management, inadequate accounting and auditing, deterioration of acceptable moral and ethical values, and inefficient civil service system (despite continuous improvements year after year) have also been cited by some scholars and researchers as causes of corruption in Ethiopia.

During the Imperial and the Military Regimes, corruption is said to have resulted in undermining the legitimacy of the governments and weakening their structures, reducing productivity, hindering development, worsening poverty, marginalizing the poor, creating social unrest, and finally speeding up their downfall. It encouraged the then public servants and senior government officials to place themselves above the law.

Unfortunately, it has continued to pose threats to the Country's development and democratization processes even now. Currently, corruption is believed to be one of the factors that contribute to the reduction of government revenue. It can also negatively affect the on-going poverty reduction and development Programmes.

Various studies and surveys have been conducted to measure and assess the level and magnitude of corruption in Ethiopia . The study conducted by the Addis Ababa University in 2001 seemed to conclude that corruption in Ethiopia , at least by then, was spreading to the extent that it would sooner or later become one of the major problems in the country. That was the general tone of the outcome of the study back then.

Some researchers question the relevance of the outcome of this study due to time factor. According to them, things have changed a lot since then. It doesn’t, therefore, reflect the current objective reality in the Country. It was, for example, stated in the survey that there was rampant corruption in some service delivery institutions like the Ethiopian Telecommunications Corporation and the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation.

That is not the case at the moment. Moreover, some experts argue that the samples taken for the above-mentioned study are not representative and sufficient in number to show the full picture of the then corruption prevalence in the Country. Therefore, it would be absurd to take it as a serious and reliable source of information to depict the current level of corruption in the County. Instead, they advise, we should refer to recent surveys and studies conducted by different bodies and stakeholders in the fight against corruption that represent the current objective reality and that have larger and adequate sample sizes.

What do such studies tell us about the level and extent of corruption in Ethiopia and who conducted them? Let us see what each one of them have to say in this regard. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), corruption is very minimal in Ethiopia and the Country is suitable for investment (2004, page 11 of the report). According to this particular report, “ Ethiopia is exceptional among the least developed countries (LDCs) in its virtually complete absence of routine corruption” (Executive summary of the same report, page one).

Another survey conducted by the Inter Africa Group also concluded that the government is winning in its onslaught on corruption (2008, page 49 of the report). What is more, the rankings produced by the World Bank Group on the ease of doing business put Ethiopia above many other countries, showing the better investment climate in the country because of low corruption prevalence. The Global Integrity, a non-governmental organization engaged in fighting corruption and promoting governance globally, placed Ethiopia among the least corrupt countries in Africa (2006 report). The corruption diagnostic baseline survey conducted by Transparency Ethiopia (the Ethiopian Chapter of Transparency International) in 2008 has also found out that there is no grave and systematic corruption in Ethiopia against some perceptions which contradict the existing objective reality in the Country.

The survey conducted by the World Bank on corruption in the construction sector in Ethiopia shows that corruption in this area is minimal (June, 2008). The very title of the report itself says “High Perception and Low Reality?”, emphasizing the fact that the real situation on the ground is quite different from the existing Perception. According to the “Business of Excellence Investment Guide to Ethiopia ” prepared by one of the advertising and promotion agencies, the country is ‘Free from the type of corruption that afflicts many other developing nations” (page 6, 2007). According to such reports, there is no systemic corruption in Ethiopia . What is more, the Commission has been investigating and prosecuting corruption cases since its establishment. Fortunately, it hasn’t, in most cases, spotted an institutionalized and systemic corruption case. Most of the offences it found were petty corruption cases.

According to some surveys, the areas where corruption is believed to be rampant are those where financial resources are transferred from the private to the public sector and vice versa. Other agencies where corruption is believed to be flourishing include those engaged with allocation of land and government housing, provision of telephone and electric services, granting of loans, licensing and issuance of permits, collection of taxes and procurement of consumable and fixed assets. Customs and excise offices are also believed to be affected by corrupt practices. Since recently, cyber crimes have also begun to trouble the financial sector.

Having analyzed the overall situation in the Country in a holistic manner, the Ethiopian Government finalized preparations to reform the social, economic, and political formation of the Country based on democratic principles. This holistic reform programme consisted of various components and programmes, one of which was the Civil Service Reform programme. That was how the on-going Civil Service Reform Programme, which, in turn, included the Ethics Sub-Programme as one of its major components, was launched at the national level.

For the Ethics sub-programme (which was mainly designed to tackle corruption and improve service delivery) to be launched, a multi-dimensional research on the level of corruption and degree of efficiency and effectiveness of the Ethiopian Civil Service System had to be conducted. For that reason, a task force drawn from stakeholders conducted a research, which brought the sufferings of the Ethiopian public to light.

It was after all these logically coherent preparations that the Ethiopian Government established the FEACC in 2001. Among the preparations made to establish the FEACC were the launching of training programmes and consultative workshops, drawing of international best practices and lessons, assessment of needs and problems, development of the Commission's organizational structure, and conducting of national anti-corruption survey. Representatives drawn from various stakeholders, including the media, civil society organizations, religious groups, professional associations, and federal and regional government departments were actively involved in the process.

The vision of the Federal Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission is to ensure that corruption is no longer an impediment to enhancing development and good governance in the Country by creating a highly ethical society that is resolute in combating corruption unwaveringly.

The Commission's mission is to ensure that the Country's resources go to the desired development projects by expanding ethics and anti-corruption education; examining the practices and working procedures in federal public offices and enterprises and thereby plugging loopholes that are believed to be conducive for corruption; exposing, investigating and prosecuting alleged corruption offences where they are committed in federal public offices and public enterprises, or in the regional offices related to subsidies granted by the Federal Government.

· In cooperation with relevant bodies, to strive to create an aware society where corruption will not be condoned or tolerated by promoting ethics and anti-corruption education;

· In cooperation with relevant bodies, to prevent corruption offences and other impropriety;

With a view to creating a national, holistic, inclusive, and cohesive anti-corruption framework within which all parties and stakeholders actively take part in the national struggle against corruption, a draft anti-corruption policy has been developed recently. The roles of major stakeholders in the fight against corruption are clearly defined in the draft policy. It exhaustively outlined the roles of the executive, public and financial sectors, non-governmental organizations and community groups, donor agencies, media, and civil society organizations.

The draft policy has been prepared by taking into consideration the fundamental tenets and principles expressed in the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. In fact, it stated the role of the draft policy to the furtherance of the continuous development and sustainability of mutually supportive conditions for ensuring respect for our rights and freedoms and for the collective promotion of our interests. This has been clearly expressed in the preamble of the current Constitution. It also supports the economic vision of the Country to alleviate poverty.

The policy, by citing international best practice, underscores the fact that the most effective counter-action to corruption is to adopt the three-pronged approach, which has been at the heart of the Commission’s anti-corruption strategy. According to the draft policy, education, prevention, and enforcement are the complementary and mutually supportive building-blocks of the national anti-corruption struggle. The policy also requires all concerned parties to accept a fair share of their responsibility and adopt the three core building-blocks, around which their own ethics and anti-corruption strategies are to be constructed.

With a view to discharging its duties and responsibilities effectively and efficiently, the FEACC developed and introduced a four-year strategic plan in 1998 (Ethiopian Calendar) focusing major attention on six key issues. The six critical and strategic issues which were identified in the development of the four-year strategic plan are capacity building, prioritizing major tasks, establishing an efficient service delivery system, forging strong partnership with pertinent bodies and stakeholders, establishing an integrated information system and fighting HIV/AIDS. The Commission is making preparations to develop another strategic plan, as the existing one is on the verge of completion.

In cooperation with relevant bodies, to combat corruption and impropriety by raising public awareness about the disastrous effects of corruption and by promoting ethics in public services and among the society. It is also duty-bound to prevent corruption by studying the practices and working procedures in public offices and public enterprises thereby ensuring the revision of methods of work, which may be conducive to corrupt practices. Following the finalization of its studies, the Commission is legally authorized to put forward corrective measures and recommendations and follow up their implantation.

According to Article Seven of the Establishment Proclamation, the FEACC is responsible for investigating any complaints of alleged or suspected serious breaches of codes of ethics in public offices or public enterprises and following up the taking of proper measures. Similarly, the investigation and prosecution of any alleged or suspected corruption offences specified in the Criminal Code or in other laws, where they are committed in public offices or public enterprises, or in regional offices relating to subsidies granted by the Federal Government to the regions, fall within the power of the Commission.

It is also the duty of the Commission to investigate (where there is reasonable suspicion in connection with corruption offences) and obtain information about any bank account of suspected persons and cause the attachment, with court order, of same where necessary. In a similar vein, the FEACC is duty bound to freeze, by court order, the assets of any person who may be under investigation for corruption and cause, through court order, the forfeiture of any assets and wealth obtained by corruption or its equivalent to the state or dispose same by or without public auction.

