• Program

Commissioner for Anti-Corruption, Chairman of the Commission

Velykan Valeriy

Deputy Head of Document Accounting Sector

Markova Svetlana

Acting Head of HR department

Buzinska Tatiana

Head of the Legal Department

Burova Elena

Head of the Department for International Cooperation

Varfolomyeyeva Mariya

Head of the occupational safety and fire safety sector

Holodnyuk Svetlana

Director of the State Register of Seafarers’ Documents of Ukraine

Gribov Oleg

Acting Chief Accountant – Head of Accounting and Reporting

Kirilenko Victoria

Acting Head of Information Technology Department

Lenik Arkady

Head of Quality Management, Certification and Audit

Tatiana Makintsiyan

Head of program preparation and development sector

Momot Lyudmila

Head of Diploma and Training Department

Pikulik Vladimir

З Head of testing department

Stepanyuk Olga

Head of logistics department

Tsiplyakov Igor

Corruption is one of the most dangerous threats to human rights, democracy, the rule of law, honesty and social justice, it impedes economic development and threatens the proper and fair functioning of both the state and society as a whole, as well as enterprises, institutions, organizations. Therefore, solving the problem of corruption is one of the priority directions of the state development.

The Seafarers Training and Inspection Inspectorate (hereinafter – the Inspectorate) is actively working to prevent and detect corruption, and to eliminate the preconditions for its occurrence.

However, ignorance and misunderstanding of the conditions and circumstances under which corruption occurs and develops create obstacles to the effective prevention of this negative social phenomenon. Therefore, rational planning of anti-corruption measures should always take place with a clear understanding of the full spectrum of corruption risks.

Carrying out an objective assessment of corruption risks in the activity of the Inspectorate is a necessary step in preventing violations of anti-corruption legislation by the employees of the Inspection.

Assessment of corruption risks in the activities of the Inspectorate and State Qualification Commissions (hereinafter referred to as the SCC) will ensure compliance of anti-corruption measures with the specificity of the Inspectorate’s activities and facilitate the rational use of the Inspectorate’s resources allocated to prevent corruption work.

1. TERMS

This methodology for assessing corruption risks in the activities of the Inspectorate and recommendations for their elimination (hereinafter referred to as the methodology) defines:

– the concept of “corruption risk – ways of detecting corruption risks that may arise in the activities of the Inspection officials; – the reasons that give rise to corruption risks in the activities of the officials of the Inspectorate; – the areas of activity of the Inspectorate with the highest corruption risks; – management of corruption risks (measures to counteract and prevent corruption risks in the Inspectorate).

Systematic work on detecting corruption risks in the Inspectorate is carried out with the aim of reducing the manifestation of corruption and its consequences through the implementation of regulatory, organizational and other measures.

The main objectives of the methodology are: – outline the causes and conditions that may give rise to corruption;–prevention of corruption and corruption-related offenses, minimization of corruption, formation of intolerant among the employees of the Inspectorate, heads and members of DCC, negative attitude towards corruption as a socially dangerous phenomenon; – establishment of an effective system for preventing corruption and identifying facts of corruption in the Inspectorate;– ensuring that employees are aware of measures to prevent corruption and corruption-related offenses.

The purpose of identifying and assessing corruption risks is to identify specific processes in the activity of the Inspectorate, in the implementation of which there is a high likelihood of perpetration by employees of the Inspectorate of actions containing signs of corruption offenses. Determination for each area of ​​activity of the Corruption Risk Inspectorate is not an unquestionable evidence of the existence of corruption facts, but is only a reason to assume their occurrence in case the Inspection officials do not comply with the requirements of anti-corruption legislation and established internal procedures. The recommendations contain an indicative, but not exhaustive, list of typical corruption risks, common methods for detecting them, and rules for elimination (minimization).

2. THE CONCEPTS OF CORRUPTION RISKS AND THE ALGORITHM OF ACTIONS FOR THEIR DETECTION AND MANAGEMENT

Corruption risks are understood to mean regulatory, administrative, organizational, and other factors (factors, conditions) in the activities of Inspectorate officials that promote or may contribute to the commission of corruption offenses and corruption offenses.

The work on corruption risks in the Inspectorate should be constructed in the following sequence:

– identification of corruption risks; – assessment of corruption risks; – management (prevention) of corruption risks; – development of anti-corruption programs and plans, as well as control over their implementation.

Identification of corruption risks – is the process of identifying, understanding and understanding the corruption risks of the inspection staff.

The assessment of corruption risks is to determine the potential and real consequences for certain areas of the Inspectorate’s activities in case the Inspectorate’s employees do not comply with the requirements of anti-corruption legislation. In addition, when assessing corruption risks, the Inspectorate may determine the likelihood of their occurrence in the activities of the structural unit or the Inspectorate as a whole.

