1 / 22

Louis SMEETS European Anti-fraud Office Directorate D : Policy

OLAF recent developments and its support to Member States in the fight against fraud & irregularities'. Louis SMEETS European Anti-fraud Office Directorate D : Policy UNIT D4 : Strategic Analysis, Reporting, Joint Operations. Outline of the presentation. Legal and general framework

mead
Download Presentation

Louis SMEETS European Anti-fraud Office Directorate D : Policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OLAFrecent developments and its support to Member States in the fight against fraud & irregularities' Louis SMEETS European Anti-fraud Office Directorate D : Policy UNIT D4 : Strategic Analysis, Reporting, Joint Operations

  2. Outline of the presentation Legal and general framework Main activities and presentation of OLAF Toward an enhanced anti-fraud policy in the EU TheCommission Anti-Fraud Strategy[CAFS] Some items about fraud notifications by Member States

  3. EU Institutional and Horizontal Legal Framework Article 317 TFEU (ex 274 TEC) "The Commission shall implement the budget (…) having regard to the principles of sound financial management". "Member States shall cooperate with the Commission to ensure that the appropriations are used in accordance with the principles of sound financial management."

  4. Regulation (EC) nr. 1073/99 concerning investigation conducted by the European Anti-Fraud office [OLAF] is the legal basis for OLAF investigative powers OLAF’s competences areinvestigations into cases of fraud, corruption and all other illegal activities detrimental to EU interests. ► organises the various types of investigations (on-the-spot checks) - internal administrative investigations in all EU institutions/bodies; - external administrative investigations in MS and Third Countries. Regulation (EC) nr 1073/99 has been revised and is currently under discussion in Council and European Parliament EU Institutional and Horizontal Legal Framework

  5. Importance of clear definitions of “Irregularity” and “Fraud”: OLAFs’ powers (on-the-spot checks) and activities (reporting system, fraud prevention) depend on whether or not cases brought to OLAF attention correspond to these definitions important policy items for the protection of the financial interest of the EU budget are besides the tolerable error rates (European Court of Auditors); irregularity rates fraud rates For detailed figures on the fraud and irregularity rates consult the reports and the statistical annexes on OLAF’s website Irregularity and Fraud

  6. The notion of IRREGULARITY Regulation (EC) nr. 1848/2006 "irregularity" has the broad meaning assigned to it by Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95, that is “any infringement of a provision of Community law resulting from an act or omission by an economic operator which has, or would have, the effect of prejudicing the general budget of the Communities either by reducing or losing revenue accruing from own resources collected directly on behalf of the Communities, or by charging an unjustified item of expenditure to the Community budget”;

  7. SUSPECTED FRAUD When notifying irregularities to the Commission, Member States are required since 2006 to identify whether the irregularities involves ‘suspected fraud’. As defined in Article 2 par. 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1848/2006 suspected fraud means: an “irregularity which has been subject of a primary administrative or judicial finding giving rise to the initiation of proceedings at national level in order to establish the presence of intentional behaviour, in particular fraud […]”. The component “intention” distinguishes fraud from the more common irregularity.

  8. Role of OLAF in the Anti-Fraud area Full responsibility for anti-fraud: policy, deterrence, prevention, investigation; Analysing/defining risks areas vulnerable to fraud and/or corruption; Performing fraud-proofing of legislation and management approach; Strengthening instruments for detecting, investigating and sanctioning fraud; Developing a culture of cooperation between all competent national and European authorities with full participation & commitment on the ground; Working on the basis of integrity, impartiality and transparency, in full compliance with the principle of legality and individual rights and freedom.

  9. Review of OLAF’s organisation in 2011: focus on investigation and its role for overall anti fraud policy Investigative actions Policy making Investigations related to: • - EU staff • - New Financial Instruments • - Centralised expenditure • - Expenditure for external aid • - Evasion of customs duties • - Contraband and counterfeit tobacco products • - Counterfeit products/articles • - Agricultural Funds • - Structural Funds • Monitoring of the adequate implementation of OLAF recommendations and • assisting competent authorities in the follow-up of cases Coordination activities related to investigations in MS (from concepts to reporting on progress and effectiveness) • Anti-fraud policy development • Fraud prevention initiatives • External relations • Operational & Strategic Analyses • Joint Customs Operations • Protection of the EURO • Funding (Hercule, Pericles)

  10. How to better fight fraud against the EU financial interests? one of the approaches = PREVENTION !

  11. Prevention is a very cost-effective approach to dealing with fraud as investigation and prosecution actions require considerable budgets ! However these investigation and prosecution actions are the responsibility of MS institutions or agencies which may have different priorities and objectives may take many years and are often completed too late (time barring issues, difficulty to recover…) Fraud prevention should be embedded in all levels in the management “chain” ! Why is prevention so important ?