In cooperation with relevant bodies, the Commission has the legal power and authority to register the assets and financial interests of public officials and public employees compellable to do so as specified by law. It is also responsible to protect witnesses and whistle blowers and reward persons or offices that are successful in fighting and preventing corruption. The tasks of preparing codes of ethics for public offices and public enterprises (apart from legislative and judicial bodies), undertaking research on ethics and corruption, following up the enforcement of anti-corruption laws, supporting regions and cooperating with similar bodies also come under the jurisdiction of the Commission. Additionally, the Commission is tasked with coordinating other components of the ethical infrastructures; providing the necessary support to the public offices and public enterprises in the establishment of ethics liaison units; and liaising and cooperating with national, regional, and international bodies with similar objectives.

Our organizational values and principles are our moral boundaries−the lines the FEACC and its members will not cross. They are the ethical standards by which the FEACC measures itself, and by which it invites the public to measure it. They are reflections of the Commission’s commitment to the public to do its job in a way they would be proud of. The FEACC is committed to live by its values and principles. The following principles and values are critical to the Commission to accomplish its mission and achieve its vision.

The FEACC promotes the following principles: Integrity, loyalty, transparency, confidentiality, honesty, accountability, serving public interest, exercising legitimate authority, impartiality, respecting the law, responsiveness, and exercising good leadership.

The Commission has been doing its best to acquire as many professionals and support staff as possible. At the end of December 2009, it had 236 employees. The professional mix of the staff is so diverse that we can find lawyers, engineers, managers, accountants, education experts, public relations officers, media people, economists, psychologists, and other social science experts.

The FEACC is comprised eight Directorates and three services. The directorates are identified as Ethics Education; Public Relations; Corruption Prevention; Corruption Investigation and Prosecution; Ethics Infrastructures Coordination; Plan, Procurement, and Finance; Change Management; and Human Resource Management directorates. The Services are also designated as Legal, Audit, and General Service . The Commissioner's Office and the Deputy Commissioner's Office are also part of the organizational set up.

The Government allocates nearly 13.5 million Birr (on average) in annual budget for the Commission. Part of the money is spent on operational activities the remaining section going to salary and other expenses. Additionally, the Commission has become beneficiary of the financial assistance from the United Nations Development Programme, under the latter’s Democratic Institutions Assistance Programme. The assistance is estimated at eight million Birr for three years, starting from 2008.

The major objective of this Directorate is creating an ethical society that doesn’t condone corruption through expanding and promotion of ethics and anti-corruption education. It is one of the core directorates that are at the heart of corruption prevention. In discharging its responsibilities, the Directorate uses various tools and channels of communication, including media and different publications. It also gives face-to-face ethics and anti-corruption education. Simply put, all the activities and efforts of this Directorate are geared towards the effective prevention of corruption through the enhancement and expanding of ethics and anti-corruption education.

Currently, the Directorate has 33 members in total. In full capacity, it will have some 45 professionals. As to their educational background, members of the staff have held diplomas, first degrees, and second degrees in the areas of languages and literature, art and graphics, education, political science and international relations, curriculum development, and communications. These professionals have various levels of experience in the areas of teaching, curriculum development, journalism, communication, public relations, etc.

This Directorate is duty-bound to prevent corruption offences and other improprieties in cooperation with relevant bodies. In order to do so, it studies the practices and working procedures in public offices and public enterprises, thereby ensuring the revision of methods of work, which may be conducive to corrupt practices. Upon the completion of the studies, the Directorate consults the subject public offices and enterprises and other stakeholders, puts forward corrective measures and recommendations and follows up their implementation.

The Directorate is also duty bound to conduct studies and researches on corruption so that other directorates and services of the Commission will be able to base their activities based on the outcome of such studies. It also offers consultancy service to other sectors and stakeholders on fighting and preventing corruption. The Directorate also conducts unanticipated and sudden examination of working procedures (during tendering, for example) in public offices and enterprises if it is tipped that a certain activity is being carried out in a way that is conducive to corruption because of lack of transparency and accountability. Such an intervention before the suspected corruption is committed is an important component of the Commission’s corruption prevention programme.

· Studying and examining working procedures and processes in key service delivery institutions in a comprehensive manner and

The recipients of the services of the Directorate include government departments, regional anti-corruption institutions, ethics liaison units, non-governmental organizations, private sector, and other stakeholders.

The research findings of the Department are believed to be very helpful in basing the Commission's activities on research findings, thereby raising its overall performance and efficiency. Presently, the Corruption Prevention Directorate has 22 professional staffers in total. In full capacity, it will have some 37 professionals.

The Corruption Investigation and Prosecution Directorate is authorized to investigate or cause the investigation of any alleged or suspected corruption offences where they are committed in public offices or public enterprises or in the regional offices relating to subsidies granted by the Federal Government to the regions. It is also obliged by law to investigate or cause the investigation of any complaints of alleged serious breaches of the codes of ethics in public offices or public enterprises and follow up the taking of proper measures.

The Directorate receives tips-off from whistle blowers on alleged corruption offences and ethical infringements, investigates them in the order of their seriousness. If it deems it necessary, it may require of any federal or regional public office or enterprise to produce relevant documents and provide appropriate information for the examination of practices and working procedures.

Accordingly, any public official or public employee is obliged by law to show or produce relevant documents or information when requested by the Directorate. Moreover, the former are duty-bound to report to the Directorate where they have a reasonable suspicion that corruption offences are or are about to be committed. The Directorate, on its part, is responsible to provide physical and job security protection for witnesses and whistle-blowers. Investigators are duty-bound to apply to courts for restraining order on any property acquired through the Commission of corruption offences.

Once the investigation of cases is finalized, the Directorate will press charges against any alleged or suspected corruption offences (where they are committed in public offices or public enterprises or in the regional offices relating to subsidies granted by the Federal Government to regions). It is also authorized to freeze, by court order, assets and wealth that are allegedly obtained through corruption and cause (through court order) their forfeiture and confiscation.

If the court verdict goes in its favour, the Directorate shall dispose the assets and wealth (by or without public auction) and transfer them to the Government. The Directorate works in close collaboration with Courts, prosecutorial organs, and other stakeholders. Currently, the Directorate has 69 staffers in total. In full capacity, it will have 138 professionals.

This Directorate is tasked with coordinating the activities of the Commission with that of major stakeholders (ethics infrastructures) in the fight against corruption. It spearheaded the establishment of joint forums with the media, regional anti-corruption bodies, professional associations, mass organizations, and law enforcement agencies. It also facilitated the founding of the National Anti-corruption Coalition in which almost all stakeholders are members. Currently, the Directorate has seven staffers in total. In full capacity, it will have 21 professionals, including the ones that will be based in the Dire Dawa Branch Office of the Commission.

The Directorate is in charge of coordinating the following major stakeholders and ethics infrastructures:

· Joint forums of the Commission and stakeholders(that are mentioned above), like the media,

· Public offices (police departments, prosecutorial bodies, courts, ombudsman and human rights agencies, auditor generals, and parliaments, etc) that are in charge of probing, investigating, and prosecuting crimes at federal and regional levels,

The Directorate extends support to the above-mentioned organizations in the following areas:

The Human Resource Management Directorate is tasked with developing the Commission’s human resource capacity through employment and transfer. It is also responsible to build the capacity of its staff through various training and awareness raising programmes. Issues related to credentials, promotion, benefits, record, pension and leave of absence are also handled by the same Unit. Currently, the Human Resource Management Directorate has 12 members of staff. In full capacity, it will have 14 professionals.

The Planning, Procurement, and Finance Directorate is in charge of planning, organizing, coordinating, and managing the Commission’s fiscal and financial activities. Planning recurrent activities, making projections for special projects, and monitoring and evaluation of various activities are the planning aspects of its duties. It further engages in procurement and property administration and financial management of the Commission.

It prepares fiscal and financial plans, develops projects and follows up their implementation, and prepares reports. It deals with procurement processes, including preparation of procurement plan, ensuring the availability of supplies and various materials and administering them effectively, and properly supporting the functions of the different directorates of the Commission. It also disburses funds and ensures proper maintenance of book of accounts, including its timely auditing.

Moreover, the Directorate develops medium-term strategic plan of the Commission, along with the proposed action plan, and ensures its approval by the Commissioners. It advises the Commissioners and directorates of the Commission on the fiscal and financial plans and projects, monitoring and evaluation of plans, implementation of projects, procurement and property administration, and financial management issues. It has 19 members of staff.

The major objective of this Directorate is to contribute to the achievement of the Commission’s major objectives by effectively liaising between the Commission and the general public. It does so by creating an aware society (in cooperation with relevant bodies) where corruption will not be tolerated by promoting ethics and anti-corruption education and publicizing the Commission’s visions, missions, objectives, duties, powers, programmes, activities, and achievements. It is duty-bound to promote the Commission’s objectives and activities through various outlets thereby garnering public support in the fight against corruption. It also undertakes impact assessment projects on public opinion on the Commission’s activities. It also plays a central role in making the issue of preventing and fighting corruption a popular agenda.

In discharging its responsibilities through the dissemination of timely and current information, the Directorate uses various tools and channels of communication, including media, posters, fliers, brochures, stickers, billboards, news letters (internal and external) and magazines. The Directorate has 16 members in total. In full capacity, once BPR is conducted on its activities and work flows, it will have more professionals than it currently has.

