Integrity Pacts in Public Procurement
The Integrity Pact (IP) is a tool developed by Transparency International (TI) to help governments, businesses and civil society fight corruption in public contracting. It consists of a process that includes an agreement between a government or government agency (‘the authority’) and all bidders for a public sector contract, setting out rights and obligations to the effect that neither side will pay, offer, demand or accept bribes; nor will bidders collude with competitors to obtain the contract, or bribe representatives of the authority while carrying it out.
An independent monitor who oversees IP implementation and ensures all parties uphold their commitments under the IP brings transparency and invaluable oversight to all stakeholders in a contracting process, from the authority to the public.
The IP clarifies the rules of the game for bidders, establishing a level playing field by enabling companies to abstain from bribery through providing assurances to them that their competitors will also refrain from bribery, and that government procurement, privatisation or licensing agencies will commit to preventing corruption (including extortion) by their officials, and to following transparent procedures.
IPs are legally-binding contracts, breaches of which trigger an array of appropriate sanctions, including loss of contract, financial compensation and debarment from future tenders. These act as powerful disincentives to corrupt behaviour, ensuring IPs are never simply goodwill gestures. Rather, they enable governments to reduce the high cost and the distorting impact of corruption on public procurement, privatisation or licensing, and to deliver better services to citizens.
In a specific contracting process, an IP is intended to accomplish two primary objectives:
- To clarify the rules of the game for bidders, establishing a level playing field by enabling companies to abstain from bribing by providing assurances to them that their competitors will also refrain from bribing, and that government procurement, privatisation or licensing agencies also commit to preventing corruption (including extortion) by their officials and to following transparent procedures
- To enable governments to reduce the high cost and distorting effects of corruption in public procurement, privatisation or licensing and to deliver better services to citizens.
IPs help to make projects viable. They are not an end in themselves, but are a means of supporting the appropriate completion of projects crucial for development and the satisfaction of basic needs in society.
Integrity Pact design and implementation
Design
An IP may be suitable during some or all stages of the project; ideally, it should be applied to the full range of project activities and should cover all the phases of each contracting process. At the absolute minimum, the IP should start during the pre-bidding stage of a contracting process and continue until contract signature.
A key advantage of an IP is that it is a tool that can be implemented within the ordinary authority of contracting officials and bodies, with the support of civil society (one or several NGOs). The process is always a learning experience in itself and there is no one-size-fits-all recipe that can be copied from one context to another.
Implementation
In implementing an IP, the authority (with the support of a civil society organisation) assures that all activities foreseen in the IP process are actually carried out: the selection of the project and the contracting processes where it will be applied; the design of the IP process according to goals and circumstances; the choice of implementation arrangements; monitor selection, and – once all is ready – putting the IP to work throughout all contracting stages. TI’s experience indicates that the pre- and post-bidding stages bear high corruption risks which are often overlooked, hence the utmost importance of considering these stages under the IP implementation process, and of having in place from early on measures to ensure the transparency and accountability of the contracting process.
The IP further establishes a monitoring system and a process for determining the presence of violations, which carry sanctions as a consequence. The sanctions for bidders range from loss or denial of the contract, forfeiture of the bid or performance bond and liability for damages, to debarment from future contracts. For government employees, criminal or disciplinary action should proceed.
The independent monitor
The monitoring system and the role the monitor plays are crucial for IP success. Without the monitoring system, the advantages of the IP may not be realised. The main task of the independent monitor is to ensure the IP is implemented and the obligations for bidders and the authority included in it are fulfilled (i.e. there is no violation of the IP). The monitor is therefore the source of credibility and reassurance for both the authority and the bidders that the process will go as agreed. He/she is also a source of information for the general public, and builds trust among citizens in governmental procurement processes.
A number of different monitoring systems can be used: institutional/organisational or individual; collective or individual; private, governmental or non-governmental; and national or international.