  12. Initiatives adopted by the Commission in relation to fraud prevention Since 2001 prevention is a constant concern of the EU institutions with a view to protect the Community’s financial interests. SEC(2001)2029 of 7.11.2001, Communication concerning the fraud proofing of legislation and contract management; COM(2007) 806 of 17.12.2007, Communication from the Commission: "Prevention of fraud by building on operational results: a dynamic approach to fraud-proofing“; In 2011 with COM(2011) 376 the Commission published its « Anti-Fraud Strategy » and « the Commission action plan « 

  13. Commission Anti-Fraud Strategy[CAFS] Aim = to combine/balance the legal simplification process with preventive measures against fraud CAFS covers (while focusing on the activities of the Commission) revenues & expenditures of the EU budget the whole “anti-fraud cycle”: prevention, detection, investigation, sanctioning and recovery of misused funds cooperation with Member States, third countries and international organisations CAFS is supplemented by an action plan insisting in particular on: Anti-Fraud clauses more development of Anti-Fraud measures on the ground the revision of the public procurement directive 14

  14. Fraud prevention at national level The EU Commission/OLAF encourages the development of antifraud strategies at national level: e.g. Improved and increased risk analysis Stock taking of existing anti-fraud tools: procedures in place, IT based fraud proofing systems, training… Defining control priorities /approaches for fraud Elaborating action plans Such anti-fraud strategies should be build according to the approach: prevention + detection + investigation + sanctioning

  15. Fraud Prevention Fraud prevention means that at all levels : Procedures for fraud detection and fraud management are in place. Initiatives are implemented for raising fraud awareness for all staff adequate training on fraud prevention issues – including raising fraud awareness – is providedfor staff * of: managing and audit authorities ! police and judicial authorities * possibility for EU financial support via Hercule II funding (consult OLAF’s website for details)

  16. Reporting on fraud and irregularities Why to report irregularities and suspected frauds: It is a legal obligation and a major tool for the detection of fraud providing: overall overviews of what goes wrong in spending the EU budget information for MS & OLAF/ on risk and threat analysis, destined to improve and target controls by MS & OLAF the EU Commission with a better idea about the “real” level of fraud: particularly for “suspected frauds” cases. Information to establish better the real financial impact of fraud & irregularities for the EU budget (necessary to respect the reporting obligations to the EP and the European taxpayer!).

  17. Reporting fraud and irregularities via theIrregularity Management System [IMS] IMS is an electronic platform developed and managed by OLAF to allow MS to report irregularities in a secure & consistent way to the Commission Consist of 9 different modules (per sector) . National authorities have secure access to their relevant module(s) and can download intelligence from the IMS for their internal usage. INFO Ca. 60.000 irregularity reports registered 27 Member States and 2 candidate countries connected 592 organisations registered supplying data input daily OLAF ensures availability, data quality checks, reporting back Note: Analysis results on the basis of IMS data are valid tools for risk analysis by MS authorities to better target controls ! Detailed figures are made available by OLAF; all reports and their statistical annexes are published on OLAF’s website annually!

  18. EU fraud & irregularities • fraud & irregularities cases reported in 2011 by Member States in the domain of EAGGF expenditures • irregularities : 2.395 cases and ca. € 178 million of which • suspected fraud : 121 cases and ca. € 76 million • established fraud : 18 cases and ca. € 1,3 million Fraud rates: a high suspected fraud rate does not necessarily mean that more fraud is taking place in a certain Member State. This rate is calculated on the basis of reported (suspected) fraud cases and it is therefore an indication that anti-fraud systems are performing and that reporting obligations are respected. The reliability of data depends of the information transmitted to the Commission by the Member States !

  19. The low number of suspected and established fraud cases raises again the question of the reasons behind very low fraud notifications by MS. Is this due to either non-compliance with reporting principles ?? or Is this due to the ability of the control systems in place in MS ?? Already in 2011 the Commission in its report on 2010 requested several MS to explain - their very low fraud rates - how control systems are being adapted to target higher risks area’s Unfortunately none or very light feedback has been received. OLAF and the Commission will continue to dialogue with MS in order to clarify this unsatisfactory situation of very low fraud notifications.

  20. Fraud rate per Member State (2000-2006)

  21. Thank you for your attention! Louis SMEETS European Anti-fraud Office Directorate D: Policy UNIT D4 : Strategic Analysis, Reporting, Joint Operations

More Related