Report study aed2 eng

Strengthening Civil Society Monitoring Capacity in Moldova

Perceptions and experiences of household representatives and businessmen regarding

corruption in the Republic of Moldova

(Report)

The present research has been conducted by Transparency International – Moldova within the “Strengthening Civil Society Monitoring Capacity in Moldova” Program with the support of the Academy for Educational Development (based in cooperation agreement with United States Agency for International Development No. 121-A-00-07-00707).

Chisinau

January 2009

GOVERNMENT OF THE

REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

MOLDOVA

2

Perceptions and experiences of household representatives and businessmen regarding

corruption in the Republic of Moldova Summary

page

I. The objectives and tasks of the sociological research

3

II. General information about respondents Geographical distribution Residential area Age Sex Occupational groups Incomes

4

III. Perceptions about corruption Problems faced by respondents Awareness of corruption impact Evolution of corruption Reasons for spreading of corruption Sources of information about corruption Familiarization with the implementation of the Threshold Country Program Spreading of corruption Unofficial ways to solve problems with public servants The contribution of the state to business development Work time dedicated to problem solving with public servants in state institutions The behavior of public servants from control bodies in the process of detecting violations of legislation Participation in public procurement

9

IV. Experiences in contacting public institutions Most frequently contacted institutions The institutions, where unofficial payments are done more often Average bribe Estimated total bribe The purpose of unofficial payments Unofficial payments done voluntarily or under pressure

18

V. Engagements concerning combating corruption Readiness to give a bribe Emotional aspect of the bribe payer Tolerance towards corruption

24

VI. Confronting and denouncing corruption cases Confronting corruption cases Denouncing corruption cases Solving problems in official ways Assessment of trust in institutions monitored under the TCP and the professionalism of their employees

25

VII Is it possible to combat corruption in the Republic of Moldova? Most efficient ways to reduce corruption Salaries vs. unofficial payments

27

Summary

28

3

I. The objectives and tasks of the sociological research

Transparency International – Moldova conducted within the project “Monitoring the

implementation of the Threshold Country Program (TCP) in the fiscal system” financed by the US Government, two sociological researches: one at the beginning of the project, and the second

one at its closing. The objective of the researches was to analyze the perceptions and experiences

of household representatives and businessmen about corruption in the Republic of Moldova and to evaluate the impact of TCP on the process of preventing and combating corruption.

In the researches perceptions and experiences have been evaluated regarding corruption in the Republic of Moldova of two categories of respondents: businessmen and household

representatives. The analysis focused on the situation in 6 priority areas/institutions of the Threshold Country Program: public health, judicial system, fiscal system, customs, police, the Center for Combating Economic Crimes and Corruption.

The tasks of the research are following:

- To identify the main sources of informing the population about corruption, about the

implementation of the Threshold Country Program; to assess the level of trust in information

about corruption provided in the mass-media;

- To evaluate the main problems that are subject of concern for the population and the

businessmen;

- To identify the main causes of corruption and to evaluate them in time;

- To assess the perception of corruption in 38 areas/sectors/institutions;

- To estimate the total amount of unofficial payments in various public services/institutions,

including the 6 priority areas of TCP;

- To assess the opinions of respondents regarding the level of professionalism of staff in institutions monitored under the TCP and the credibility of the respective institutions;

- To evaluate the tolerance level of the population towards the corruption phenomenon, the acceptability of unofficial payment and readiness to bribe;

- To identify the most efficient measures to prevent and fight corruption;

- To develop and calculate the indicator of corruption risk in 6 priority areas of TCP.

Methodological aspects

• The sample size: 1060 persons with the age of more than 18 years, in case of households;

503 business units;

• Sample: stratified, random, bi-stage.

• Stratification criteria: 12 geographic units, based on the administrative territorial units prior

to the latest administrative territorial reform, residential area (urban-rural), size of urban

localities (2 types), size of rural localities (2 types of rural localities). The sample offers the necessary size for a representative analysis for following strata: urban, rural, North, South, Center zones, with margins of error corresponding to the size of the strata.

• Sampling: a. The size of the urban strata and the total per regions (former counties – “judeŃe”) has

been calculated proportionally with the number of the population indicated according

to the data communicated by the National Bureau of Statistics. The sizes of rural strata have been calculated proportionally with the number of electors;

4

Randomization stages: I. Locality: within adjusted strata, the selected localities were established

aleatory, based on a table with aleatory numbers;

II. Household: the maximum number of interviews conducted in one

sampling point was 6. The households where the interview took place have been selected by the method of aleatory route, with a statistic step; III. Person: in the cases when in the selected households there are several

adult persons, the interviewed person was selected by method of closest

birthday.

b. The sample for business has been developed based on the Directory of Goods and Services VARO – INFORM MOLDOVA 2008. A statistical step was used to select the subjects to be interviewed; in order to replace those who refused from the first

selection, a repeated selection was done; this procedure was repeated until the necessary number of interviews was in place.

• Representativity: the sample is representative at national level, with a maximum error of +3%

for the household sample and +4,4% for the business units;

• Data collection period: October 2008. The interviews were conducted at the homes of

respondents, by the operators of CBS-AXA network. The questionnaire was prepared in Romanian and Russian languages, the respondents having the possibility to choose the

version;

• Verification: The quality of data collection and credibility of conducting the interviews was

carried out by the CBS-AXA verifiers. About 15% of respondents have been re-contacted at

home, and about 40% of respondents have been re-contacted by phone. The method of verification of logical connections between variables was used.

