Speech by P. Nikiforos Diamandouros, European Ombudsman

Introduction

As a political scientist, I am conscious that there is a difference between trust and legitimacy. Most citizens do not identify themselves with the European Union and its institutions to the same extent as they do with the States and their systems of government. In other words, we who work in the EU institutions cannot draw on deep historical reserves of legitimacy. For that reason, we need to demonstrate to citizens on a daily basis that the European civil service and the European institutions are worthy of their trust[1].This can only be done by delivering a citizen-friendly, accountable, and transparent service to citizens which adheres to the highest ethical standards.

In my speech today, I will focus on the increasing importance of ethics in public administration. In this context, I will present the "public service principles" which I published in June 2012, with an eye to building greater trust between citizens and the EU institutions by rendering explicit the ethical standards that govern the conduct of EU civil servants. Even if these principles are designed for the EU level, I very much hope that they can serve as an inspiration for civil servants at the national and regional levels as well.

The role of the European Ombudsman

Before I go into details about ethical behaviour in public administration and before I expand on the "public service principles", I would like briefly to explain the role of the European Ombudsman.

A provision envisaging the establishment of the Ombudsman was included in the chapter on citizenship which constituted an important innovation introduced by the Treaty of Maastricht. The clear intention of such a provision was to bring the European Union closer to its citizens and to give the EU administration a "human face". 

Every year, I receive around 2 500 complaints from citizens, businesses, NGOs, civil society organisations, and associations, and open hundreds of inquiries into alleged maladministration by the EU institutions.

Maladministration encompasses all kinds of poor or improper administrative behaviour, from late payment for EU projects to the unjustified refusal to release a document, and from publishing inaccurate information to failure to reply to a letter.

It is important to point out that the European Ombudsman cannot deal with complaints about national or regional administrations, even when the complaints concern European Union matters. Such complaints should normally be addressed to the national or regional ombudsman. In the case of Spain, you obviously have the Defensor del Pueblo de España, but also a whole range of regional ombudsmen.

Good administration

The Ombudsman's decisions are not legally binding. My task is, rather, to persuade the EU institutions to observe the principles of good administration.  Where possible, I aim to achieve a positive-sum or win-win outcome, satisfying both the complainant and the institution involved.

My work relies heavily on the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour. This Code was drafted by the Ombudsman and adopted by the European Parliament in 2001. Since then, it has had significant influence and impact on the civil service of the EU. It has also proved to be an important tool of empowerment for citizens.

The Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights further strengthened the role of the Ombudsman. The Charter also contains the right to good administration, a new right, that is, which lies at the heart of what the European Ombudsman does.

The right to good administration includes the right to have one’s affairs handled impartially, fairly, and within a reasonable time by the EU administration. This right is obviously closely linked to the need for high ethical standards in the EU institutions.

Ethics in public administrations

In the public sector, including the EU public administration, ethics seeks to address the fundamental issues relating to the core values which should guide the judgment of public servants on how to perform their tasks in their daily operations.

Nothing erodes faster than trust when citizens suspect unethical conduct in public administrations. Let me immediately make clear, however, that the Ombudsman’s role is not to fight fraud, corruption and other illegal conduct within the EU institutions. There is a special body which has that task as one of its functions; the European Anti-Fraud Agency, OLAF.

As Ombudsman, I am only marginally involved in such matters, because I can (and very occasionally do) receive complaints from so-called “whistleblowers” who gave information to OLAF and who are dissatisfied with OLAF’s response.

My main task as Ombudsman is very different from that of OLAF. Without being complacent, I believe that illegal conduct is rare among EU civil servants and that the mechanisms that are in place to prevent and detect such conduct are generally effective.  That is why I describe the relevant part of my mission as being “to foster the highest standards of behaviour in the Union's institutions”.  In other words, I see my role as encouraging and helping the EU administration to build on the basic foundations of lawfulness and honesty.

That implies that the Ombudsman has to do more than merely check that the administration is following the rules. Of course, it is important not to break the rules, but the EU administration can and should aspire to something better than merely saying “we followed the rules”.