The newly-established Directorate is tasked with following up the implementation of the Commission’s activities and plans in accordance and conformity with the work directives and principles formulated following the conducting of the BPR recently. It is also duty-bound to make sure that the Commission’s activities are undertaken in line with the on-going national Civil Service Reform Programme. If it finds it necessary, it may propose corrective measures in the implementation of the Commission’s programmes and plans in accordance with the Civil Service Reform Programme and the BPR-borne new work directive. It may also design proposals for improving working procedures in the Commission’s directorates, services, and other divisions.

The Directorate will centrally gather, store, analyze, and manage all the information on the Commission and its activities and disseminate same to the directorates and services of the Commission, with or without request, as the case may be. Additionally, it is duty-bound to table the information it gathered and analyzed for discussion among the members of the Commission’s management and the staff quarterly. Moreover, it is also responsible for designing proposals for improving working procedures of the commission.

The Directorate is responsible for seeking out and looking for new working procedures and methods of work from within or outside the country and adopting them, if it finds them congruent with the newly introduced working procedures in the Commission. It will also oversee and follow up the implementation of new working procedures and the system of balanced score card. The Directorate is tasked with conducting baseline surveys and impact assessment projects to measure the level of satisfaction of all stakeholders in general and the public in particular with the Commission’s performance. The Directorate also manages the Commissioner’s and Deputy Commissioner’s Offices. The Information Technology Unit takes charge of equipping the Commission and its staffers with appropriate information technology. Currently, the department is under reengineering and is subject to structural change once the reengineering processes are finalized. Currently, the Directorate has 15 members of staff.

The Internal Audit Service audits the financial documents and performances of the various directorates and services. It then presents the report to the Commissioner. The Service examines the authenticity, legitimacy and validity of the financial documents and declarations, makes recommendations based on its assessments, and follows up the implementation of the recommendations.

The Legal Service, on its part, provides legal advice to the Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, and other directorates of the Commission; drafts laws, regulations, directives, etc. and comments on same when prepared by others; represents the Commission on legal matters before courts, administrative tribunals, etc. It also detects possible bottlenecks in laws, regulations, and directives in force and proposes amendments if need be. It also prepares contract documents and comments on same when prepared by other parties. Other activities related with the UN Convention Against Corruption and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption are also taken care of by this service. The newly established General Service section is in charge of maintenance, transportation, cleaning, and security issues and activities.

The FEACC exercises extreme caution in the recruitment and employment of employees. Following the announcement of vacancies on government papers, the FEACC receives application packages from applicants. Then, the work experience, academic achievement, and background of the applicants will be seriously assessed. Subsequently, the ones with relevant experience, better academic achievement, and clean background will be short-listed. Finally, those with better cumulative results (measured against the three criteria) will be recruited to the posts from among the short-listed applicants. It is worth noting that any applicant with unethical background will be immediately rejected.

Once employed, the employees are expected to adhere to the Commission’s work and code of ethics. Apart from expertise, commitment and professionalism, they are also expected to maintain a consistent integrity and clean image so that the public’s confidence in the Commission is sustained. The Commission cannot tell the public to maintain integrity if some of its employees are behaving unethically and immorally. That is why disciplinary action is taken without any compromise and tolerance against any employee found to have contravened the Commission’s code of ethics.

One of the new approaches taken after the BPR is the conducting of induction training programmes for new starters. The induction trainings are given to ensure that new starters are retained and settled in quickly. The induction training process offers the best opportunity to help new recruits integrate into the work environment more quickly. The trainings will also enable them to be productive as soon as possible. The trainees will be able to understand the Commission’s mission, vision, objectives, and values. Additionally, they will have a firm understanding of the jobs they are required to do with clear methods, time scales, and expectations. The trainings will help the new employees do their jobs better and quicker.

In summary, the induction trainings will include the following elements, among others:

The Ethiopian Government has adopted the preventive approach as a major course of action and line of thought in its fight against corruption, with curative measures reinforcing it. Given the cost-effective, sustainable and participatory nature of this approach, no wonder the government took it as a primary direction of stamping out corruption at the national level.

The FEACC is of the conviction that expanding ethics and anti-corruption education among the public and plugging loopholes in the working procedures of public offices and enterprises should be at the heart of preventing corruption offences. It is for this very reason that the Commission is currently launching wide-ranging awareness raising programmes through formal and informal ways.

With a view to preventing corruption before it is committed, the FEACC examines the working procedures in government departments and public enterprises thereby plugging loopholes, which may be conducive to corrupt practices. It has also been taking curative measures to make sure that corruptors didn’t get away with their corrupt activities and offences.

Since its establishment in May 2001, the FEACC has given face-to-face ethics and anti-corruption education for more than 135,000 Ethiopians drawn from various cross-sections of the society. In this regard, one of the approaches taken was to give sustainable and organized training on ethics and corruption prevention to a limited number of trainees who may be drawn mainly from public offices and enterprises and other ethics infrastructures. Then, these trainees will, in turn, train the greater public in their respective areas of concern. Understandably, therefore, this approach is important to multiply the skills and knowledge (received by a limited number of trainees) on fighting and preventing corruption among thousands of Ethiopians.

The training programmes focus on equipping the trainees with the basic knowledge and skills on anti-corruption laws and strategies, corruption prevention strategies, and codes of ethics for civil servants and their managers. What is more, there are standardized training manuals under the new system. The ethics and anti-corruption education is being offered based on and supported by practical examples and real experiences. Such an approach is believed to motivate the public to participate in the struggle against corruption actively. Furthermore, the Commission is trying everything in its capacity to base its ethics education programme on research findings. It is also trying to be creative in employing various training methodologies during training of trainers. In this regard, the Commission is prepared to use the media aggressively in raising public awareness on providing tips-off, whistleblowers protection, and achievements of the Commission.

Additionally, it reached millions of Ethiopians through the media and tried to raise public awareness on the dire need to fight corruption. It also played a key role in the inclusion of ethics and civic education in the Country's formal education curriculum and the establishment of ethics and civic education clubs in schools in collaboration and partnership with the Ministry of Education.

The establishment of ethics liaison units in 267 public offices and enterprises has also contributed to the expansion of ethics education and prevention of corruption, at least in those offices and enterprises. It also played a significant role in the development of textbooks and other materials on ethics and civic education. Moreover, awareness-raising programmes have been launched through the media.

With a view to enhancing the expansion of ethics and anti-corruption education, the Commission produced and distributed over half a million brochures, magazines, fliers and posters among government departments, public enterprises, and the general public at large. It has also been preparing and distributing an internal monthly newsletter, namely “Guadachin” among the Commission’s staff. In an attempt to inform the diplomatic community, donors, international NGOs, anti-corruption watchdogs, and development partners on the on-going anti-corruption struggle, the FEACC has been issuing an external bi-monthly English newsletter, namely “Insight”.

As enshrined in the amended Establishment Proclamation of the Commission, examining the practices and working procedures in government departments and public enterprises and plugging loopholes that are believed to be conducive for corrupt practices is at the heart of the Country's corruption prevention programme. So far, the Commission examined the practices and working procedures in more than 117 government departments and public enterprises, put forward corrective measures and followed up the implementation of the recommendations.

Among the departments and enterprises whose working procedures were examined included the Ethiopian privatization Agency; Ethiopian Airlines; Addis Ababa University; Ethiopian Insurance Corporation; Commercial and Development Banks of Ethiopia; former Federal Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Agency; former Customs Authority; Roads Authority; Telecommunications and Electric Power Corporations; Ministry of Mine and Energy; and former Ministry of Youth, Sports, and Culture.

Researches were also conducted on procurement and petrol consumption in government departments and public enterprises after which corrective recommendations were given. The Commission was also following up the implementation of the recommendations by the respective public offices and enterprises. To make future projects in this area more fruitful and successful even before the implementation of the BPR, the FEACC developed guidelines for prioritizing the examination of the working procedures and practices of public offices and public enterprises in their order of urgency and seriousness.

In the face of severe capacity limitations, the FEACC cannot examine the practices and working procedures in all public offices and enterprises at a time and put forward corrective measures and recommendations. Unsurprisingly, therefore, it had to prioritize its target areas and guide the reviewing and examination of working procedures in public offices and enterprises based on the priority it set and the guidelines it put in place.

Therefore, putting the susceptibility index of the public offices and enterprises in place had to come first. The FEACC used the following three criteria to determine the degree of susceptibility of public offices and enterprises to corruption: Vulnerability to corruption, impact of corruption, and scope of corruption.

Based on the afore-mentioned criteria, the FEACC came up with a susceptibility index classifying public offices and enterprises engaged in collecting taxes and revenue, building infrastructures, providing licenses and work permits, allocating land and managing the construction sector as the most corruption prone ones. Under the second category came courts, organizations that had a monopoly on providing a certain service, law enforcement departments, import-export organizations, loan and insurance enterprises and distributors of goods. The remaining public offices and enterprises fall under the third category.

