Supporting Governance-Driven Approaches to Building Integrity in the Security Sector

A system could be developed to systematically map sensitive processes (e.g., procurement, promotion of staff, inspection), sensitive functions (typically, staff with relevant decision-making powers related to finances, procurement, human resources etc.) and identify vulnerabilities and risks to integrity violations. Control mechanisms with investigation capacity to respond to suspicions of violations should also be put in place. Similarly, public surveys and other tools for the systematic collection of data on the population’s perception regarding the level of integrity of the security sector could be developed.

There is a need to ensure that the management of the security sector institutions’ staff meets relevant international standards, such as clear and transparent assignment of authority and responsibility, appropriate lines of reporting, fair and transparent recruitment policies, merit-based systems to promotions, regular performance reviews, gender-equality policies, and the planning for post-service employment services. Cronyism and nepotism must be safeguarded against, and illicit practices has to be prevented. Labor unions should also play a role in ensuring respectable social and working conditions which are necessary preconditions for integrity.

Salaries should be adequate and paid on time to avoid the need to look for other sources of income. Implications for family members of security sector personnel should also be taken into consideration when deciding about the appropriateness of benefits, such as housing, schooling, medical care, etc. If the workplace provides for welfare, then it reduces the need for staff to engage in corrupt behaviors and provides incentives for them to perform their work competently, honestly and completely. Similarly, efforts should be made to identify existing vulnerabilities and incentives for malpractice and to support their elimination.

Non-transparent financial management in security sector institutions, lack of control over expenditures and the disconnection between policymaking, planning and budgeting are powerful enablers of corrupt practices. Moreover, in the security sector, corruption can often occur in contracting and procurement, as relevant information is often confidential due to security reasons and may involve security restrictions on competition in tenders or limitations on subsequent audit and investigation. Thus, more attention should be paid to support participating States in establishing or enhancing appropriate financial management within security institutions, including by setting effective inspection and audit systems, clear and transparent procurement processes and appropriate mechanisms for income and asset declarations of public officials.

The way how integrity-building efforts are framed and perceived within the institution concerned will influence attitudes of staff whose behavior and conduct are essential for achieving a long-term change. Promoting an institutional culture that endorses integrity as a key value can thus significantly contribute to the success of reform efforts in any other area, be it human resources, financial management, risk management or preventing misconduct.