Citizens also expect public servants to serve the public interest, to manage public resources properly on a daily basis, and to make individual decisions fairly. Fair and reliable public services and predictable decision-making inspire public trust. The integrity, transparency, and accountability of public administrations are prerequisites for, and underpin, public trust, as a keystone of good governance.

Trust depends on a belief in the integrity of officials, who are expected to conduct themselves in a manner that will bear the closest public scrutiny and will inspire confidence in their interlocutors.

Complainants increasingly raise issues concerning governance of the EU institutions; that is to say matters such as accountability arrangements, the representation of different interests in decision-making, conflicts of interest and other ethical issues.

Among the most prominent cases recently was a complaint from an NGO concerning the membership of the European Central Bank's President in the Group of 30. The Group is composed of high-level representatives from central banks, international public financial bodies, private banks, and investment companies, as well as politicians and academics.

The NGO launching the complaint alleged that the independence, reputation, and integrity of the ECB were undermined by Mario Draghi's membership of the Group. The complainant qualified the Group as a lobbying vehicle for promoting private financial interests and called on the ECB to require Mr Draghi to leave the Group.

After analysing the Group's membership, funding, and aims I found the President’s membership to be compatible with his role. However, I suggested that, in the interests of transparency, the ECB’s website should publicise the President’s membership of the Group.

The public service principles

My experiences with the Code of Good Administrative Behaviour led me to believe that European citizens expect people working at all levels of the EU to behave in accordance with high ethical standards. Accordingly, I took the view that it would be useful to draft a document that identifies, in a succinct and easily intelligible form, the ethical principles that should apply to the handling of EU matters.

I, therefore, contacted the national ombudsmen within the European Network of Ombudsmen with an eye to obtaining information on national statements of ethical principles in public life. For the draft public service principles, I took account of best practices in the Member States and invited citizens, interest groups, and other organisations to submit comments.

In total, we received 54 contributions from individual citizens, organisations, associations, staff representatives, EU institutions, and other agencies and bodies. This input made a real difference to the final wording of the principles.

In the end, we identified five public service principles:

• Commitment to the EU and its citizens
• Integrity
• Objectivity
• Respect for others
• Transparency

1. Commitment to the EU and its citizens

Civil servants should be conscious that the EU institutions exist in order to serve the interests of the EU and of its citizens. They should be mindful of their position of public trust and set a good example to others.

2. Integrity

Civil servants should conduct themselves in a manner that would bear the closest public scrutiny. They should not place themselves under any financial or other obligation that might influence them in the performance of their functions, including by the receipt of gifts.

Civil servants should take steps to avoid conflicts of interest and also the appearance of such conflicts. They should take swift action to resolve any conflict that arises. This obligation continues after leaving office.

In recent years, I received an increasing number of complaints about alleged conflicts of interest, a development which underlines the point that the public eye is getting more vigilant when it comes to ethical behaviour in this respect.

My approach to defining conflicts of interest draws on the work of the OECD. The fundamental idea is that the term refers to situations in which the private interests and affiliations of a public official create, or appear to create, conflict with the proper performance of his or her official duties.

“Private interests” are not limited to financial interests, or direct personal benefit to the official. A conflict of interest may involve otherwise legitimate private-capacity activity, personal affiliations and associations, and family interests, if those interests could reasonably be considered likely to influence improperly the official’s performance of their duties.

I would like to emphasise two points that emerge from my experience with complaints.

First, the EU institutions cannot simply ask individuals to declare that they are not in a conflict situation. They can and should expect individuals to make full declarations of interest, but the institution itself needs to decide whether there is a conflict and if so how to deal with it.

Second, the institutions need to avoid giving even the appearance of a conflict of interest. It is not enough to say that there is no evidence of any actual impact on decision-making.

My office is also dealing with an increasing number of what are commonly called 'revolving door' cases. This term is used to describe a move by public sector staff to closely linked jobs in the private sector, or vice versa and, ultimately concerns conflicts of interest.

By way of an illustrative example, I called on the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in Parma to strengthen its rules and procedures in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest in 'revolving door' cases. This followed a complaint from a German NGO, alleging that EFSA had failed to address a conflict of interest arising from the move of an EFSA Head of Unit to a biotechnology company.