The FEACC has also begun reviewing the practices and working procedures of key public offices and enterprises by assigning experts on permanent basis. Such public institutions, which are believed to be pivotal in public service delivery, need to be given special emphasis. Just to high light the common steps followed in examining the working procedures, the Commission will examine working procedures in limited and specified areas (which are believed to be conducive for corruption in a certain organization), not the entire organization. Such a technique is believed to be worthwhile for the following reasons:

Firstly, the specific area to be examined will be identified right from the very beginning, rendering the conduction of a preliminary survey to identify a specific area for examination worthless and irrelevant. Secondly, the examination will be conducted only on a specific activity, where there are loopholes for committing corruption. We will not try to examine an ocean of activities in a certain working procedure, as was the case in the former system. As a result, we won't waste a lot of time and energy on gathering and organizing data and information that may be useful for the examination of an entire working procedure from the very beginning to the end.

Thirdly, an expert will be assigned to review working procedures only in a specific activity and in a specific period of time, enabling him/her to prepare and submit his/her own report on his/her specific project within a relatively shorter period of time. The briefness of the report (as it is limited to a specific activity) will make things easier for report evaluators to finalize their assessment of reports as early as possible. In addition, clear recommendations and corrective measures, which can be practically implemented, will be proposed. It will also be easier to follow up the implementation of such recommendations and corrective measures. This will also enable the Commission to cover a lot more public offices and enterprises than before in examining the working procedures and practices in them.

The Commission has also been doing its best to upgrade the capacity of ethics officers to the desirable level through training and experience sharing programmes so that they can examine working procedures that are believed to be conducive to corruption in their respective public offices and enterprises.

The FEACC established channels and mechanisms of making corruption complaints. Whistle blowers can present their complaints about alleged corruption offences, ethical infringements and improprieties in person, on telephone, through e-mail, on fax and through post office. Their identity could be withheld upon their request. The FEACC will, in no way, disclose their identities without their permission and against their will.

If the complainants prefer to present their complaints in person, they can directly turn up and do so physically. If they want to blow the whistle on alleged corruption on fax, they can use 0115536991. The e-mail and postal addresses of the Commission are feacinv@ethionet.et and 34798/9 respectively. For those who want to do it on telephone, the FEACC has already set up a new hotline (988) at which they can call and inform it about their cases free of charge.

The Commission provided the public and other stakeholders with clear and sufficient information on the channels, mechanisms and procedures of presenting their complaints to it through various publications and the media. Just to outline the procedures briefly, the complaints will be received by officers assigned for this very purpose. Then, some sort of analysis will be made to check whether the alleged offences are in deed corruption offences or not. In this regard, it should be noted that whistle blowers have every right (whether their tips-off fall within the Commission's jurisdiction or not) to know about the status of the cases which they have brought to the Commission.

Afterwards, the Commission is duty-bound to identify those cases which come within its jurisdiction and transfer them to the Department of Investigation for further examination and scrutiny. Subsequently, the FEACC will press charges against those cases which are well-substantiated. Regarding the cases which fall out of the Commission’s jurisdiction, they will be sent to the concerned bodies and organizations.

As far as the achievements made through curative measures (investigation and prosecution of corruption offences) are concerned, the FEACC made some encouraging accomplishments in the last eight years. So far, it investigated a number of alleged corruption offences and prosecuted offenders some 300 of whom received from 1-19 years of imprisonment.

The FEACC has already hammered out a carefully-worked out plan to improve the mix and diversity of its professionals in the Investigation Department. Whistle-blowers tip us off corruption offences that are allegedly committed in a number of public offices and public enterprises. Obviously, investigating such cases requires the skills and knowledge of a mix of professionals from various areas of specialization. That is why increasing the diversity of professionals is high on the agenda of the Commission. In parallel with this, the FEACC is prepared to raise the capacity of its investigators to the required level through sustainable training.

One other trend that needs to be changed in the years to come is the dependency of the Commission (almost entirely) on whistle blowers for spotting alleged corruption offences. The FEACC has, therefore, been considering the option of developing its own intelligence and surveillance system for spotting and identifying reputed corruption offences thereby complementing the good job the whistle blowers are doing. Putting such a system in place will enable the Commission to identify a good number of suspected corruption offences by its intelligence and surveillance unit.

Previously, all sorts of tips-off (whether they fall within or out of the Commission's jurisdiction) brought by whistle blowers had to be presented to the Director of the Corruption Investigation Department for decision on the jurisdiction of the Commission on them. Such a time-consuming procedure was, no doubt, delaying the process thereby denying whistle blowers a timely and quick response on the status of their cases. To curb the problem, therefore, we have established a new mechanism whereby tips-off that fall out of the Commission's jurisdiction should be fully dealt with by the Registrar Office of the Corruption Investigation and Prosecution Directorate.

First, whistle blowers will learn immediately whether their case comes within the Commission's jurisdiction or falls out of it. If they have complaints to file on the decision made in relation to their cases, there are mechanisms through which they can do so. Secondly, it will give investigators in the Registrar team to do a job that matches the level of their professional qualification and competence. It will also help them devote their full time to dealing with cases that fall within the Commission's jurisdiction only.

Formerly, also, prosecutors used to examine cases only after investigators finalized the investigation of those cases and sent the final results to them. In those days, files had to be sent back and forth between investigators and prosecutors for further investigation and explanation. Besides, the cases had to pass through various levels of leadership before they were readied for prosecution. Such unnecessary and redundant process steps used to consume a lot of time, energy, and resources.

Under this system of investigation, mechanisms whereby prosecutors can participate in the investigation of cases right from the beginning have already been put in place. According to this procedure, prosecutors should give investigators a general guiding direction right from the beginning (without intervening in the professional independence of the latter) as to how the investigation of alleged corruption cases should be carried out. Such a system is believed to have the following advantages over the previous one:

For a start, the participation of prosecutors in the investigation of cases right from the beginning will help the Commission save a sizable amount of time, energy and resources that would have been wasted on gathering and organizing irrelevant information that doesn't contribute to the effective prosecution of cases. Secondly, the fact that the investigation of cases are conducted with the support and guidance of prosecutors will significantly reduce the probability of returning cases (by prosecutors) back to investigators for further investigation.

Thirdly, the assignment of a particular investigator and a supporting prosecutor to the full investigation of a particular case right from the beginning will reduce the frequency of the movement of files back and forth among many individuals. As the prosecutor is involved in the investigation of the case right from the beginning and knows it very well, he will be able to pass a swift decision upon the completion of the investigation on whether the case is sufficiently substantiated for prosecution or still lacks in supportive evidence for prosecution.

Previously, there was a pre-investigation stage where cases were identified for prosecution and where there was a relatively little accountability for throwing out cases without deep investigation. This stage was also time-consuming. These days, the pre-investigation stage is not at all necessary, as the prosecutors will follow up the cases right from the beginning of the investigation. As mentioned earlier, the partnership of the prosecutor and the investigator will significantly enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the investigation of corruption offences.

Formerly, prosecutors were tasked with examining files and prosecuting alleged corruptors, at the same time, in a court of law. The double assignment would, no doubt, reduce the overall effectiveness and efficiency of prosecutors, as they were wasting the biggest chunk of their time sitting idly in court rooms until it was their turn to defend their cases. We have, therefore, grouped prosecutors into two: Those responsible for dealing with cases in courts and those in charge of examining cases in office. Such a separation of duties and responsibilities has the following advantages and benefits:

Prosecutors that are responsible for taking care of cases in Courts will have the freedom of spending their full time on prosecutorial matters, which in turn will enable them to bring more cases to courts than before. It will also considerably reduce the amount of time they were wasting waiting for their turns in court rooms. Similarly, prosecutors that are in charge of examining cases in office won't be involved in the prosecution of corruption offences in court of law. Instead, they will focus only on examining and reviewing cases assigned to them on full time basis. This will enhance their efficiency and effectiveness in terms of time and quality. It will also enable them to provide investigators with the support they may need in investigating cases right from the beginning to the end.

Formerly, all sorts of activities related to making appeals to pertinent courts against some cases and presenting formal request to courts for letters of summons, a copy of verdicts given and other issues were carried out by investigators or prosecutors. Such assignments have taken much of their time, which they could have used to discharge other professional duties and responsibilities. Presently, such activities will be carried out by individuals assigned to the jobs on permanent basis. Such a system will enable the investigators and prosecutors to spend their full time on investigating and prosecuting corruption offences.

Currently, the Prosecution Department has given more emphasis on rating its performance based on the number of cases it may win in courts, not on the number of cases it may take to courts. Therefore, the Department will do the best it can to raise the conviction rate of the cases it takes to court. The Commission will delegate the investigation and prosecution of some corruption offences to other investigating and prosecuting organs so that it can focus on tackling grand corruption.

Among the convicts were high profile government officials, including the former Prime Minister, Defense Minister and Head of Government Enterprises and Privatization Agency. Some senior bank and telecom managers, land administration officials, and senior judges were also among the culprits. We believe that such cases are more than enough to prove the Government's seriousness and political commitment in dealing with corruption and impropriety. Currently, also, the Prosecution Department of the Commission has some 200 pending cases in the regional and federal Supreme and High Courts.

More than 1,162,345 square meter of land (worth more than 2 billion Ethiopian Birr), nearly 4.6 million USD, 81 Kg of gold, 32 residential houses and four other buildings and 35 vehicles, among others, have also been restrained on court order. What is more, two factories (flour and soap factories) that were believed to have been obtained through corruption were transferred to government ownership on court order.