Corruption risk management is the identification and selection of the most effective measures to counteract and prevent corruption offenses and offenses related to corruption in the Inspectorate. At the stage of planning and monitoring the implementation of relevant anti-corruption programs and plans, further steps are taken by the organization to identify, assess and manage corruption risks, analyze the effectiveness of previously implemented anti-corruption measures and prevent corruption offenses, and control them. In the practical analysis of individual areas and activities of the organization, depending on the specific circumstances, other methods other than those specified in these recommendations may be used to identify corruption risks, and specific methods for their prevention and elimination (minimization), more specific to specific ones, may be developed and used. specific area of ​​activity of each department of the Inspectorate.

3. WAYS TO IDENTIFY CORRUPTION RISKS

In order to identify corruption risks in the activity of the Inspectorate, it is necessary to be guided by the information available in the Inspection, as well as to use internal and external resources, for which it is necessary to carry out a thorough analysis of the following components:

• – previous activity of the structural units of the Inspectorate in order to identify measures, procedures and decisions that caused the inspection by the Inspectorate of Corruption Offenses and / or Corruption Offenses;
• – previous activities of the Inspectorate’s structural units in order to identify measures, procedures and decisions aimed at eliminating (minimizing) the consequences of corruption offenses and / or corruption offenses committed by the inspection personnel;
• – results of external and internal inspections, official investigations, which consists in the analysis of acts, certificates and other documented results of the conducted measures, in particular, of the given recommendations, in order to maximally study the spheres whose activities were carried out in violation of the relevant regulatory requirements and their current status likelihood of committing (facilitating) corruption and / or corruption-related offenses;
• – letters, appeals, complaints received from individuals and legal entities containing information about the areas and areas of activity of the Inspectorate, in which there are signs of actions that indicate a possible commission of corruption offenses. In doing so, special attention should be paid to complaints about the activities of individual officials of the Inspectorate, which, in turn, allows to trace the systematic nature of their misconduct;
• – regulatory, organizational and regulatory documents governing the activities of the Inspectorate’s structural subdivision and individual procedures to ensure that they have provisions that may facilitate the commission of corruption offenses and / or offenses related to corruption (corrupt factors);
• – the list, nature and extent of authority of the officials of the Inspectorate, which provides for the study of the official instructions of such persons, as well as their comparison with the real scope of competence and activities carried out;
• – the current jurisprudence to hold public law enforcement officials accountable for corruption and corruption-related offenses.

The use of internal resources involves:

• – general and / or anonymous surveys (questionnaires) of employees of a separate structural unit or of the whole Inspection, by filling in the appropriate forms to identify areas of risk, internal shortcomings of certain procedures;
• – personal interviews (interviews) with individual employees of the Inspectorate who are able, in the light of their experience, competence, duties performed, to cover in more detail the problematic (potentially risky) areas of the Inspectorate’s activity;
• – discussions at meetings, meetings on issues related to corruption risks in the activities of the officials of the Inspectorate, and a joint search for ways to eliminate them (minimize);
• – official investigations (investigations) in order to examine the facts of the illegal behavior of the officials of the Inspectorate and their results, as well as the reasons and conditions that contributed to the commission of actions containing signs of offenses.

The use of external resources involves periodic holding:

• – analysis of external experience, which is to study the state of implementation of procedures aimed at detecting and preventing corruption by other state enterprises, institutions, organizations, as well as state bodies;
• – analysis of ways and positive practices of managing corruption risks, their elimination (minimization) by other state enterprises, institutions, organizations, as well as state bodies;
• – general and / or anonymous surveys (surveys) of members of the public and business entities who have had direct experience (both negative and positive) of interacting with the Inspectorate for the effectiveness of appropriate procedures and artificial burdens. It should be noted that the effectiveness of the implementation of the measure will be enhanced if it is combined with an internal survey (questionnaire) and subsequent comparison and analysis of the results;
• – group discussions in the form of thematic meetings, roundtable discussions, involving representatives of government bodies, economic entities, the public and experts in relevant areas to discuss corruption risks, and to work out ways to eliminate them (minimize);
• – analysis of national and international studies, ie study and generalization of conclusions and recommendations on the results of independent sociological, scientific, expert and other developments in the anticorruption sphere;
• – analysis of reports in the media about deficiencies in certain procedures, corruption schemes, bad behavior of the officials of the Inspectorate (in particular, appearances on radio and television, publications and comments in print media, online publications, etc.).