And some weeks ago I opened an inquiry into how the European Commission implements its rules concerning conflicts of interest in 'revolving door' cases.  This followed a complaint from several NGOs. As a first step, I have asked the Commission to provide me with a list of potentially relevant cases it has dealt with over the past three years. I will then decide which of the individual files to inspect.  If I find indications of a systemic problem, I will consider opening an own-initiative inquiry on the matter.

3. Objectivity

Civil servants should be impartial, open-minded, guided by evidence, and willing to hear different viewpoints. They should be ready to acknowledge and correct mistakes.

In procedures involving comparative evaluations, civil servants should base recommendations and decisions only on merit and any other factors expressly prescribed by law. Civil servants should not discriminate or allow the fact that they like, or dislike, a particular person to influence their professional conduct.

4. Respect for others

Civil servants should act respectfully to each other and to citizens and express themselves clearly, using plain language.

5. Transparency

Civil servants should be willing to explain their activities and to give reasons for their actions. They should keep proper records and welcome public scrutiny of their conduct, including their compliance with these public service principles.

Let me elaborate a bit on this last principle: In a Special Eurobarometer, which I conducted together with the European Parliament, 42% of the persons questioned said that they were not satisfied with the level of transparency in the EU administration.

Furthermore, by far the most common allegation examined by the Ombudsman is lack of transparency in the EU administration. This allegation forms the basis for around one third of all inquiries every year and includes refusal of information or access to documents.

I remain very concerned about the outcome of the survey and the consistently high number of transparency-related complaints, since an accountable and transparent EU administration is key to building citizens' trust in the EU.

Why do we need the principles?

As you might have correctly concluded by now, the five principles are not new. Nor were they intended to be new. On the contrary, they represent existing expectations of citizens and civil servants. Furthermore, they are already embodied, both explicitly and implicitly, in the EU Staff Regulations and in other documents such as the Financial Regulations, and the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour.

The Ombudsman was, however, the first to write these five principles down in this form. As such they represent a high-level distillation of the ethical standards applicable to EU civil servants.  They also form part of a vital component of the culture of service to which the EU public administration adheres.

Bearing the principles in mind can help civil servants to understand and apply rules correctly, and guide them towards the right decision in situations where they should exercise judgment.

One way of making such principles operational in concrete situations is through detailed rules. Such rules exist, for example, on matters such as preventing and regulating conflicts of interest. As some contributors to the public consultation pointed out, more and better rules may well be needed. It is important to point out that the public service principles are not intended as a substitute for such rules.

It is equally important to note that the principles were drafted for EU civil servants. In preparing them, I endeavoured to express the fundamental ideas underpinning them in a way that is relevant to all civil servants, not just those with management or other leadership responsibilities.

In this context, I should also mention that members of the institutions, such as Members of the Commission, the Court of Auditors, and the Parliament, and Judges of the Court of Justice are not civil servants. Nonetheless, such persons may find the principles relevant to them, as a source of inspiration in relation to their special responsibilities.

Conclusion

To conclude: an effective public administration has a critical role to play in delivering the services that citizens expect in modern democratic states. Failure to deliver those services risks weakening the legitimacy of democratic institutions in the eyes of citizens, especially in times of crisis. Put otherwise, an effective public administration has a direct and substantive impact on the quality of democracy offered to citizens in a given legal order.

In order to be effective, public administrations need to respect the principles of good administration and adhere to the highest ethical standards. Above all, they need to embody a culture of service to citizens which serves as the guiding philosophy underpinning the behaviour of civil servants in their daily dealings with citizens and associations.

I hope that making the five public service principles explicit can help generate and focus an ongoing, constructive dialogue among civil servants and between civil servants and the public, including, to be sure, economic entities which, of necessity, are in constant contact with state services. As I have already indicated, these reflections apply, above all, to the EU level.  But they can certainly also serve as an inspiration for the national and regional levels in the Member States. And it is in this spirit that they are being presented to you in this hospitable Forum today.

Thank you for your attention and patience. I am now ready to respond to questions or comments and to engage with you on this topic.