In addition to other means and mechanisms of detecting alleged corruption offences, the FEACC received nearly 12,000 tips-off on alleged corruption offences from whistle blowers. Decisions were also made on dealing with the cases by the Commission and other pertinent law enforcement bodies. With a view to encouraging whistle blowers to continue to blow the whistle on corruption and impropriety, the FEACC has been doing everything in its capacity to protect them from any retaliatory actions that corruptors, on whom they may blow the whistle, may pose on them. Many of them were given job security protections in the last six years or so.

In order to provide the protection through a firmly established legal framework, the Commission initiated the formulation of a draft “Whistle Blowers and Witnesses Protection Proclamation”. Upon implementation following its approval by the House of Representatives, the proclamation is believed to ensure the protection of whistle blowers in a more reliable and comprehensive manner. So far, the Commission has given protection to nearly 40 whistle blowers and witnesses.

Currently, the Commission has 236 employees. The FEACC has a strong conviction that it should build its capacity to the desirable level to realize its objectives and fulfill its mission. In this regard, the efforts exerted in the areas of developing training manuals and modules, internal regulations and directives, revenue and expenditure manuals and the four-year strategic plan were particularly worth mentioning. The implementation of the civil service reform programme and the internal and external audit recommendations was also part and parcel of the capacity building programme.

The provision of trainings and the organization of study tour programmes for members of the Commission's staff were particularly important. The training programmes were given in the areas of good governance, communications, media, public relations, democratization and development processes, transparency, anti-corruption endeavours, procurement management, report writing, information system, law enforcement, investigation and prosecution of corruption offences, project planning and execution, basic managerial skills, integration and coordination of activities, project monitoring and evaluation, provision of support to stakeholders and regional ethics and anti-corruption commissions, and building partnership with stakeholders in the fight against corruption.

The establishment of procedures and standards for guiding the investigation of alleged corruption offences and the development of codes of conduct and administrative regulations and procedures for handling disciplinary cases and grievance-related problems within the Commission itself were also components of the capacity building programme. The methods and working procedures in the entire human resource development programme have been reengineered. It has been clearly stated in the new system that all the training programmes should be designed and implemented based on the human resource needs and requirements of the Commission's departments and services. They should also be problem-solving and tailor-made. They must also be easy to evaluate in concrete and tangible terms.

Since its inception, the FEACC has been working in close partnership and collaboration with various stakeholders, including donors, development partners, civil society organizations, media, religious groups, ethics liaison units, regional states, foreign governments and public offices and enterprises. The police, courts, Institution of Ombudsman, Human Rights Commission, Auditor-General, Parliament and the Prime Minister’s Office are some of the Commission's partners.

Domestically, for example, the civil society has been participating in the organization and launching (though not to the desirable level) of training programmes as were religious groups in expanding ethics and anti-corruption education. The media were also supportive (though not to the required level) of the anti-corruption campaign in raising public awareness and blowing the whistle on corruption and impropriety. The Ministries of Capacity Building and Education have also been working with the Commission in the areas of capacity building and expanding ethics education respectively.

Similarly, some development partners and foreign governments have been extending support in sponsoring study tour and training programmes and sharing experience. The Governments of the Netherlands , China , Malaysia , Botswana , South Korea , United States of America , and Zambia could be cited as examples in this regard. The World Bank, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Department for International Development (DFID) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime have also been supportive of the Commission’s efforts in the last eight years.

The Commission's partnership with regional states is not hierarchical. The anti-corruption bodies in the regional states are autonomous and independent. The FEACC has been working in collaboration with them in its fight against corruption and impropriety. It has for, example, been extending support to them in the areas of training and capacity building.

Experience sharing has also been high on the agenda of the FEACC and regional ethics and anti-corruption Commissions. In this regard, the collaborative work the Commission has been undertaking with the Tigrai; Amhara; Gambella; Oromia; Benshangul-Gumuz; Harari; and the Southern Nations, nationalities and Peoples Regional States is worth mentioning.

The FEACC has also been working in close collaboration with 267 ethics liaison offices in government departments and public enterprises, the duty of which is to deal with ethical issues, examine working procedures that are believed to prone to corruption in their respective public offices and enterprise, facilitate the anti-corruption struggle in their respective public offices and advise the management on fighting corruption. The FEACC provided the ethics officers in the liaison units with trainings, material resources and advice. With a view to enhancing their performance, a regulation guiding their operations and activities has already been put in place.

Civil society organizations are also believed to be key stakeholders in the fight against corruption and impropriety. The Ethiopian Government has expressed readiness at various occasions to enhance the participation of the civil society in the campaign against corruption. That is why the FEACC has been doing its best to enhance the participation of the civil society in the fight against corruption.

The FEACC has so far launched many consultative workshops (in the presence of civil society organizations) in an attempt to strengthen collaborative efforts with them. It also left the door open for them to present any ideas and recommendations that might help strengthen the anti-corruption campaign. Additionally, the FEACC has established a good working relationship with both the private and government media. The FEACC has always been doing its level best to provide them with sufficient information regarding the on-going anti-corruption movement.

The Commission wants to further strengthen its relationship with the media, which is believed to be the most important watchdog for exposing and monitoring corrupt practices and improprieties. In fact, the Commission will do everything in its ability (in collaboration with other concerned bodies) to enhance the creation of vibrant and vigorous media in the country that can help fight corruption with better efficiency and effectiveness.

We also want to reinforce our ties with religious organizations in the years to come. We attach a very high premium on the role the religious leaders and respectable personalities can play in expanding ethics and anti-corruption education among the faithful thereby hindering the spread of corruption.

We also want to boost our partnership with associations working on promoting the causes of the Ethiopian women, who bore the brunt of corruption more than any other section of the society since time immemorial. The youth, who have significantly immense role in shaping the Country in every aspect, will also be encouraged to participate actively in the fight against corruption in an organized manner.

Similarly, professional associations are high on our list of major stakeholders. In our judgment, they should particularly be the Commission’s key partners in drafting and developing professional codes of ethics in various areas. The preparation and effective implementation of such codes of ethics will be of paramount importance in preventing unethical and unprofessional practices in various professions and areas of specialization. This will, in turn, contribute significantly to the prevention of corruption at the national level. Therefore, the FEACC is highly interested in working in close partnership and collaboration with various professional associations, which are morally and legally responsible for monitoring and preventing unethical practices in their respective professions.

To sum up this section, the FEACC has a strong conviction that civil society organizations are important stakeholders in the fight against corruption. It will, therefore, continue to work in partnership with them in the fight against corruption. Besides, the establishment of the Ethics Infrastructures Department for the coordination of stakeholders' efforts against corruption will no doubt enhance their collaboration with the Commission.

It is no more contentious that corruption has already become one of the major global threats. As in many other parts of the world, there are signs that it has been taking roots in Ethiopia , too. Cognizant of the growing danger, the Ethiopian Government established FEACC in May 2001 to tackle corruption and impropriety before it became rampant. Additionally, seven of the nine regional states have established their own ethics and anti-corruption commissions. It has also forged a strong and healthy relationship with many global and regional actors in the struggle against corruption. Our partnership with the World Bank and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) are worth mentioning in this regard. Ethiopia has also been actively participating in various global and regional anti-corruption initiatives like the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST) and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative ( EITI ). It is also a founding member of the International Association of Anti-corruption Authorities. The preparation of the draft proclamations for the registration of assets and financial interests of public officials and other public servants, the draft proclamation on the protection of witnesses and whistleblowers, and codes of conduct for civil servants and political appointees could also be taken as major undertakings. It is worth mentioning at this juncture that the first two draft proclamations have already been submitted to the Council of Ministers for approval. Most importantly, we have made encouraging strides in preventing and fighting corruption through law-enforcement and preventive measures.

The FEACC also established joint forums with the media institutions and associations, religious organizations, mass organizations, Ethiopian Chamber of Commerce and Sectoral Associations, federal institutions engaged in promoting rule of law, non-governmental organizations that incorporate anti-corruption as one of their objectives, and professional associations. Establishing bilateral forums has proved to be a good beginning. However, the process of coalition building should be elevated to the next level. We believe that it is a must for a country to have one national vision in addressing corruption. It needs to have a consensual national strategy devised by all stakeholders in the struggle against corruption. There should be a united front against corruption, which, in turn, necessitates the establishment of a national coalition against corruption.

The National Anti-corruption Coalition was established upon the conclusion of a founding conference on 4 July 2009 in which almost all stakeholders were in attendance. Broadly speaking, the coalition comprises government departments, civil society organizations, private sector, and opposition political parties. The representation of the founding members in the Coalition is presented in tabular form as follows. Non-members can join the coalition any time they want and become members.

As can be understood from the above tabular information, government representation in the coalition is only 31.79 per cent of the total number of members. The civil society as a whole takes the lion’s share of the membership representation, which stands at 48.34 per cent of the grand total. The civil society, private sector, and opposition political parties taken as a whole control 68.21 percent of the total membership seats. This is a clear indication that those groups have an immense role to play in the overall activities of the coalition. Here is some detailed information on the representation of each block and its constituents.