• Entry and processing of collected data was done in SPSS 15 software.

II. General information about respondents, 20081

Geographical distribution of respondents.

Distribution of respondents by zones

1 Taking into account that both researches were conducted in 2008 and the respondents expressed their opinions and experiences regarding the last 12 months, conventionally the first research is indicated with

2007, and the second research with 2008.

5

Center

Households - 17,1% Business people – 12,4%

Chişinău Municipality

Households - 28,5% Business people – 50.2%

South

Households - 22% Business people -17,5%

North

Households – 32,5% Business people – 19,9%

6

Distribution of respondents by rayons, %

Households Business

people

Anenii Noi 2,5 1,6

Balti 3,2 10,1

Basarabeasca 0,9 1,4

Briceni 2,4 1

Cahul 3,8 4,6

Calarasi 1,1 1,4

Cantemir 1,2 1,4

Causeni 2,2 1,8

Chisinau 21,9 48

Cimislia 2,5 2,6

Criuleni 2,5 0,6

Donduseni 1,2 1,2

Drochia 2,4 0,6

Dubasari 1,2 0,4

Edinet 2 1,4

Falesti 3,7 0,4

Floresti 1,2 0,6

Glodeni 1,2 1,2

Hincesti 3,7 2,8

Ialoveni 2,2 0,6

Nisporeni 1,2 0

Ocnita 1,3 0

Orhei 3,8 2,4

Rezina 1,2 0,4

Riscani 3,7 1,4

Singerei 3,7 0,8

Soldanesti 1,2 0,4

Soroca 2,5 1,2

Stefan Voda 2,5 1,2

Straseni 3,7 2,8

Taraclia 1,1 0

Telenesti 2,5 0,4

Ungheni 3,7 0,6

UTAG 4,9 4,5

Leova 0 0,2

7

Residential area

Age of respondents

Sex of respondents

Residential area: households

Urban 39%

Rural 61%

Sex of respondents: households

Male 45.8%

Female 54.2%

Sex of respondents: businessmen, %

Male

49.3 % Female

50.7%

Age of respondents: households 21% 20.4%

18.5% 16%

9.6%

14.5%

0

5

10

15

20

25

18–24 yrs. 25–29 yrs. 30–39 yrs. 40-49 yrs. 50–59 yrs. Over 60 Yrs.

Age of respondents: businessmen, %

5.8

12.5

24.6

31

22.1

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

18–24 25–29 30–39 40-49 50–59 Over 60

Residential area: businessmen, %

Rural

17.3%

Urban

82.7 %

8

Education level of respondents

Occupational groups

Incomes of respondents

Incomes of respondents

35.6%

23.8%

36.1%

4% 0.5% 1.2%

21.7%

58.8%

13.1% 5.2%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Very low

incomes

Incomes

lower than

middle

Middle

incomes

Incomes

higher than

middle

Very high

incomes

households

businessmen

Occupational groups: households, %

Employed without labor contract 4.8%

Officialy

as registered unemployed 2.3%

Do not work, but look for work

10.8%

Do not work and do not look for work

7.3 %

Students 5.4% Employed,

temporary labor contract 10.2%

Employed,

permanent

labor contract 29.5%

Others(invalid,

retired, etc.)

29.7%

Education level of respondents: households

Secondary

professional

27%

Secondary 35.7%

Incomplete

secondary

14.9%

High,

including

incomplete

22.4%

Education level of respondents: businessmen, %

Secondary 8.3%

Secondary

incomplete

0.8%

High,

including

incomplete

65.3%

Secondary professional

25.6%

9

III. Perceptions about corruption How severe are the following problems for you? (Average, estimated on a scale from 1 to 6, where 1 signifies that the factor is not a problem, 6 – a major problem)

Problems faced by households, average

3.69

3.75

3.83

3.95

4.01

4.12

4.19

4.19

4.20

4.20

4.34

4.31

4.47

4.68

4.91

4.34

3.27

3.3

3.6

3.59

3.73

4.1

3.94

4.22

4.05

4.13

4.26

4.48

4.59

4.72

5

3.87

3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00

Limited access to public information

Complicated regulation of business

Low quality of educational system

Frequent modifications of legislation

Red tape

Unsatisfactory communication services (roads,

phone lines, Internet access, etc,)

Political instability

Criminality

Unfair judicial system

Unsatisfactory quality of medical care

Pollution of environment

Inflation

High taxes

Corruption

High unemployment

Poverty 2007

2008

10

To what extent the following factors hinder the business development in Moldova? (Average, it is evaluated on a scale from 1 to 6 (1 – does not hinder at all, 2 – hinders sometimes, 3 – hinders a little, 4 – hinders a lot, 5 – hinders very much, 6 – blocks)

