The Institutional Architecture of EU Anti-Fraud Measures: Overview of a Network
Gianluca Sgueo
2018-06-18
Abstract:Protection of the financial interests of the European Union (EU) is a key element of the EU policy agenda. Transparent use of public money is crucial for two separate reasons: first, for strengthening citizens' confidence in the activities of the EU; second, to facilitate better management and protection of the EU budget.
According to the European Commission, risks from fraud against the EU's financial interests amount to about €3 billion per year, roughly 2 % of the EU's annual budget. Cohesion policy is considered to be one of the most critical sectors, with regional development policy being the most affected by fraudulent behaviour.
Following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the instruments available to protect the EU's financial interests have been substantially strengthened. A composite institutional architecture was designed to detect, prevent and combat fraud. This paper aims to describe the institutional architecture designed to tackle EU budget fraud, and its main features. The anti-fraud system related to the EU budget is based on a multi-layered network of cooperation. The first layer is composed of horizontal cooperation among EU authorities. The second and third layers are based on vertical relationships: between EU authorities and national authorities, and between EU authorities and international organisations.
Cooperation between EU authorities and national administrations consists of mutual efforts to prevent, detect and correct irregularities and fraud that might affect the use of EU funds. National authorities prosecute and report on cases of fraudulent use of EU funds to the European Commission. Cooperation between EU and international organisations is aimed at, first, coordinating efforts to monitor and combat fraud and, second, at encouraging harmonisation of legislation on fraud, corruption and mismanagement of public funds.
Ten EU authorities are specifically dedicated or entitled to carry out tasks concerned with detecting and countering fraudulent behaviour. These are: (1) the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF); (2) the European Commission; (3) the European Parliament (and specifically the Committee on Budgetary Control); (4) the Council; (5) the European Court of Auditors; (6) Eurojust; (7) the European Police Office (Europol); (8) the European Court of Justice; (9) the EU Ombudsman; and (10) the European Public Prosecutor's Office. These EU authorities perform four key tasks with regard to combating fraud: (1) policy-making; (2) scrutiny; (3) assistance; and (4) reporting.
Depending on which EU authorities are involved, the moment at which tasks are carried out (e.g. before a fraud is detected, or when fraudulent behaviour is addressed) and the typology of fraud concerned, cooperation, overlap, or even contrast may characterise the EU institutional architecture against fraud.
The debate as to how to improve the efficiency of the EU institutional architecture aimed at protecting EU financial interests continues. At the institutional level, the main topic of discussion concerns the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office, which will take over the task of prosecuting fraud against the EU budget from the national authorities of 20 Member States after 2020. Further improvements are expected through the digitalisation of administrative procedures, and from closer inter-institutional cooperation.
Political Science,Business,Law