· Federal and regional ethics and anti-corruption commissions…………….7x2=14

· Regions that haven’t established their own ethics and anti-corruption commissions……5x2=10

· Members of the Joint Anti-corruption Forum established by the Commission and professional associations………22x1=22

· Members of the Joint Anti-corruption Forum established by the Commission and mass organizations……14x1=14

· Members of the Joint Anti-corruption Forum established by the Commission and the media institutions and associations…….25x1=25

· Members of the Joint Anti-corruption Forum established by the Commission and non-governmental organizations…… 7x1=7

· Members of the Joint Anti-corruption Forum Established by the Commission and religious organizations………5x1…………5

· Members of the Joint Anti-corruption Forum established by the Commission and the trade and sector associations………………27x1=27

· Opposition political parties that have relatively greater number of seats in the House of People’s Representatives…………3x1=3

ü Enhances the effectiveness and efficiency of the national anti-corruption struggle.

ü Strengthens the institutionalization, systematization, and accommodativeness of the national anti-corruption movement.

ü Enhances the participation of members of the coalition in the national struggle against corruption.

ü Paves the way for putting in place a national anti-corruption strategy that accommodates, governs and guides all anti-corruption efforts by all stakeholders.

ü Encourages regional governments to follow suit and facilitate the establishment of similar coalitions in their respective states.

As Member and Coordinator of the Coalition, the Commission has so many roles to play. As provided in its Establishment Proclamation, the FEACC is duty-bound to lead and coordinate all anti-corruption efforts exerted by members of the coalition and other ethics infrastructures. It will, therefore, serve as a permanent secretariat of the coalition. It is also required to take appropriate measures that are believed to enhance and boost the participation of stakeholders in the struggle against corruption.

It supports the capacity building efforts exerted by members of the coalition. It summarizes reports submitted by members and presents a summative synopsis of the reports to the chairperson every six months. It presents performance reports of the Coalition to the general assembly. It encourages non-member actors to join the Coalition and takes appropriate measures (as may be required) that could enhance their participation as new members.

In collaboration with the coalition members, it will do everything in its capacity to curb any obstacles and bottlenecks that the Coalition may face. It arranges and facilitates experience-sharing programmes so that members of the Coalition could draw lessons and experience from their counterparts abroad or any other body engaged in fighting corruption. It takes other measures, as may be required, that may strengthen the Coalition. It encourages and supports regional states to establish a similar coalition against corruption in their respective regions.

Other members of the Coalition, on their part, are expected to participate in the national anti-corruption struggle actively and seriously. They shall also exert efforts (in collaboration with the FEACC) to curb any obstacles that the Coalition may face in discharging its responsibilities. They are also required to propose and suggest corrective measures to improve the Commission’s leadership of the Coalition. In sum, they are duty-bound to engage in any anti-corruption activities that are believed to make the national anti-corruption struggle a success.

Formerly, anti-corruption laws were not separately treated in the Penal Code. They were located here and there in isolation. They were inseparably mixed with other criminal provisions, making it difficult to deal with corruption offences in isolation using those laws.

In the former Penal Code, we could find only the definition of corruption some where in it. There was no mention as to which offences fall under the category of corruption offences and which ones come under other classifications. This created loopholes in the judicial system and law enforcement organs and became a source of disagreement between and among the prosecutors, investigators and judges as to which criminal offences are corruption offences and which ones are not. There was, therefore, much leeway and possibility for corruptors to go unpunished.

To make matters even worse, there weren’t clear provisions to address some of the corruption offences. It was, therefore, very difficult to prosecute some of the globally serious crimes like terrorism, drug trafficking and money laundering. The afore-mentioned problems, compounded with other deficiencies in the Old Penal Code, prompted the Ethiopian Government to amend it as part of the on-going judicial reform.

As a Government serious about tackling corruption, the Ethiopian Government did everything in its capacity to include all anti-corruption provisions in the amended Penal Code (which came into effect as of 9^th May 2005), covering almost all sorts of corruption offences. Some 23 articles are included in the New Criminal Code to address the issue of corruption in isolation. Most importantly, a good number of anti-corruption laws are placed together. There are also provisions stating which offences fall under the category of corruption offences and which ones come under other categories. This sealed off the afore-mentioned loophole in the legal system, making it difficult for corruptors to get away with their criminal acts.

The preparation of the draft proclamations for the registration of assets and financial interests of public officials and other public servants and the development of codes of conduct for civil servants could also be taken as major undertakings. The formulation of a draft proclamation on the selection of awards for persons or offices that are successful in fighting and preventing corruption was also an encouraging achievement. The decisive measures taken by the Government have, no doubt, contributed to the enhancement of the on-going anti-corruption struggle.

According to the new Criminal Code of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, which included some 23 articles on the issue of tackling corruption, the following criminal acts, among others, are presumed to be corruption offences.

Abuse of power, acceptance of undue advantages, maladministration, unlawful disposal of object in charge, appropriation and misappropriation in the discharge of duties, traffic in official influence, illegal collection (e.g. taxes) or disbursement, undue delay of matters, taking things of value without or with inadequate consideration, granting and approving license improperly and possession of unexplained property fall under the category of "Corruption Crimes Committed by Public Servants in Breach of Trust and Good faith".

Soliciting of corrupt practices, giving things of value without or with inadequate consideration, acting as a go-between, using pretended authority and traffic in private influence come under the section "Crimes against Public Office by Third Parties".

In addition to the above-mentioned ones, the crimes of corruption also include corrupt electoral practices, forgery or falsification of public or military documents, aggravated breach of trust, the commission of and aiding in money laundering, and aggravated fraudulent misrepresentation committed by public servant.

Corruption is no longer a local matter but a transnational phenomenon that affects all societies and economies, making international cooperation to prevent and control it very essential. To promote, facilitate and enhance international cooperation and technical assistance in the prevention of and fight against corruption, the international community needs to adopt and put in place strong anti-corruption conventions.

Ethiopia

attaches a significant premium to such conventions and is committed to observing and implementing them. In fact, Ethiopia has already ratified the UN Convention against Corruption and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption in 2007.

The Council of Ministers deliberated on the conventions, gave the seal of its approval, and referred them to parliament for ratification, which the latter did formally. Then, the instrument of ratification and the formal statement of the UN Convention Against Corruption was sent to the United Nations Head Office based in New York . As to the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption, it has already been deposited with the African Union. With regard to the implementation aspect, it has already been underway even before the ratification of the conventions.

In the years to come, we will take additional measures to ensure the convergence of the conventions with the Country’s legal system in general and the anti-corruption laws in particular. Naturally, such steps are believed to speed up the incorporation of the provisions of the conventions into the Country’s internal laws with the passage of time.

As we have made it clear time and again, we have capacity constraints at all levels. In an attempt to curb the constraints, we have adopted two strategically important approaches in our capacity building programme: Giving sustainable training to our staffers and arranging experience-sharing programmes for them. In this section, we will focus on discussing the latter as the former has been sufficiently dealt with in the other section of the document under the title “ Capacity Building ”.

As many experts in the area would agree, the practice of experience sharing is arguably one of the best mechanisms of learning. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the FEACC has been doing its best to share experience (in fighting and preventing corruption) with its counterparts in other countries. It also benefited from continental and global conferences that were organized to enhance international cooperation in fighting corruption.

The Commission has, for example, established a long-standing relationship with the Independent Commission against Corruption of Hong Kong (ICAC). In fact, it made a successful study tour to Hong Kong in March 2003. The five-member delegation visited the various departments of its counterpart in Hong Kong for 11 successive days and managed to draw vitally important lessons in fighting corruption and impropriety. Once more, a 15-member delegation of the Commission made a three-day working visit to Hong Kong in June, 2009 and drew important lessons in the area of fighting and preventing corruption from its Hong Kong counterpart. In fact, the FEACC devised its anti-corruption strategies and policies in the model of the ICAC.

As one of the strongest anti-corruption commissions in the world, the ICAC introduced crucial skills and techniques of fighting corruption to the delegations. To say the least, the study tours were educative. Similarly, delegates traveled to Singapore and Malaysia and acquired vital knowledge and skills in preventing, investigating, and prosecuting corruption offences.

As mentioned earlier, the FEACC has also actively participated in a number of continental and global conferences on enhancing international cooperation in fighting corruption and impropriety. It has, for example, participated in the Vienna-Conference, which was held to draft the UN Anti-corruption Convention. The Commission took part in the International Anti-corruption Conference held in Czech Republic , Prague .

Members of the FEACC also took part in the four Global Forums on Fighting Corruption held in Washington DC (24-26 February, 1999), the Hague (28-31 May, 2001), Seoul (29-31 May, 2003) and Brasilia (7-10 June, 2005). The FEACC also participated in the Pan African Anti-corruption Conference held in Zambia , Lusaka , in 2005.

In addition, the Commission took part in the International Anti-corruption Conference held in Austria , Vienna in January, 2006. This Conference was organized to draft the procedure for the implementation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption. It, as well, participated in the First, Second, and Third Annual Conferences and General Meetings of the International Association of Anti-corruption Authorities held in Beijing , China , Bali , Indonesia , and Kiev , Ukraine , respectively. Additionally, it participated in the International Conference on Anti-corruption Efforts and Human Rights held in Poland in 2006.