Problems that hinder business development in

Moldova, average

3.05

3.05

3.21

3.37

3.42

3.45

3.52

3.52

3.58

3.60

3.61

3.64

3.65

3.68

3.68

3.73

3.80

3.98

4.07

3.03

3.19

3.32

3.73

3.59

3.41

3.53

3.45

3.57

3.56

3.8

3.62

3.64

3.73

4.03

3.86

3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00

Difficult access to bank credits

Lack of property for pledge

Lack of raw material

Control of prices

Criminality

Regulatory problems of export-import

Imperfect labor legislation

Complicated regulation of business

Unfair judicial system

Exagerated number of controls and inspections

Monopol situations on the market

Weakly developed market infrastructure

Shortage of skilled labor

Frequent modifications of legislation

Political instability

Inflation

Imperfect tax legislation

High taxes and fees

Corruption 2007

2008

11

Awareness of corruption impact

Evolution of corruption

We are poor because we are corrupt,%

2007

60.1% 2007

59.9%

2008

56.8%

2008

57.1%

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

Households Businessmen

Evolution of corruption during the last year:

households, %

1.2

11

11

17.6

27.8

31.4

1.5

11.2

11.5

17.8

23.2

34.8

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Decreased a lot

Decreased a little

Don’t know/No answer

Increased a little

Increased a lot

Remained almost the same

2008

2007

Evolution of corruption during the last year:

businessmen, %

1.2

8.2

14.2

17.1

18.3

41

8.5

15.3

1.4

17.1

15.9

41.8

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Decreased a lot


Decreased a little

Increased a lot

Increased a little

Remained almost the same

2008

2007

12

Reasons for spreading of corruption

How important are following reasons for the spreading of corruption in the Republic of Moldova?

Average, it is evaluated on a scale from 1 to 4 (1 – very important reason, 2 – quite important reason, 3 –

less important reason, 4 – it is not a reason)

Sources of information about corruption

Sources of information about corruption:

households, %

0.4

1.4

1.6

5.8

14

24.7

13.9

38

0.9

0.4

1.1

0.8

6.7

15.8

14.4

23.4

36.5

Press releases of international organizations

.

Press releases of NGOs

Reports of state authorities

Own experience

Press

Discussions with relatives, friends

Radio

Television

2007

2008

Main reasons of corruption, average

2.63

2.53

2.2

1.98

1.98

1.88

1.85

1.79

1.68

1.54

1.47

2.83

2.76

2.28

1.99

1.93

1.88

1.94

1.76

1.65

1.49

1.47

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Pressures from relatives and friends

Pressures from the superior

It is already a tradition

Lack of standards of conduct for public servants

Lack of transparency in the activity of public institutions

Low level of culture

Greed

Lack of internal control in public institutions

Government does not approach the problem seriously

Corrupt persons are not sanctioned

Low salaries

Businessmen

Households

13

How trusted is the information about corruption provided in the mass-media

Familiarization with the implementation of the Threshold Country Program Households

Businessmen

2007 2008 2007 2008 Share of population who knows about the implementation of TCP (% of total number of respondents)

26.7 34.3 35.0 52.1

How much do you trust the information about corruption in mass-media: households, %

8.9

31.4

49.4

10.3 8.3

41.7 40

10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Very much A lot Little Don’t trust at all

2007

2008

How much do you trust the information about

corruption in mass-media: businessmen, %

6.8

31.7

47.6

13.9 10

45.2

38.6

6.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

Very much A lot Little Don’t trust at all

2007

2008

Sources of information about corruption: businessmen, %

1.4

2.1

2.3

10.2

11.6

17.5

20.9

34

2.0

2.7

1.2

11.9

14.0

15.8

20.9

31.4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Press releseas of international organizations

Press releases of non-governmental organizations


Own experience

Discussions with relatives, friends, acquintances

Radio

Press, including electronic

Television

2007

2008

14

Perceptions about spreading of corruption

How often it is appealed to money, gifts, and personal contacts in order to „solve” problems?

(%, summing up the share of respondents who consider that one appeals to unofficial payments

“often”, “very often” and “always”) Households

Businessmen

2007 2008 2007 2008

Tax inspectorates 43.8 43.1 39.9 41.2

Customs 62.3 57.8 53.9 55.4

Police 67.1 61.7 59.3 59.8

Public prosecution 53.3 53.1 40.7 41.8

Sanitary-epidemiological inspections 37.8 44.1 38.3 39.8

Cadastral offices 28 37 24.9 26.2

Privatization 31 40.1 25.7 28.8

Rent of state property 29.9 35.9 29.3 30.6

Courts of justice 50.6 48.5 39.3 36.6

Public procurement 28.1 38.3 27.8 30

Education institutions 63.7 55 53.5 57

Health institutions 68.9 60.5 64 63.5

Ministries and departments 35 43 32.5 32.8

Local Public Administration 30.8 35.9 32.5 30

Civil Registry Offices 21.4 28 16.9 21.5

Passport bureaus 31.3 32.1 24.1 28.3

Utility services 15.8 24.5 12.3 17.7

Chamber of State Registration 18.9 25.7 19.3 18.5

Anti-fire inspections 18.2 25.5 21.6 23.3

Energetic Inspectorate 19.1 25.1 18.3 21.3

Environmental Protection Services 18.3 25.5 19.1 20.5

Chamber of Commerce and Industry 19.4 26.9 21.3 18.3

CCECC 21.1 28.1 23.1 19.1

Sources of information about the implementation

of TCP measures, % (2008)

0.6

2.4

2.5

12.4

16.3

25.1

40.7

2.1

4.7

4.1

10.3

24.6

15.8

38.4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Press releases of international organizations