4. GENERAL RULES FOR CORRUPTION RISK (MINIMIZATION) REMOVAL

In order to eliminate (minimize) corruption risks, the Inspectorate should use the following general rules:

• – improvement of the regulatory and organizational documents of the Inspectorate in order to eliminate (prevent) provisions that could potentially contribute to corruption;
• – clarification (specification) of the list and powers of the officials of the Inspectorate;
• – developing and implementing in the Inspectorate provisions on mechanisms for preventing, detecting and resolving conflicts of interest, restrictions and rules for receiving gifts, benefits, benefits, other external (charitable) assistance, periodically reviewing and updating such provisions;
• – Conducting anti-corruption training on an ongoing basis for Inspectorate staff, including its management;
• – specifying and setting specific timeframes for the implementation of certain actions to be performed by the specific executor of the procedure and overall simplification and transparency of the management decision-making process;
• – minimizing the influence (use) of the human factor (direct contact and influence) in the decision-making process;
• – carrying out official investigations on each fact of alleged violation of the requirements of anti-corruption legislation and ensuring the inevitability of liability in accordance with the current legislation in case of confirmation of such violations;
• – the inevitability of personal responsibility for improperly performing the responsibilities of managing subordinate personnel.

At the same time, the Inspectorate develops, implements and implements appropriate outreach work on a “corruption risk map”, which will include a list of the main Inspection processes and the procedures that describe them, their level of risk, and a summary description of possible corruption offenses. Such a “corruption risk map” may form part of an anti-corruption program or exist in the form of a separate document approved by the order of the Inspector General. In addition, a list of positions related to high corruption risks in the Inspectorate is required.

Employees holding such positions may have specific requirements for anti-corruption procedures, such as conducting a background check on hiring and / or corruption-related offenses, regularly completing a conflict of interest form , reports of cases of solicitation or instigation of corruption or corruption-related offenses, etc.

5. SPECIAL RULES FOR CORRUPTION RISK REDUCTION (MINIMIZATION)

When analyzing the activities of the Inspectorate to identify corruption risks, first of all, attention should be paid to the areas of activity that may include the following typical corruption risks.

The activities of the Inspectorate are characterized by corruption risks in the following areas:

5.1. PROFESSIONAL SELECTION AND PERSONNING

Staffing is the main resource of the organization, which determines in the first place the success of its activities. Therefore, selection of personnel is one of the most important management functions, which determines the further fate of the Inspectorate, without which other management functions cannot be realized.

Recruitment is the procedure of selecting candidates from the total number of candidates for a vacant position, differentiating candidates by the degree of their suitability for future activity, and deciding on their possible work in the Inspectorate.

It should be noted that the selection system for the management staff, as well as the inspection staff, should be clear and, where appropriate, transparent. In this case, the mandatory criterion for the selection of personnel should be the presence of applicants for the post of special knowledge, skills, abilities, experience in the relevant field, high moral and ethical qualities.

Typical risks:

• - the competitive bidding for the vacant vacations of the Inspectorate (the lobby is designated, without the need for clarity and vigorous procedures with all possible minds for all potential candidates);
• - non-response by the applicant for a busy vacant landing about potential potential real interest;
• - submission by the applicant for the landing of inadequate data.

Recommended remedies:

• - develop and approve the selection conditions for vacancies in the Inspectorate;
• - to engage in interviews with candidates for the vacant posts of the Inspectorate of the Anti-Corruption Commissioner in the Inspectorate;
• - ensure proper documentation of interviews with candidates for vacant positions in the Inspectorate in accordance with the selection conditions;
• - to warn applicants for the position of responsibility for submitting false information about themselves;
• - to verify the accuracy of the information submitted by the applicant for the position of himself / herself with the originals or certified copies of the relevant documents, as well as his / her compliance with the qualification requirements;

5.2. WORKING WITH STAFF

Staffing is all the managerial actions that directly affect employees.

Typical risks:

• - privileged or knowingly prejudiced treatment of individual Inspection personnel;
• - the application of repressive measures of influence (translation, attestation, change of working conditions, etc.) to persons who assist in the prevention and counteraction of corruption (accusers);
• - concealing unethical behavior of subordinates;
• - concealing unethical behavior of subordinates;
• - receipt by officials of the Inspection of Gifts from subordinates.

Recommended remedies:

• - ensure that channels are available and effective to inform the Inspectorate staff about the facts of corruption or corruption-related offenses;
• - conduct training and professional development of managers in management issues;
• - to provide increased control over employees whose activities are associated with increased corruption risk;
• - Conduct periodic anonymous surveys of employees to determine job satisfaction and overall ethics.

5.3. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

Delegation of authority is the process of delegating to a supervisor any part of his or her work and authority necessary for its performance to a subordinate who assumes responsibility for its performance.

The delegation of authority is:

• - delegated powers (granting a subordinate a limited right to make decisions, use resources and direct efforts of subordinates to accomplish their tasks);
• - accepted responsibilities (the subordinate undertakes to fulfill the tasks set and to ensure their solution);
• - accountability (a subordinate who, using his authority, should be aware of the consequences of his actions and report them to his immediate supervisor).