What is more, it held discussions, on various occasions, with the Treasury Department of the United States of America, World Bank, UNDP, its Sudanese counterpart, the Chinese Law Society, European Union, Transparency International, and Audit Principal of the National Audit Office (NAO) of the British government, Xavier Gilquin .

The participation of a three-member delegation led by the Commissioner of the FEACC, H.E Ali Sulaiman, in the Global Forum V on Fighting Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity held in Johannesburg, South Africa (from 2-5 April 2007) and the taking part of the Deputy Commissioner of the FEACC, H.E Mr. Addisu Mengistu, in the Global Financial Crime Congress held in Bangkok, Thailand from 17-20 April 2007 could also be mentioned as major events. The visit of a four-member delegation comprising officials from the FEACC, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commissions of the Amhara and Tigray Regional States to China was educative as well.

The Commission’s active participation in Conferences held in various parts of the world on preventing and fighting corruption in the construction and mining sectors is particularly worth mentioning in this regard. In fact, Ethiopia is a member of the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST) and has been actively participating in the consultative Conferences of the Initiative held in various parts of the World, including London and Helsinki .

Given the fact that the biggest amount of the Country’s national budget goes to this sector, membership of the Commission in the CoST is of paramount importance. Another reason that makes the membership of the Commission even more important is the construction boom in the country. The FEACC has also participated in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative ( EITI ).

As active participants in most of the afore-mentioned forums and conferences, members of the Commission’s delegation presented the Ethiopian experience in fighting corruption and drew important lessons from others. The participation of Ethiopia in the afore-mentioned forums and conferences shows its strong desire and belief in the global collaboration and partnership against corruption. The colourful celebration of the International Anti-corruption Day (December 9) annually as per the Resolution (No. 58/4) of the UN General Assembly also shows Ethiopia’s commitment to international cooperation in the fight against corruption.

In conclusion, the FEACC, which puts a high premium to sharing experience and enhancing global cooperation in fighting corruption, has been doing everything it could to draw lessons from its counterparts. As a result of this, it has gained new skills and knowledge in the areas of preventing, investigating, and prosecuting corruption offences.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, it will continue to learn more and more from its counterparts in different corners of the world. It is also willing to share its experience with others. As mentioned above, the FEACC attaches a significant value to international cooperation in the fight against corruption. Accordingly, it is more than ready to cooperate with any anti-corruption body or stakeholder in this regard. The Commission has a firm conviction that corruption can be eradicated only through a multi-stakeholder approach, not through isolated, uncoordinated and separate measures.

In the course of the anti-corruption struggle, the Commission has faced some challenges. Of all the problems, capacity constraints have, up until now, remained to be the most serious and critical ones. There is lack of sufficient number of skilled work force in all areas (ethics education, prevention, investigation, and prosecution). The investigation of corruption offences requires special skills and high level of professionalism. Most of the cases cannot be successfully investigated and prosecuted using the skills and knowledge we use to handle other criminal acts.

The FEACC is a young institution. Its youthful inexperience, compounded with capacity and resource constraints, undoubtedly pose problems. Understandably, therefore, it goes without saying that young anti-corruption bodies (like ours) in particular and all anti-corruption institutions in general should give tailor-made capacity building trainings to their investigators and prosecutors.

Unfortunately, we couldn't fully design and implement such projects because of capacity limitations. For a start, we don't have enough financial and material resources at our disposal to design and launch such programmes despite the Governments’ sustainable effort to provide the Commission with the required financial and material resources. Besides, there are only a handful of high profile professional trainers in those areas at the national level, making it difficult for us to get their invaluable services easily. The other problem we have faced is entirely related to the mismatch between the high expectation of the general public and our achievements. A large proportion of the Ethiopian public expects us to do away with corruption and impropriety from the face of the Country in a matter few years, which, in our opinion, is too much to ask from a very young anti-corruption body in a poverty-ridden Country. Additionally, the unsubstantiated and speculative perceptions that some people hold towards the Commission have been negatively affecting the anti-corruption drive in the last few years.

Thirdly, the absence of bilateral or multilateral extradition treaties between and among our Country and other countries in different corners of the world has helped some corrupt guys get away with their criminal acts. Some of them have, for example, looted tremendous amount of public funds and assets, sought asylum in the western world, and secured safe haven there. Unfortunately, many developed countries do not show willingness to extradite such criminals in the absence of extradition treaties, which are usually signed after many years of bilateral or multilateral negotiations between and among countries.

In this regard, the launching of 'StAR Initiative' by the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the World Bank will no doubt be of paramount importance. According to the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, the Initiative is established to foster the much needed cooperation between developed and developing countries and between the public and the private sectors to ensure that looted assets are returned to their rightful owners. The Initiative was established to help developing countries recover assets stolen by corrupt leaders, invest them in effective development programmes, and combat safe havens internationally. The FEACC is of the conviction that the Initiative will foster global cooperation against corruption and impropriety.

Fourthly, lack of sufficient international cooperation in various areas, including capacity building, training, experience sharing and implementation of continental and global conventions has also impacted our performance negatively. To make things even more complicated for the Commission, some judges in the Country do not seem to fully realize the complex nature of corruption and the need for special treatment of it. Had the judicial system in the Country had a common and firm stance on corruption, it would have been relatively easier for the Commission to deal with it more effectively. Some managers in government departments and agencies have not also been that helpful in the prevention of corruption in their respective organizations and agencies. The absence of vibrant media has also negatively affected our performance.

The reluctance that some government departments and public enterprises were showing to produce supportive information that the Commission sought for investigative purposes was one of the stumbling blocks in the fight against corruption in this Country. There were also times when they were deliberately providing the Commission with misleading information. Worst of all, some of them were showing no willingness to implement the corrective recommendations the Commission put forward to seal off loopholes that were believed to be conducive for corrupt practices.

Getting the right witnesses for the investigation and prosecution of alleged corruption offences was also one of the major problems the FEACC faced. Before giving their testimony, many of the whistle-blowers and witnesses wanted to see a reliable legal framework (on their protection) in place so that they could be protected from any danger that corrupt people might pose on them. In an attempt to solve this problem, the FEACC developed a draft whistle blowers and witnesses protection proclamation to ensure the physical and job security protection of witnesses and whistle blowers.

We, therefore, seek the support of our partners and stakeholders in the area of capacity building, which, in our opinion, is central to the alleviation of the rest of the problems. It is our strong conviction that the mitigation of the afore-mentioned problems through collaborative and coordinated efforts, compounded with the serious political commitment of our Government in the fight against corruption, will definitely continue to make the anti-corruption campaign in our Country a success. Together, we can defeat corruption.

We shouldn't, therefore, limit the scope and objectives of our training programmes to 'raising public awareness' on corruption. As a result, we have decided to give deep and intensive ethics and anti-corruption education to civil servants and their managers through face-to-face training programmes. The training programmes will focus on equipping the trainees with the basic knowledge and skills on anti-corruption laws and strategies, corruption prevention strategies and codes of ethics for civil servants and their managers.

People from different cross-sections of the society ask the following questions frequently. Here they are with their full answers:

? How independent is the Commission from any political influence or manipulation?

Answer: According to Article 4 of the Commission’s Establishment Proclamation, the Commission is free from any interference or direction by any person with regard to cases under investigation or prosecution or to be investigated or prosecuted.

? The Commission is accountable to the Prime Minister. Doesn’t this set hurdles to the Commission in investigating and prosecuting grand corruption offences that may be committed in the executive branch of the government?

Answer: So far, the fact that the FEACC is accountable to the Prime Minister has, in no way, prevented the Commission from investigating and prosecuting corruption offences allegedly committed in the executive. No investigation or prosecution has been thwarted because of the fact that the Commission is accountable to the Prime Minister. Regarding accountability, some people argue otherwise. According to them, corruption is mainly committed in public offices and public enterprises, particularly in developing countries. They, therefore, hold that making anti-corruption institutions accountable to the Heads of the respective governments would rather help the former to tackle corruption effectively and efficiently in partnership and collaboration with the latter, which has a better knowledge of the ins and outs of the public offices and enterprises it is running and the problems and improprieties in them.

In fact, many anti-corruption watchdogs in the world that have acquired a reputation as the finest anti-corruption institutions the world has ever seen are accountable to the Heads of their respective governments. The Independent Commission Against Corruption of Hong Kong, Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau of Singapore, Independent Commission Against Corruption of New South Wales Australia, United States Office of Government Ethics, and the Directorate for Corruption and Economic Crimes of Botswana are worth mentioning in this regard.

? I really doubt that the incumbent government is seriously committed to tackling corruption at all levels. Can you list the indicators that could show its serious commitment to this crucial endeavour?

Answer: One should not have the slightest doubt in his mind about the government’s commitment and seriousness to the national struggle against corruption. There are a lot of indicators that show its commitment to this critical issue. The following are a few of them:

Ø The Government has put in place substantive and procedural anti-corruption laws and regulations to tackle corruption. The Revised Anti-corruption Special Procedure and Rules of Evidence Proclamation, Revised Federal Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission Establishment Proclamation, Draft proclamation on the Protection of Whistleblowers and Witnesses, Proclamation to Provide for Disclosure and Registration of Assets, and Code of Ethics for Public Servants could be mentioned in this regard.