Press releases of non-governmental

organizations


Discussions with relatives, friends, acquintances

Press, including electronic

Radio

Television

Businessmen

Households

15

Visa issue 44.2 38.9 32.7 31.2

Licensing 37.5 39.1 31.2 32.8

Notary 35.6 37.8 23.5 26.9

Law firms 39 39.7 26.7 27.7

Access to credits, loans 21.9 24.1 17.7 17.5

Registration of transport and qualification of drivers 42.3 41.3 36.6 40

Technical revision of cars 42.7 43.1 39.1 41.8

Granting of construction authorizations 38.2 36.9 44.1 38

Water supply 13.8 21.1 14.6 14.6

Electricity supply 12.4 20.5 12.6 14

Gas supply 11.4 21.3 14 13.6

Heating supply/ heat carrier 11.4 17.6 12.2 13.2

Labour inspection 18.2 20.3 22.1 18.7

Telecommunications 14.5 16.5 11.7 12.2

Insurance companies 17.5 18.3 15 15.3

Unofficial ways of solving problems with public servants

Is it easier to solve problems through official

than unofficial ways? % (2008)

6.9

6.9

8.6

10.9

19.8

22.3

24.6

7.6

8.2

15.5

6.6

17.7

16.5

27.9

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Always

Never

Very rare


In most cases

Very often

Sometimes

Business 2008

HH 2008

Unofficial ways of solving

problems with public servants: HH, %

0

0.5

2.2

14.4

22.3

60.6

0.1

0.9

2.1

15.7

20.7

60.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Other

Pressures from criminal organizations

Pressures from superiors

Presents

Contacts/relations

Money HH 2008

HH 2007

Unofficial way of solving problems with

public servants: businessmen, %

0.4

0.6

3.2

12.4

41.8

41.6

0

0.8

2.7

9.9

37.2

49.4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Other

Pressures from criminal organizations

Pressures from superiors

Presents

Contacts/relations

Money

bus. 2008

bus. 2007

16

The contribution of the state to business development How do you assess the contribution of the state to the development of your business? (% of total

number of interviewed businessmen)

2007 2008

Helps a lot 2.1 2.2

Helps somehow 5.6 12.9

Helps very little 16.1 20.7

Is absolutely neutral 26.4 27

Sometimes even hinders 26.3 23.7

Hinders more 21 10.1

Don’t know/No answer 2.5 3.4

What part of your work time do you use to solve problems with public servants in state

institutions? (% of total number of interviewed businessmen)2

The behavior of tax inspectors in the process of detecting violations of legislation

2 Data for 2004: Diagnosis of Bribery in Business, Transparency International – Moldova, 2005.

Work time used to solve problems with

public servants in state authorities, %

2008

17.3%

2007

21%

2004

22.4%

0

5

10

15

20

25

If the tax inspector detects a violation of legislation,

how does he/she normally proceed? %

60.5

20.4

3.1

16.0

66.0

17.6

3.7

12.7

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Registers the violations and elaborates the

control act according to the regulation

Implies that it is necessary to pay in order to “solve” the problems

Names the price to correct the

data of the report

Registers and then implies that it is

necessary to pay

2007

2008

17

Share of unofficial payments in the amount indebted to the state for breaching the legislation.

If a violation of legislation is detected, for which you have to pay a fine in the amount X, usually, what

part of this amount is needed to be paid directly, in order to solve the problem?3 (% of X)

Participation in public procurement

22.1% of businessmen participated in the last two year in public procurement tenders (in 2007 – 16.3%).

Reasons for non-participation in public procurement, %

Very

important

Impor-

tant

Minor

reason

This is

no reason

Complexity of procedure 11.6 28.5 14.6 45.3

Cost of procedure 16.6 24.5 14.3 44.6

Too much competition 11.3 27.8 16.2 44.7

I would not win the contract without making some

unofficial payments

9.1 23.9 18.6 48.4

The procurement procedure is not transparent and fair 11 25.5 15.6 47.9

Direct contracts are easier 21.8 28.6 11.3 38.3

It is not our profile 49.1 18.2 10.4 22.3

Visits paid by representatives of control bodies

Average number of visits, times per year 2007 2008

Tax inspectorate 3.23 2.67

Police 2.88 2.48

Anti-fire inspectorate 1.76 1.92

Energetic inspectorate 3.25 2.88

Sanitary-epidemiological inspections 2.75 2.36

CCECC 1.69 1.63

Environmental Protection Services 2.37 1.54

Labour Inspection 1.91 1.79

3 Ibidem.

2008 27%

2007

36%

2004 39.7%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

18

IV. Experiences in contacting public institutions, 2008

Most frequently contacted institutions, 2008.

Have you contacted the following institutions/services during the last 12 months? (% of respondents

who contacted the institution)

(% of respondents who contacted the institution)

Most frequently contacted institutions: businessmen, %

0

10

20

30

40

50

60 Tax inspectorates

Health institutions Utility services

Sanitary-epidemiological inspections

Police

Education institutions

Customs

Local public administration Technical revision of cars

Anti-fire inspections

Notary

Labor inspection Passport bureaus

Energetic Inspectorate

Telecommunications

Environmental protection services

Registration of transport and

qualification of drivers

Electricity supply

Insurance companies

Access to credits, loans

Most frequently contacted institutions: households, %

0

10

20

30

40

50 Health institutions

Education institutions Police

Customs

Utility services

Passport bureaus

Local public administration

Tax inspectorates

Electricity supply Technical revision of cars

Civil Registration Offices

Visa issue Notary

Gas supply

Telecommunications

Acces to credits, loans

Registration of transport

and qualification of drivers

Water supply

Courts of justice Insurance companies

19

Institutions where unofficial payments are made more often, 2008. Have you made unofficial

payments in the following institutions/services during the last 12 months? %

Institutions where unofficial payments are made more often:

businessmen, %

0

10

20

30

40

50 Health institutions

Customs Police

Education institutions

Technical revision

of cars

Granting of construction

authorizations

Courts of justice

Visa issue

Public procurement

Licensing Privatization

Law firms

Registration of transport and qualification of drivers

Rent of state-owned property


Anti-fire inspections

Passport bureaus

Tax inspectorates

Cadastral offices

Public prosecution

Institutions where unofficial paments are made more often:

households, %

0

10

20

30

40

50

60 Customs

Registration of transport and qualification of drivers

Police Health institutions

Technical revision of cars

Granting construction authorization

Privatization

Visa issue

Law firms Education institutions

Environmental protection services


Public prosecution

Notary

Rent of state-owned property

Civil Registration Offices

Gas supply

Courts of justice

Tax inspectorates Passport bureaus

20

Average bribe, 2008

Businessmen: average bribe

Number of

unofficial

payments

Minimal

amount,

Lei

Maximal

amount,

Lei

Average,

Lei

Health institutions 94 10 8000 707

Police 52 50 20000 1033

Customs 50 20 15000 1383

Education institutions 40 60 10000 990

Tax inspectorates 32 50 20000 1531

Technical revision of cars 27 50 5000 541

Sanitary-epidemiological inspections 19 50 3000 682

Anti-fire inspections 16 50 1000 303

Passport bureaus 13 30 3000 480

Registration of transport and qualification of drivers 13 100 3500 654

Visa issue 10 100 1500 480

Licensing 10 100 6000 1137

Notary 10 50 1000 243

Public procurement 8 100 15000 2913

Ministries and departments 8 50 5000 1550

Energetic Inspectorates 8 50 200 119

Law firms 8 50 1000 381

Rent of state-owned property 7 200 4000 1529

Courts of justice 7 20 10000 2824

Granting of construction authorization 7 100 9000 2036

Labour inspection 7 30 8000 1711

Local Public Administration 6 50 2000 692

Environmental Protection Services 6 50 2000 588

Chamber of Commerce and Industry 6 70 1500 528

Civil Registration Offices 5 50 1000 272

Public Prosecution 4 270 15000 5193

Cadastral offices 4 200 3000 1050

Privatization 4 100 1500 700

Electricity supply 4 80 300 145

Chamber of State Registration 3 500 8000 4167

Water supply 3 100 8000 2783

Utility services 2 200 6000 3100

Access to credits, loans 2 150 600 375

Heating supply/heat carrier 2 200 200 200

Telecommunications 2 50 1000 525

Insurance companies 2 50 200 125

CCECC 1 2000 2000 2000

Gas supply 1 100 100 100

21

Households: average bribe Number

of

unofficial

payments

Minimal

amount,

Lei

Maximal

amount,

Lei

Average,

Lei

Health institutions 200 20 14000 783

Customs 86 50 3400 591

Education institutions 75 30 5000 677

Police 70 20 14000 1082

Passport bureau 30 25 1000 302

Technical revision of cars 30 50 1000 357

Tax inspectorates 22 25 1500 287

Visa issue 22 100 7100 1177

Registration of transport and qualification of drivers 21 50 5000 833

Notary 16 40 1600 356

Civil registration offices 15 20 400 116

Law firms 12 100 2000 800

Water supply 10 50 780 224

Gas supply 10 80 7000 901

Sanitary-epidemiological inspections 9 20 7000 1036

Courts of justice 9 100 3000 767

Electricity supply 9 50 100 79

Public Prosecution 8 200 7000 2213

Privatization 8 150 3000 905

Environmental Protection Services 8 50 200 106

Granting of construction authorizations 8 50 2000 419

Local Public Administration 7 20 500 179

Energetic Inspectorate 7 40 200 100

Anti-fire inspections 6 50 100 75

Heating supply/heat carrier 6 50 200 105

Labour inspection 6 50 200 98

Telecommunications 6 50 100 77

Rent of state-owned property 5 50 800 470

Utility services 5 90 500 219

Insurance companies 5 50 470 224

Cadastral offices 4 100 1000 413

Public procurement 4 100 300 150

Licensing 4 50 2300 1200

Ministries and departments 2 100 300 200

Chamber of Commerce and Industry 2 102 350 226

Access to credits, loans 2 50 200 125

CCECC 1 1000 1000 1000

Chamber of State Registration 0 0 0 0

22

Estimated total bribe. In order to estimate the total value of bribes paid by businessmen and household representatives in various institutions, services and field, following indicators have been

used: the frequency of bribes, the average bribe in the institution/service/fields and the total number of

economic agents/households. In the institutions/services, where the indicator of average bribe was not

stable, i.e. the number of registered bribes was not sufficient to obtain a stable average, the average was used which was calculated for the institutions in the „other” category.

For the estimation of the total value of bribes paid by household representatives, the official statistics

on the total number of households was used (1131 thousand), and for the estimation of bribes paid by businessmen – the total number of economic agents, which is 166172, out of which 149342

enterprises (including 66524 individual enterprises, 64941 societies with limited liability, 4984 joint

stock corporations, 4074 cooperatives, 1509 state and municipal enterprises, 1019 unions and associations, 2927 branches and representations, 3364 – other type of enterprises)4 and 16830 holders

of entrepreneurial patent.

According to the calculations, the total volume of estimated bribe in the household profile amounted

about 6300 million Lei in 2008, increasing with 7% compared to 2007. Most unofficial payments were made in health institutions (190 million Lei), police (97 million Lei), education institutions (64

million Lei), and customs (61 million Lei).

The total value of bribes paid by businessmen amounted about 264 million Lei, decreasing with 15% compared to 2007. Most unofficial payments were maid in customs (34 million Lei), health

institutions (30 million Lei), tax inspectorates (26 million Lei), and police (25 million lei).

Estimated total bribe: businessmen

Institutions, services, fields Amount per

country,

million Lei

Health institutions 29.9

Police 25.2

Customs 33.8

Educations institutions 18

Tax inspectorates 25.8

Technical revision of cars 7.3

Sanitary-epidemiological inspections 7.4

Anti-fire inspections 2.4

Passport bureaus 3

Registration of transport and qualification of drivers 4.3

Visa issue 2.1

Licensing 6.8

Notary 1.2

Other 96.7

Compared to 2005, in the profile of areas monitored under the TCP5, the amount of estimated bribe changed in the following way: • In customs – reduced with about 50%; • In fiscal system – reduced with 28%;

4 Chamber of State Registration, www.registru.md. 5 In judiciary system and CCECC: the statistics of cases of accepting bribes have been insufficient (respectively 9 and 1 testimony), which does not allow making significant estimations.

23

• In public health – increased with 24%; • In police – increased with 26%. The purpose of unofficial payments. The respondents were asked to indicate what the purpose of unofficial payments was: to avoid a punishment in case of a violation of law or to „grease the wheels”, i.e. to obtain something, for which he/she is entitled according to the law. The situation in the six areas monitored under the TCP is following (the indicator represents the share of those who paid for the mentioned purposes, out of the total number of respondents who made unofficial payments)

6.

Respondents - households

Police

Health institutions

Courts of justice

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008

To avoid the punishment (sanction ) for breaching the law

48.0

42.4

1.1

3.1

54.2

33.3

To “grease the wheels” 52.0 57.6 98.9 96.9 45.8 66.7

Respondents - businessmen

CCECC Customs Tax

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008

To avoid the punishment (sanction ) for breaching the law

75.0

66.7

15.9

26.2

24.7

35.5

To “grease the wheels” 25.0 33.3 84.1 73.8 75.3 64.5

Unofficial payments made voluntarily or under pressure. The answers of respondents to the questions

„Have you made the unofficial payments willing or you were forced to pay?” in the profile of six institutions/areas monitored under the TCP show, that the respondents paid prevailingly upon own

initiative, which confirms a high readiness to pay a bribe. (The indicator represents the share of those who

paid voluntarily and were forced to pay out of the total number of respondents who made unofficial

payments)7.

Respondents - households

Police

Health institutions

Courts of justice

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008

Were forced to pay 36.3 43.2 37.3 43.6 * *

Made unofficial payments upon own initiative

63.7 56.8 62.7 56.4 * *

* Insufficient number of cases of bribing

Respondents - businessmen

CCECC Customs Tax

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008

Were forced to pay * * 54.8 60.6 35.7 37.3

Made unofficial payments upon own initiative

* * 45.2 39.4 64.3 62.7

* Insufficient number of cases of bribing

6 In case of courts of justice, police and health institutions the indicator from the households survey is reflected, and for tax inspectorates, customs and CCECC – from the businessmen survey. 7Ibidem

24

V. The engagement of the society to prevent corruption

Readiness to offer a bribe


2007 2008 2007 2008

Yes 29.3 20.9 27.6 17.5

No 24.1 34.7 19.5 23.5

Depends on

the situation

46.6 44.4 52.9 59

In your opinion, how would feel the person who offered a present to a public servant in order to

solve his/her problem?


2007 2008 2007 2008

Revolted 13.5 17.5 12.8 18.1

Humiliated 28.6 31.8 31 23.1

Indifferent 10 12.1 11.3 11.9

Satisfied 19.9 18.4 25.3 27.3

Happy 19.1 9.1 10.7 10.1

Don’t know/No answer 8.9 11.1 8.9 9.5

Tolerance towards corruption

How acceptable is the situation when... % Households Businessmen

2007 2008 2007 2008

Accep-table

Unaccep-table

Accep-table

Unaccep-table

Accep-table

Unaccep-table

Accep-table

Unaccep-table

A regular public servant accepts an unofficial payment and uses it to pay his debts for utility services

39.8 60.2 44.2 55.8 41.9 58.1 38.2 61.8

A minister accepts an unofficial payment and uses it to pay for the education of his/her child

28.7 71.3 34.8 65.2 29.6 71.4 28.3 71,7

A president of rayon council accepts an unofficial payment and uses it to pay for the medical treatment of his/her relative

33.8 66.2 36.9 63.1 36.7 63.3 30 69.9

Readiness to offer a bribe:

households, %

No 34.7%

Yes 20.9%

Depends on

the situation

44.4%

Readiness to offer a bribe:

businessmen, %

Depends on

the situation

59%

Yes

17.5%

No

23.5%

25

VI. Confronting corruption cases in the TCP areas

Have you been confronted during the last year with bribing, protectionism in the following

institutions?

Have you complained about the corruption cases you were confronted with?

Where did you complain about the corruption cases you were confronted with? 2008 8

8 Number of businessmen who complained about corruption cases is insignificant.

Where did you complain about corruption cases?

households, %

Friends,

relatives 13.3%

Court of justice 6.7%

Superior public

servant 6.7%

CCECC 4.4%

NGOs 4.4%

Mass-media

2.2%

Police

33.3%

Lawyer

13.3%

Public prosecutions

15.6%

Have you been confronted with bribing, protectionism... : households, %

9.9

2

26.9

13.1

4.6

26.9

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Police

Courts of justice

Health institutions

2008

2007

Have you been confronted with bribing, protectionism...: businessmen, %

23.9

21.8

7.4

17.5

23.3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Tax

inspectorates

Customs

CCECC 2008

2007

Have you complained about the corruption cases? households, %

No 96.3%

Yes 3.7%

Have you complained about the corruption cases?

businessmen, %

No 97.8%Yes 2.2%

26

Reasons for not denouncing cases of corruption

Households Businessmen 2007 2008 2007 2008

You did not know who to address and where 19.3 10.4 7.3 3.5

It would have taken too much time 8.6 12.7 15.6 20.2

Nothing would change 45.6 49 46.9 43.7

It would have created only problems for you 23.7 27.8 28.4 32.6

Other reasons 2.8 10.4 1.8 0

Has your problem been solved? (2008)

Credibility of TCP institutions, %

Full trust A lot of trust Little trust No trust at all 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008

Tax inspectorates (respondents-businessmen) 7.6 5.4 30.9 25.8 47.6 50.2 13.9 18.6 Customs (respondents-businessmen) 2.6 2.2 12.8 13.2 56.5 56 28.1 28.5 Police (respondents-households) 3.5 1.4 12.3 14.6 46.5 49.3 37.7 34.7 Courts of justice (respondents-households) 3.9 1.6 17.5 19.2 51.8 52.1 26.8 27.1 CCECC (respondents-businessmen) 7.2 9.1 23.4 31.2 45.8 41.3 23.6 18.4 Health institutions (respondents-households) 7.0 4.4 25.3 23.4 44.0 47.8 23.7 24.4

Professionalism of employees in TCP institutions, % High Medium Low

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 Tax inspectorates (respondents-businessmen) 17.2 22.4 68.1 61 14.7 16.6 Customs (respondents-businessmen) 8.2 14.3 66.2 56.1 25.6 29.6 Police (respondents-households) 6.3 11.4 57.7 58.5 36.0 30.1 Courts of justice (respondents-households) 11.5 16.1 67.0 62.1 21.5 21.8 CCECC (respondents-businessmen) 18.1 30.2 62.9 52.1 19.0 17.7 Health institutions (respondents-households) 16.5 18.7 58.5 57.9 25.0 23.4

Has your problem been solved?

households, %

Partially 40%

Yes

13.3%No

46.7%

27

VII. Is it possible to combat corruption in the Republic of Moldova?

Which of the following statements do you agree with? % (2008)

Which of the following statements do

you agree with? %

5.2

5.6

21.5

24.2

43.5

4.2

2.2

17.7

30

45.9

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Corruption can be completely eradicated


Corruption cannot be combated

Corruption can be significantly reduced

Corruption will always exist, but can be limited

Businessmen

Households

Most efficient measures to reduce corruption, %

2.46

2.70

2.67

2.79

2.80

2.92

3.04

3.15

3.24

3.31

3.34

2.46

2.54

2.76

2.81

2.78

2.95

3.13

3.25

3.45

3.43

3.47

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3,00 3,50 4,00

Reducing the number of state interventions in

economy

Control of declarations of income made by public servants

Ensuring independence of judges

Publication of budgets of public institutions

Informing the population about the danger of corruption

Enforcement of rules of conduct in public service and introduction of sanctions for their violation

Promotion in career of public servants according to merits

More severe sanctions for those who give bribes

To increase salaries

More severe sanctions for those who accept bribes

Introduction of some severe sanctions for corrupt behavior

Businessmen

Households

28

Measures to reduce corruption, % (2008) Salaries vs. unofficial payments What salary should receive a public servant, in order not to be tempted to accept bribes?

(opinions of respondents)

Monthly average salary, US Dollars


2007 2008 2007 2008

Minister 1600 1615 2300 2280

Head of department/directorate 900 1090 1270 1460

Regular public servant 560 705 685 850

Summary

In the framework of TI-Moldova monitoring project two sociological surveys have been conducted (one at the TCP launch and the second one at its finalization), the objective being the

assessment of the situation concerning the perception and experiences related to corruption in the

Republic of Moldova of two categories of respondents: households and businessmen. The analysis focused on the situation in the 6 priority areas of TCP. The number of respondents: 1060

households and 503 businessmen.

The results of the survey show that, as expected, the results of TCP implementation have not been felt substantially by the respondents in a period shorter than one year, especially taking into

account the fact that in several TCP areas the activities have not been finalized yet.

It is important to mention the fact that a part of TCP activities had an indirect nature of

preventing and combating corruption and the impact of these activities would be felt only in a

longer term.

Also, since some questions were of perception nature, the responses have been influenced by the

general feeling of comfort or discomfort of citizens in the interview phase (seasonal nature). Therefore, in the first sociological survey the interview phase took place in February-March 2008,

and in the second – in October-November 2008.

Some indicator modifications may be considered insignificant, considering the margin of error of the survey (3% for household and 4.4% for businessmen).

Still, some effects of TCP implementation can be mentioned even in this short period of time.

Victimization of corruption: Police

resp. - HH

Health

institutions

resp. - HH

Courts of law

resp. – HH

CCECC

resp. –

businessmen

Customs

resp. –

businessmen

Tax bodies

resp. –

businessmen

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

Share of respondents who made unofficial payments to representatives of state institutions during the last 12 months (% of total number of respondents)

9,9

7,9 24,7 21,4 0,9 1,1 1,9 1,0 13,4 14,5 17,9 10,1

29

Pressure of corruption: Police

resp. - HH

Health

institutions

resp. - HH

Courts of law

resp. – HH

CCECC

resp. –

businessmen

Customs

resp. –

businessmen

Tax bodies

resp. –

businessmen

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

Share of respondents who were forced to make unofficial payments (% of total number of respondents who made unofficial payments)

36,3 43,2 37,3 43,6 32,2 50,0 60,0 0 54,8 60,6 35,7 37,3

Spreading of corruption Police

resp. - HH

Health institutions

resp. - HH

Courts of law resp. – HH

CCECC resp. –

businessmen

Customs resp. –

businessmen

Tax bodies resp. –

businessmen

I survey

II survey

I survey

II survey

I survey

II survey

I survey

II survey

I survey

II survey

I survey

II survey

Share or respondents who consider that the corruption phenomenon is widely spread in the TCP areas (total of share of respondents who consider that unofficial payments are made often, very often, and permanently)

67,1 61,7 68,9 60,4 50,6 48,6 23,1 19,1 53,9 55,4 39,9 41,2

Credibility of monitored institutions – results at TCP launch/at project closing (% of total number of respondents)

Full trust A lot of trust Little trust No trust

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008

Tax inspectorates (respondents –

businessmen)

7,6 5,4 30,9 25,8 47,6 50,2 13,9 18,6

Customs (respondents – businessmen) 2,6 2,2 12,8 13,2 56,5 56 28,1 28,5

Police (respondents – households) 3,5 1,4 12,3 14,6 46,5 49,3 37,7 34,7

Courts of law (respondents – households)

3,9 1,6 17,5 19,2 51,8 52,1 26,8 27,1

CCECC (respondents – businessmen) 7,2 9,1 23,4 31,2 45,8 41,3 23,6 18,4

Health institutions (respondents –

households)

7,0 4,4 25,3 23,4 44,0 47,8 23,7 24,4

Professionalism of staff - results at TCP launch/at project closing, (% of total number of respondents)

High Medium Low

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008

Tax inspectorates (respondents – businessmen) 17,2 22,4 68,1 61 14,7 16,6

Customs (respondents – businessmen) 8,2 14,3 66,2 56,1 25,6 29,6

Police (respondents – households) 6,3 11,4 57,7 58,5 36,0 30,1

Courts of law (respondents – households) 11,5 16,1 67,0 62,1 21,5 21,8

CCECC (respondents – businessmen) 18,1 30,2 62,9 52,1 19,0 17,7

Health institutions (respondents – households) 16,5 18,7 58,5 57,9 25,0 23,4

30

Average bribe paid in the last 12 months Police

resp. - HH

Health

institutions

resp. - HH

Courts of law

resp. – HH

CCECC

resp. –

businessmen

Customs

resp. –

businessmen

Tax bodies

resp. –

businessmen

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

Average bribe (Lei)

807 1082 564 783 z z z Z 3074 1383 1255 1531

Note: to take into account inflation

Total estimated bribe paid by businessmen and households during the last 12 months Police

resp. - HH

Health

institutions resp. - HH

Courts of law

resp. – HH

CCECC

resp. – businessmen

Customs


Tax bodies


I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

I

survey

II

survey

Total estimated

bribe (million Lei)

77 97 153 190 z z z Z 66 34 36 26

The readiness of the population to make unofficial payments decreased. Thus the share of

respondents who are ready to make unofficial payments in difficult situations decreased from 80.5% to 76.5% among businessmen, and from 75.9% to 65.4% among household representatives.

At the same time it is necessary to note a higher level of skepticism among respondents concerning the

efficiency of preventing corruption. The share of respondents who consider that the corruption

phenomenon decreased during the last 12 months remained almost the same among households (12.2% / 12.7%), and businessmen (15.4% / 16.7%). The share of respondents who consider that the corruption phenomenon can be reduced varies between 75.5% and 73% among household

representatives and between 82.9% and 80.1% among representatives of business community.

TCP assessment indicators

Attitude towards corruption Households

Businessmen

I survey II survey I survey II survey

The share of respondents who consider corruption a major

impediment in the development of the country (% of total number

of respondents)

84.1 83,3 65.5 72

Corruption costs Households

Businessmen

I survey II survey I survey II survey

The share of respondents who consider poverty the main

consequence of corruption (% of total number of respondents)

60.1 56,8 59.9 57,1

Level of information of population about TCP

The share of those who know about the implementation of TCP rose from 26.7% to 34.3% among

representatives of households and from 35% to 52.1% among businessmen.

Credibility of mass-media

The share of respondents who believe in the information related to corruption in mass-media increased from 40.3% to 50% of households and from 38.5% to 55.2% of businessmen. The main

sources of information about TCP, according to the respondents are television (about 40%), written press (about 25%), and radio (16%).

Report study aed2 eng

Documents

Transcript of Report study aed2 eng