Typical risks:

• - the use by the Inspectorate staff of delegated powers for personal or third party purposes contrary to the interests of the Inspectorate (abuse of authority);
• - exceeding the limits of the delegated powers.

Recommended remedies:

• - establish clear boundaries and procedures for the exercise of delegated authority by the inspection staff;
• - ensure control over the exercise of the powers vested in the subordinates,
• - as well as the application of disciplinary measures to them in the event of detection of facts of improper exercise of authority or performance of a person’s work in their own interests or to the exercise of which they were not entitled;
• - ensure control over the observance of the rules of record keeping on the subject of fixation of the performed work (storage of the bound copies of the executed documents, their proper registration, etc.).

5.4. THE AVAILABILITY OF OFFICIALS OF THE CORPORATE RIGHTS ORGANIZATION IN THE FIELD OF WHICH THEY EXERCISE THEIR AUTHORITIES

According to the first part of Art. 167 of the Commercial Code of Ukraine, corporate rights are the rights of a person whose share is determined in the authorized capital (property) of a business organization, which include the power to participate in the management of a business organization, to receive a certain share of profits (dividends) of the organization and assets in the event of liquidation the latter in accordance with the law, as well as other powers provided for by law and statutes.

An enterprise is an independent business entity created by a competent state or local government body or other entities to meet social and personal needs through the systematic implementation of industrial, research, trade, and other economic activities in the manner prescribed by the Commercial Code Ukraine and other laws (Article 62 of the Economic Code of Ukraine).

However, if there are economic relations between the Inspectorate with a legal entity owned by an Inspection official, then such an official already has a conflict of interest.

Typical risks:

• - use of the Inspectorate’s resources (official transport, communications, office equipment, official information, etc.) for the benefit of his enterprise;
• - improper assistance in the management activities;
• - not informing the official of the Inspectorate of his / her direct supervisor about the real or potential conflict of interest that arises in connection with work in his enterprise;
• - use by an official of the Inspectorate of subordinates to carry out work at their enterprise.

Recommended remedies:

• - warn employees of the Inspectorate of the inadmissibility of using its resources for the benefit of their enterprise;
• - take action to resolve a real or potential conflict of interest.

5.5. MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER ENTERPRISES, INSTITUTIONS AND ORGANIZATIONS

A separate group of corruption risks is those arising in the sphere of the external activity of the Inspectorate, ie in its relations with other enterprises, institutions, organizations or state bodies.

Typical risks:

• - concealment by an official of the Inspectorate of informal relations with a business entity with which the Inspectorate is in a contractual relationship or intends to enter into a contract (contract);
• - assisting the Inspection officer with certain economic entities in carrying out economic activities;
• - the possibility of obtaining inaccurate information from outside organizations for further consideration and processing of this information by the inspection staff.

Recommended remedies:

• - to take into account the financial interests (in particular, the existing corporate rights) of officials, on the basis of information contained in declarations of property, income, expenses and financial obligations;
• - ensure that all documentation is recorded and stored as part of the work (service) procurement procedure;
• - ensure the protection of confidential information, agree between the company and the entity the rules of its protection;
• - ensure clear and properly structured contracts (contracts);
• - to carry out an assessment of corruption risks and to identify measures for their elimination before the conclusion of the contract (contract);
• - ensure proper financial accounting and periodic audit of the enterprise.

5.6. PUBLIC PROCUREMENT

The area of ​​public procurement is characterized by a high level of corruption, which is related to the widespread practice of non-transparent procurement procedures. At the same time, the adoption of the new Law on Public Procurement has eliminated many corruption-related factors in this field at the legislative level. The law, in particular, improved the procurement rules and conditions and ensured the creation of an e-procurement system. However, at the organizational level, there are some risks, especially when it comes to performing ancillary purchases.

The Inspectorate makes every effort to minimize the risks of business relations with counterparties that may be involved in corruption activities, for which it checks the counterparties’ tolerance for corruption, including the verification of their own anti-corruption programs, their readiness to include anti-corruption agreements. (caveat) and provide mutual support for ethical conduct of business and prevention of corruption.