Ø It has established independent anti-corruption institutions, both at national and regional levels, to tackle corruption.

Ø It has provided the anti-corruption institutions with the necessary budgetary, financial, material, and human resources.

Ø It has incorporated anti-corruption laws into the amended Criminal Law, classifying them into 23 articles.

Ø It was among the first signatories to the UN Convention Against Corruption and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption, which it later ratified.

Ø It has clearly been stipulated in the Commission’s Establishment Proclamation that the Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner may not be removed, except on his own will, from his office unless he has violated the provisions of the relevant codes of conduct, has shown manifest incompetence and inefficiency, or can no longer carryout his responsibilities on account of mental or physical illness.

Ø It has shown its commitment by taking to court its own senior officials and got them penalized for the corruption offences that they committed.

Ø And most importantly, everything it has been doing so far doesn’t show the fact that it is not serious in tackling corruption. Rather, we have been practically witnessing the reverse.

? What if a senior member of the Government is allegedly found to be involved in corruption? Would you really and truthfully prosecute and bring him/her to justice?

Answer: It must be understood that no government official, be it senior or junior, is immune from being prosecuted if he/she is found to be involved in corruption. The fact that the Former Prime Minister and the Former Defense Minister; Senior Bank and Telecom Managers; the Former Manager of the Privatization Agency; and the Former President of the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Regional State were prosecuted for their involvement in corruption is a tangible and concrete proof of this.

? Does the Commission have the jurisdiction to prevent, investigate, and prosecute any corruption offences committed anywhere in the Country?

Answer: Mainly, the Commission is tasked with preventing, investigating, and prosecuting corruption crimes in federal public offices and public enterprises. It also does same when corruption is committed in regional offices relating to subsidies granted by the Federal Government to the regions. It can also investigate and prosecute corruption offences in the private sector if public offices and public enterprises are involved in them.

Answer: The two most important reasons, among others, for limiting the Commission’s jurisdiction to the public sector are the following:

Ø For a start, the Commission, as a young anti-corruption institution, will find it difficult to shoulder the huge responsibility of tackling corruption in every sector. It has to focus on the major public offices and enterprises.

Ø The second chief reason for limiting the Commission’s jurisdiction is the fact that public offices and the civil servants working in them are believed to be the major players in committing corruption.

Fortunately, after eight years of experience in tackling corruption, both the Ethiopian Government and the Commission are of a strong conviction that the latter can now tackle corruption, at least to some extent, in the private sector as well. A study is, therefore, underway to include the task of combating corruption in the private sector to a limited extent under the Commission’s jurisdiction.

? What is the fate of those alleged corruption offences that do not fall within the Commission’s jurisdiction? Will you simply throw them into your trash cans?

Answer: Those tips-off that do not fall within the Commission’s jurisdiction will be sent to relevant bodies that have the jurisdiction to deal with them. No crime will be thrown away without proper investigation in this law-abiding country.

Answer: Whistleblowers can inform the Commission of corruption crimes in the following ways:

Ø The Commission has a hotline that gives quick and direct access to informants and whistle blowers. It is 988 and whistle blowers can file their complaints using this number. There are investigators who are always on duty during working hours to receive the information and investigate it.

Ø They can even make appointments with the Commission’s investigators to file their complaints in the week ends.

Ø What is more, they can use our mailing address, which is 34798/9. They can also e-mail us at feacinv@ethionet.et.

Answer: Whistle blowers are not obliged to disclose their names. They can blow the whistle anonymously. If they wish, they can also disclose their names. As stipulated in Article 49 of the Revised Special Procedure and Rules of Evidence Proclamation on Anti-corruption, a disclosure of corruption offence may be made with or without the name of the person who makes the disclosure.

Answer: Whistleblowers can file their complaints in whichever way they want; they can do it orally or in writing.

? How would I know whether my complaints are thrown away or properly investigated?

Answer: First of all, the Commission doesn’t throw away a single complaint that is within its jurisdiction without properly investigating it. Secondly, it has put mechanisms in place whereby complainants and whistle blowers can check up the status of their cases and how they are being handled. If they have problems with the ways that their cases are being investigated, they can notify the Commission of this situation so that the latter can take corrective measures sooner than later.

? Does the Commission have the Jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Corruption offences that were under due process of law before it was established on 24 May 2001?

Answer: According to Article 28 of the Establishment Proclamation, any corruption cases or other cases related with corruption which have been committed prior to the coming into force of the Commission’s Establishment Proclamation and the investigation of which have been just started, or undergoing, or finalized, or which have been in the process of trial, shall continue to be handled and decided in the same manner. If, however, the case in question, which had been committed before the coming into force of the Commission’s Establishment Proclamation, has never received a court verdict, the Commission has the jurisdiction to deal with it.

? Can a whistleblower be guaranteed that he will be protected from any retaliatory actions for blowing the whistle on corruption?

Answer: The Commission protects whistleblowers from any retaliatory measures. If it is ascertained that somebody has been a victim of such an act, the Commission will do everything in its capacity to redress the injustice as soon as possible.

? Does the Commission supervise and oversee regional ethics and anti-corruption Commissions?

Answer: The relationship between regional ethics and anti-corruption Commissions and the FEACC is not hierarchical. The fact that the FEACC is a federal institution doesn’t mean that it has an authority over its regional counterparts. They collaborate and partner in the fight against corruption on equal footing. The FEACC also assists them in various capacity building projects. The FEACC and its regional counterparts had already established a Joint Forum on tackling corruption in partnership and collaboration. So far, members of the Forum held six conferences semi-annually in various regional states and here in the Metropolis on preventing and fighting corruption collaboratively.

? Does that mean that the regional ethics and anti-corruption commissions shall, in no way, be accountable to the FEACC under any circumstances?

Answer: There are times when they shall be accountable to the FEACC. When they investigate and prosecute alleged corruption offences in accordance with the delegation that may be given to them by the FEACC, they shall be accountable to the latter. They are also duty bound to submit statistical data and periodic report regarding the state of corruption offences in their respective region to the FEACC.

? Is there a mechanism through which other organs may participate in the investigation and prosecution of corruption offences?

Answer: The Commission may delegate, in whole or in part, to federal or regional crime investigation and prosecution bodies, as the case may be, a general investigation and prosecution power of corruption cases, other than grand corruption. Additionally, any federal or regional crime investigation body that is not delegated by the Commission shall begin investigation of any alleged or suspected corruption offences falling under the competence of the latter. It shall, however, inform the Commission of same forthwith.

? Am I required and obliged by law to cooperate with the Commission whenever the latter seeks cooperation in connection with its powers and duties?

Answer: According to Article 26 of the Commission’s Establishment Proclamation, any person is duty-bound to cooperate whenever cooperation and assistance is required by the Commission in connection with its powers and duties. In particular, public offices and public enterprises having the necessary expertise shall provide the Commission with the necessary professional support when required.

? Does the Commission have its own detention center on its premises where it keeps suspects?

Answer: So far, the Commission doesn’t have any detention center on its premises. It has been detaining suspects in police stations. But it is trying to have one in the years to come.

Since its establishment in 2001, the FEACC made some encouraging achievements in fighting and preventing corruption. It has, for example, undertaken a number of successful awareness-raising activities on the threat of corruption and on the dire need to counter it. The FEACC was able to make the issue of fighting corruption a popular agenda. It also revised the working procedures and practices in more than 117 public offices and enterprises.

Afterwards, it put forward corrective measures and recommendations to the respective public offices and enterprises, thereby sealing off loopholes that were believed to be conducive for corruption. Furthermore, it investigated more than 1,200 cases and prosecuted a number of offenders some 300 of whom received from 1-19 years of imprisonment. By doing so, it has sent a clear message to all corrupt guys that they have to think twice before committing corruption. However, the on-going anti-corruption campaign cannot gain more momentum and vigour without the active participation of all stakeholders in general and the Ethiopian public in particular. If more achievements are to be made, all stakeholders must join hands with the Commission in the fierce fight against corruption and impropriety.

Obviously, however, the general public cannot take part in the fight against corruption actively when they are not fully aware of the causes, manifestations, consequences, and threats of corruption. The FEACC has, therefore, devised mechanisms of creating public awareness on fighting and preventing corruption at the national level.

One of such means is the publication and distribution of promotional materials like this one. It was for this very reason that we prepared and distributed the magazine among the different cross-sections of the Ethiopian public and other stakeholders in the fight against corruption. We very much hope that the magazine will serve its purpose of raising public awareness on the dire need to prevent and fight corruption resolutely. It will also give regional and global partners some information about the on-going anti-corruption struggle in Ethiopia .

Finally, we, once again, urge the different cross-sections of the society and other partners to join hands with the Commission in the fight against corruption so that the Country’s development and democratization processes will stay the course. If we confront it in unison, corruption will have the power to derail the on-going development and democratization processes in our Country. The Commission takes this opportunity to request and urge the Country’s partners to continue to support its anti-corruption efforts. It would also be helpful to synchronize their efforts with that of the Commission's in their struggle against corruption.

•Corruption Investigation and Prosecution Directorate, Deputy Director’s Office: