GODR Commits to Anti-Corruption Initiative with

UNCLAS SANTO DOMINGO 001596 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV KJUS PREL KCRM KCOR EAID DR PHUM SUBJECT: GODR Commits to Anti-Corruption Initiative with International Donors REF: SDO 308, SDO 434, SDO 570, SDO 817 ¶1. (U) Summary: On December 17, Embassy Officers joined representatives of several international development organizations in a meeting with President Fernandez to discuss how the GODR might begin to tackle effectively the issue of corruption - as well as citizens' perception of corruption. The international donor community made a presentation that outlined the corruption problem the nation faces, the effects that corruption has on development and democratic institutions, and the actions that the Dominican Government is taking, with assistance from different donor organizations. The donors concluded by suggesting possible short- and medium-term steps that the President might undertake. In response, the President accepted the donors' offer of support for a Participatory Anticorruption Initiative, which would include conducting a corruption assessment and organizing a multi-sector dialogue to determine options and priorities. The international donors' initiative is welcome as endemic corruption in the DR adversely affects U.S. interests and programs ranging from support for democratic institutions to promoting economic growth to combating narco-trafficking (reftels A, B, C). End Summary. -------------- Background -------------- ¶2. (U) In May and June 2009, as a series of corruption-related scandals were making headlines in the Dominican Republic (reftel D),USAID and the World Bank organized a working group among international donors in order to explore options how, as a community, donors might be able to take diplomatic action to promote greater attention to the issues of corruption, governance, transparency and accountability. On July 9, by happenstance if not in response to the bad press, Dominican President Leonel Fernandez Reyna for the first time called together different units in the GODR working on these issues and had them sit at the same table to coordinate efforts. Fernandez also asked international donors to attend that meeting to discuss "what donors could do to help improve his government's image regarding corruption." (Note: The World Bank and UNDP were able to attend, but the Embassy and the EU, who were also invited to the meeting, did not due to the last minute nature of the invitation. End Note.) ¶3. (SBU) Subsequently, USAID met with the World Bank representative and agreed that, while the donor community would not want to help the government simply whitewash the issue of corruption, the president had opened the door for the donor community to take a more concerted action. An "anti-corruption working group" was formed including the World Bank, UNDP, the EU and Spain. The Embassy participated as well, but let these international entities take the lead. ¶4. (U) In a September 2009 meeting with the UNDP, President Fernandez requested that the donor community present a strategy for dealing with corruption. The anti-corruption donor community working group agreed that the donors could not present a set of proposed activities if the GODR did not take the lead in designing the strategy and identifying priority areas of work and that the subject meeting should present options for developing said strategy. Nevertheless, discussions within the group led to a consensus that the presentation include suggestions as to the sorts of steps that the President might take that would enhance transparency in the short-run at low/no cost. For instance, the President might set an example simply by making public the expenditures of the Presidential Palace and/or of the First Lady's Office (which together account for some 12 percent of the GODR's budget). -------------- Meeting with the President -------------- ¶5. (U) On December 17, Embassy Officers, along with the World Bank, UNDP, the European Union, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB),and the Spanish Embassy, attended a meeting with President Fernandez to present the donors' view on the issue of corruption and to gain the President's buy-in to move forward in designing a plan for developing a national strategy to combat corruption. Also attending the meeting were the President's Chief of Staff, legal counselor, the President of the National Commission on Ethics and Combating Corruption (CNECC),the Secretary for Economy, Planning and Development, the Attorney General, the Assistant Attorney General for Prosecution of Corruption, and the Director General of Public Procurement. ¶6. (U) The presentation by the donors discussed the corruption problem the nation faces, the effects that corruption has on development and democratic institutions, and the actions that government was taking along with the assistance being provided by different donor organizations. USAID-funded surveys of Dominican households were the sources of much of the data cited about the perception of corruption. It concluded with some possible short- and medium-term steps that the President might undertake. 7 (U) The short-term steps included publishing data about how the GODR corruption hotline and website, "311" and "311.com" are functioning, ensuring full compliance with the asset declaration law by all government officials, and publishing online how the budgets of the Offices of the Presidency and the First Lady are expended. Medium-term initiatives included conducting a corruption diagnostic to identify where vulnerabilities exist and opportunities for reducing corruption, organizing a multi-sector dialogue to develop a strategy to deal with corruption and identify priority areas of intervention, and designing a plan of action to implement the strategy. ¶8. (U) In response, the CNECC's President defended the government, stating that surveys measuring the perception of corruption were based on invalid premises, that the media blew the issue of corruption out of proportion, and that while corruption certainly exists, the great majority of government officials were honest and, indeed, were trying to limit corruption. While President Fernandez agreed with his chief anticorruption advisor, he accepted the donors' offer to support a Participatory Anticorruption Initiative, which would include conducting a corruption assessment and organizing a multi-sector dialogue to determine options and priorities. He also noted that publishing data on the GODR's 311 corruption hotline could be useful, though he did not support the other suggestions made. ¶9. (U) The World Bank, UNDP, IDB and USAID representatives acknowledged that perception of corruption may not be an accurate reflection of reality, however, the perception, accurate or not, undermined citizens' confidence in government and public policy. As a result, effective implementation is made more difficult, and the government's capacity to collect taxes and to have budget available for programs providing critical public services are reduced. ¶10. (U) The President asked the donors to organize a corruption diagnostic to begin in January. He also charged Secretary of Economy, Planning and Development Temistocles Montas with working with donors to organize the multi-sector dialogue involving government, the private sector and civil society to provide inputs on a national anticorruption strategy and identify priority areas for action. -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶11. (SBU) The invitation by President Fernandez to the international donor community to him help address his government's "image" problem with corruption has fortuitously opened an opportunity for encouraging GODR action. To date, the donor community has obtained what it desired from the President - an agreement to undertake a corruption diagnostic and a participatory process to develop a national anticorruption strategy. However, it remains clear that the GODR's view of the seriousness of the corruption problem in the Dominican Republic does not coincide with that of the donor community (or the Dominican public). It remains to be seen the degree to which the President will a) vigorously work to develop mechanisms that will increase the transparency of the GODR, and b) be willing to take action against officials in his own government who are engaged in corrupt acts. Nevertheless, the green light obtained on December 17 is an important achievement that the USG and other donors will need to nurture so that the GODR takes the lead on subsequent anti-corruption steps. Lambert