Typical risks:

• - disclosure by the Inspection official to one of the participants of the procurement procedure of confidential information regarding offers of other participants;
• - concealing an employee of the Inspectorate who is directly involved in organizing a procurement procedure that has a conflict of interest;
• - conspiracy of participants in the procurement procedure;
• - falsification of documentation;
• - publication on the official website of incomplete information about the procedure for the procurement, their evaluation and obtaining the approval decision;
• - failure to notify the chairman and / or the member of the tender committee or the member of the technical committee about the presence of conflict of interest;
• - acceptance of the offer, promise or undue benefit of the potential counterparty by the chairman and / or member of the tender committee or member of the technical committee;
• - abuse in the evaluation of the bids of the procurement participants in order to reject the bid of the successful bidder

Recommended remedies:

• - ensure that clear, one-size-fits-all qualification criteria are set out for tenderers;
• - establish unqualified qualification criteria for the participants in the procurement procedure;
• - create conditions for free and equal access of potential participants of the procurement procedure to the information concerning the procedure for their conduct;
• - ensure the expansion of the competition market by taking appropriate effective measures.

5.7. CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

Particular attention in the activities of the officials of the Inspectorate should be given to the prevention and resolution of conflicts of interest. Unlike the previous Law of Ukraine “On the Principles of Prevention and Combating Corruption”, which provided only a general definition of conflict of interest, the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” distinguishes two of its types: the real one and the potential one. According to Art. 1 of the said Law:

potential conflict of interest

– is the presence of a private interest in the field in which he or she performs his / her official or representative powers, which may affect the objectivity or impartiality of his / her decision-making, or the act or omission of actions during the exercise of such powers;

real conflict of interest

– it is a contradiction between the private interest of the person and his or her official or representative powers, which affects the objectivity or impartiality of decision-making, or the act or omission to act in the exercise of those powers.

What is important is that the existence of a conflict of interest does not necessarily lead to facts of corruption, but it substantially increases the risk of corruption and is a prerequisite for them. Therefore, the legislation provides for a number of provisions to prevent and resolve conflicts of interest.

Thus, for public law officials, the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” stipulates the following duties aimed at preventing and resolving conflicts of interest:

• – take steps to prevent a real, potential conflict of interest;
• – not to take actions or make decisions in the conditions of real conflict of interest;
• – take steps to resolve real or potential conflicts of interest;
• – to report no later than the next business day from the moment when the person found out or should have known about the real or potential conflict of interest of the immediate supervisor.

Inspection staff are advised to refrain from any suggestions that may place them in a conflict of interest situation.

The above means that, first of all, a conflict of interest must be prevented. Therefore, the practice of deliberately creating by the Inspectorate of the Conflict of Interests circumstances, and subsequently taking measures to resolve it, is wrong.

As a result, the Inspectorate, which plans to take steps to prevent and resolve conflicts of interest, has the difficult task of striking a balance between the interests of the Inspectorate and those of its employees.

On the one hand, the employees of the Inspectorate have the right to engage in any activities not prohibited by law, engage in property relations, and so forth in their free time. On the other hand, such private activity of employees, as well as family and other personal relationships existing with employees may conflict with the interests of the Inspectorate.

Therefore, the main task of the Inspectorate to prevent and resolve conflicts of interest should be to limit and eliminate the influence of the private interest of employees on the exercise of their job functions, in particular, in making business decisions, rather than necessarily eliminating the circumstances that lead to a conflict of interest. Ways to resolve conflicts of interest, defined by the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” (Article 29 of the said Law):

• – removing a person from completing a task, taking action, taking a decision or participating in its taking in the face of a real or potential conflict of interest;
• – Applying external control over a person’s execution of a task, committing it to certain actions or making decisions;
• – restricting a person’s access to certain information;
• – viewing the amount of authority a person has;
• – transfer of a person to another position;
• – release of the person.

When resolving a conflict of interest, the softest measure of resolution should be chosen, taking into account existing circumstances. Stricter measures should be used when necessitated by real necessity, or where the more lenient measures have proved to be ineffective. The following principles should be based on the work of conflict of interest management (prevention, settlement) at the Inspectorate:

• – individual review and assessment of material and reputational risks to the Inspectorate in identifying and resolving any conflict of interest;
• – confidentiality of conflict of interest disclosure and resolution processes;
• – maintaining the balance of interests of the Inspectorate and the employee in the resolution of conflicts of interest;
• – protecting an employee from harassment due to a conflict of interest message from another employee of the organization.

Typical risks:

• – not informing the official of the Inspectorate of his / her direct supervisor about the conflict of interest and taking decisions in the conditions of his / her presence;
• – use of authority by the official to obtain material or other personal gain for himself or others;
• – the use by the official of powers for the purpose of adversely affecting persons to whom they have an unfavorable (biased) attitude;
• – claiming unlawful rewards for committing certain actions;
• – deliberate concealment of conflicts of interest;
• – unduly promoting individual or legal entities or their associations.

