Conflicts of interests and incompatibilities in Eastern Europe Case study: Romania

Construction of Romanian anticorruption system 1 st pillar – external commitments in order to join EU 2 nd pillar – internal pressure of reformist groups and civil society 3 rd pillar – political will

First period: Legislative and institutional development, with poor results - There are no anticorruption institutions working – first wealth statements were introduced, with an opaque procedure

Second period: Anticorruption instruments are generated through legislative initiatives and institutional building – reformist wave: National Anticorruption Directorate, new interest declaration templates – Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM), National Integrity Agency

Third period: Institutions start producing visible results – Constitutional Court decision limits the attributions of NIA – five years of monitoring through CVM: NIA and NAD are presented as efficient institutions

Legal design and issues - Conflicts of interests, incompatibilities and wealth declaration are covered by both general and special laws - Drastic modification of legislation in Frequent legislative amendments - Significant number of raised unconstitutionality exceptions

Evolutions and setbacks of the system Instruments of political control: legislative initiatives + Constitutional Court budgeting political declarations + electoral campaign defensive stance and opposition to putting into practice legal decisions

Anticorruption network + National Anticorruption Directorate National Integrity Agency Courts European funds management institutions