Recommended remedies:

• – to develop methodological recommendations on the prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest in the activities of officials of the Inspectorate, which provide typical examples of situations of conflict of interest, to determine an approximate algorithm for actions aimed at its identification and settlement;
• – Regularly review the declarations of property, income, expenses and commitments of a financial nature submitted by Inspection officials for a conflict of interest;
• – ensure the timely notification of the Inspection officer to his immediate supervisor that he or she has a real or potential conflict of interest;
• – regularly collect information on conflict of interest from the inspection staff;
• – to ensure unconditional prosecution of employees of the enterprise in case of failure to notify them in the cases established by law and the procedure for the presence of real conflict of interests.

5.8. PRESENTS

According to Art. 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” is a gift of money or other property, benefits, privileges, services, intangible assets that provide / receive free of charge or at a price below the minimum market. Inspection officials should refuse to receive a gift if it is likely that:

• – such a gift is related to the person’s post in the Inspectorate;
• – this may cause conflicts of interest;
• – doing so will discredit the Inspectorate or damage its reputation.

At the same time, officials of the Inspectorate may accept gifts that are in accordance with generally accepted ideas about hospitality, within the limits specified by the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption”.

Generally accepted notions of hospitality can be understood to mean receiving gifts from loved ones, long-time friends or acquaintances who give gifts on the occasion of a birthday, anniversary or public holiday (New Year, International Women’s Day, Defender of Ukraine Day, etc.).

A prerequisite for accepting gifts and hospitality is that such gifts and hospitality are not permanent (systematic) and will not affect the decision-making (withholding) of the Inspectorate’s decision-maker in the exercise of his or her authority in Inspections.

Typical risks:

• – the use of the tradition of welcoming Inspectorate officials for personal and professional holidays;
• – lack of proper control over the observance of the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” regarding the refusal to receive gifts, as well as the declaration of gifts received;
• – a conflict of interest as a result of receiving a gift.

Recommended remedies:

• – to keep records (register) of gifts and gifts offered to officials of the Inspectorate, received as hospitality or as gifts for the Inspectorate;
• – eliminate (minimize) personal, informal (non-working) contacts of officials of the Inspectorate with representatives of the enterprises, institutions, organizations with which the Inspectorate cooperates.

5.9. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

According to Art. 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Information” information is any information and / or data that can be stored on a material medium or displayed electronically.

Information about an individual is confidential, as well as information that is restricted to an individual or legal entity, except for the authorities. Confidential information may be disseminated at the request (consent) of the person concerned in accordance with the procedure prescribed by it, as well as in other cases specified by law (Part 2 of Article 21 of the Law of Ukraine “On Information”). The official information may include the following information (Article 9 of the Law of Ukraine “On Access to Public Information”):

• – contained in the documents of the entities that make up the inter-departmental official correspondence, supporting notes, recommendations, if they are related to the development of the direction of activity of the institution or the exercise of control, supervisory functions by public authorities, the decision-making process and preceding public discussion and / or decision making;
• – collected in the course of operational search, counterintelligence, defense of a country that is not classified as a state secret.

In turn, information related to the production, technology, management, financial and other activities of a non-State secret entity, disclosure of which may harm the entity’s interests, may be recognized as a trade secret. The composition and amount of information that constitutes a trade secret, the method of their protection are determined by the entity in accordance with the law (Part 1 of Article 36 of the Economic Code of Ukraine).

Misuse of confidential, commercial or other proprietary informationMisuse of confidential, commercial or other proprietary information

Typical risks:

• – the transfer of confidential, commercial or other proprietary information to third parties, without legitimate reason, for the purpose of obtaining undue advantage;
• – use of personal data or information about individuals for their own gainful purposes;
• – disclosure of confidential, commercial or other proprietary information upon dismissal;
• – use of confidential, commercial and other official information, other resources of the enterprise for the purpose of organizing their own business.

Recommended remedies:

• – provide written warning of restrictions related to the handling of confidential, commercial or other proprietary information;
• – provide technical restrictions on the use of confidential, commercial or other proprietary information, including, in part, access to it, making it impossible to copy, transmit or otherwise move such information;
• – ensure that accounting and periodic reviews of access to and use of sensitive information are made compulsory;
• – warn of the inadmissibility of disclosure of confidential, commercial and other proprietary information by a person upon dismissal.

5.10. FINANCE MANAGEMENT

Financial management – purposeful formation of the process of redistribution of financial resources, activities for attracting and efficient use of financial resources.

5.10.1. Payment for goods, works, services

Typical risks:

• – intentionally, by agreement with the supplier, overestimation of the cost of goods, works and services;
• – violation of officials of the Payment Discipline Inspectorate;
• – the bias of officials, in particular because of private interest, when allocating funds to the Inspectorate’s counterparties (payment of services by some and delay of payment for the benefit of others).

Recommended remedies:

• – periodically conduct internal audit of the use of financial resources;
• – to check compliance with the order of payments in accordance with the organizational and administrative documents of the Inspectorate.

5.10.2. Remuneration

Remuneration (wages) is the monetary expression of the value and cost of labor that acts in the form of any earnings paid by the owner of the enterprise to an employee for the work performed.

As a socio-economic category, wages serve as the main means of meeting the personal needs of workers, an economic lever that stimulates the development of social production, the growth of labor productivity, and the reduction of production costs.

Typical risks:

• – receiving an employee of the Inspectorate who was not entitled to payments;
• – a selective (privileged or biased) approach in determining tariffs, salaries, allowances, surcharges, bonuses, and other incentive and compensation payments.

Recommended remedies:

• – to comply with officials in determining tariff rates, salaries, allowances, surcharges, bonuses of other incentive and compensation payments of the organizational and administrative documents of the Inspectorate, as well as the current legislation of Ukraine;
• – periodically record the working time of employees (stay in the workplace).

5.11. RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Resource management is the use and disposal of Inspection officials.

5.11.1. Use of material resources

Typical risks:

• – use of the Inspectorate’s resources (communications, office equipment, transport, etc.) for its own purposes, including for the purpose of obtaining undue advantage;
• – the use by the Inspectorate of its resources for profit through the use of its own enterprises (corporate rights);
• – appropriation by the employee of material resources of the Inspection;
• – non-return of the resources of the enterprise received for personal use (for storage) after dismissal.

Recommended remedies:

• – to warn employees about the inadmissibility of using material resources of the Inspectorate for other purposes not caused by official necessity;
• – ensure compliance with the rules for the use of individual resources, such as communications, vehicles, etc.;
• – to impose a ban on the personal one-person solution of the issues of allocation (transfer) of material resources of the Inspectorate for his personal use (for storage);
• – to account for the resources provided (transferred) to the officials of the Inspectorate for personal use (for storage), to carry out periodic checks of such resources and the needs for their further personal use (storage);
• – to ensure steady return of material resources of the enterprise allocated (transferred) to officials of the Inspectorate for use (for storage) upon dismissal.

5.11.2. Management of material resources

Typical risks:

• – deliberate overstatement of orders for personal use;
• – artificially lowering the operational characteristics of material resources in use for their subsequent write-off (disposal) or replacement;
• – understating the value of the property to be written off (disposed of) with a view to its further acquisition.

Recommended remedies:

• – ensure that persons entrusted with the authority over the management of the material resources of the Inspection are held accountable for the failure or improper performance of the duties of management and disposal of property;
• – to carry out checks of available material resources with the ones specified in the acquisition and write-off (disposal) information;
• – periodically inventory and evaluate material resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the analysis of the activities of the officials of the Inspectorate, a number of possible corruption risks were identified and recommendations were given on how to eliminate them.

The following procedure for carrying out corruption risk assessment is proposed:

• – consideration of the activities of the Inspectorate in the form of separate processes (for example: relations with regulatory authorities; participation in public procurement;
• – relations with suppliers and contractors, etc.), in each of which analyze and distinguish components (subprocesses);
• – identification of persons implementing each specific process and sub-process (“process owners”), as well as persons exercising independent control over the implementation of such processes (“controllers”) (for example: approval of decisions by the head of another department of the Inspectorate, lawyer, accountant; sighting documents, etc.);
• – determining the degree of risk for each process and sub-process in which the occurrence of corruption offenses is most likely.

Determining the degree of risk is desirable to indicate: “minimally risky”; “Medium risk”; “Potentially risky”; “risky”; “Extremely risky” (requires maximum level of control).

Additionally, for each subprocess whose implementation involves corruption risks, a description of possible corruption offenses should be provided, including:

• – a description of the unlawful benefits or benefits that may be obtained by individual employees of the Inspectorate as a result of committing a corruption offense;
• – positions in the organization that are “key” to the potential commission of a corruption offense, ie participation of which is necessary to make the commission of a corruption offense possible (for example, persons responsible for managing funds for representation expenses, giving gifts on behalf of the Inspectorate, etc.);
• – possible forms of committing corruption offenses (making payments, providing tangible assets in the form of gifts, use of property).

The ways of minimizing corruption risks in the activities of the Inspection officials are:

• – analysis of administrative processes in the Inspectorate for corruption and preparation of proposals for their elimination or minimization;
• – assessing the effectiveness of the Inspectorate’s anti-corruption policy;
• – conducting surveys, questionnaires and other sociological research methods in order to identify corruption risks and violations of the rules of ethical conduct in the activity of the Inspectorate;
• – organization of trainings, practical exercises on anticorruption topics;
• – organization of fruitful interaction with the public, international organizations in the field of preventing and combating corruption;
• – forming and periodically updating the list of positions of the Inspectorate with the highest risks of committing corruption offenses or violations of ethical rules;
• – to take other measures to form the perception and condemnation by employees of any manifestations of corruption in the Inspectorate.

• План заходів

1. This Regulation defines the criteria and procedure for the selection of business partners for the various fields of activity of the Inspectorate for Training and Certification of Seafarers (hereinafter – the Inspection)..

2. The development of business relations with business partners determines the relevance of the problem of selecting the most suitable contractors of the Inspectorate, so its potential partners are selected according to criteria based on:

• transparency of production, economic and financial activities;
• fair competition among participants;
• maximum savings and efficiency;
• openness and transparency at all stages of procurement;
• non-discrimination of participants;
• an objective and impartial evaluation of the tender proposals;
• prevention of corruption and abuse;
• quality of goods, works and services;
• reliability and stability.

3. Choosing a business partner is an important part of the Inspectorate’s activities, which includes the following measures:

• – identify a range of potential partners, including joint ventures, among those who hold a leading position in the field;
• – analysis of indicators of financial position and business activity of enterprises, selection of potential partners and sending them a formal request with a proposal to participate in the procurement of goods / works / services;
• – Carrying out a comparative technical and economic evaluation of the commercial proposals, including the assessment of the competitiveness of products and the final choice of the partner.

4. To select and organize information about the business partner uses a wide range of materials that characterize it: data from periodicals, individual monographs, catalogs, prospectuses, anniversary and advertising publications of enterprises. It is useful to use the services of the Chamber of Commerce and many existing specialized companies to provide information services.

5. The sources for obtaining information about potential inspection partners are open source information, namely:

• – banking or business information;
• – balance sheet;
• – income statement;
• – statement of changes in financial position;
• – a report on the sources and uses of fixed and current assets.

6.The inspection establishes the criteria for the procurement procedure (hereinafter referred to as the tenderers) and decides on the refusal of the tenderer to participate in the procurement procedure, and is obliged to reject the tenderer’s tender if:

• – there is conclusive evidence that the participant offers, gives or agrees to give directly or indirectly to any official of the Inspectorate, any other public authority in any form (employment offer, valuable item, service, etc.) in order to influence acceptance the decision to determine the winner of the procurement procedure or the use by the customer of a specific procurement procedure;
• – information about a legal entity that is a participant, entered in the Unified State Register of persons who committed corruption or corruption-related offenses;
• – the official (official) of the participant who is authorized by the participant to represent his interests during the procurement procedure;
• – the entity (participant) for the past three years has been held liable for the violation provided for in paragraph 4 of part 2 of Article 6, paragraph 1 of Article 50 of the Law of Ukraine “On Protection of Economic Competition” (tenders);
• – a natural person who is a participant has been convicted of a crime committed on the basis of self-serving motives, the conviction of which has not been withdrawn or repaid in the manner prescribed by law;
• – the official (official) of the tenderer who has signed the tender offer has been convicted of a crime committed for selfish reasons, the conviction of which has not been withdrawn or repaid in accordance with the procedure established by law;
• – the tender offer is submitted by the participant of the procurement procedure, who is a related party with other participants of the procurement procedure and / or with the member (s) of the tender committee authorized by the person (s) of the contracting authority;
• – the participant is declared bankrupt by the statutory procedure and the liquidation procedure is opened against him;
• – there is no information in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individuals – Entrepreneurs and Public Formations provided for in paragraph 9 of Part 2 of Article 9 of the Law of Ukraine “On State Registration of Legal Entities, Individuals
• – entrepreneurs and public formations;
• - the participating legal entity does not have an anti-corruption program or an anti-corruption program commissioner if the cost of purchasing the goods (goods), services (services) or works is equal to or exceeds UAH 20 million;
• – the participant has arrears of taxes and fees (compulsory payments).

7. The Inspectorate’s Corruption Prevention and Detection Officer (hereinafter – “the Commissioner”) conducts an anti-corruption audit of the Inspectorate’s existing or potential counterparties to assess the existence of corruption risks.

8. The Commissioner checks whether the business partner has the reputation of an entity whose activities are related to corruption (even in the absence of appropriate court decisions), and whether the business partner will be used as an intermediary for the transfer to third parties (or to obtain from third parties) of unlawful benefits.

9. Anti-corruption checks are carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Anti-Corruption Program of the Inspectorate, as well as standards for various fields of activity of the Inspectorate.

10. Based on the results of anti-corruption inspection of the business partner of the Inspection, the Commissioner makes a written recommendation to the Chief of Inspection in any form.

11. In case of a negative recommendation of the Commissioner for continuation or commencement of legal relations with such a business partner, the Head of the Inspection should make a reasonable decision on this matter.

12. The materials of the anti-corruption check of the business partners of the Inspection shall be kept for at least 5 years.