Corruption, Employment, Financial Services, Latvia, Legislation

As reported, several MPs had opposed part of the amendments suggested by Saeima member Aleksejs Loskutovs (Unity), but the final version of the amendments approved by the parliament today has been altered pursuant to recommendations made by Saeima Legal Affairs Office.

The amendments deal with requirements on the Corruption Prevention Bureau employees, their responsibilities and remuneration, rules on dismissal of the bureau's employees – which will no longer require approval from the bureau's trade union, and others.

As reported, the union of the Corruption Prevention Bureau's employees previously said that the amendments were actually intended to give greater authority for the Corruption Prevention Bureau's Chief Jaroslavs Strelcenoks, who would use them to destroy the bureau. The union told LETA that the proposals by Loskutovs, the former chief of the bureau, go against the principles of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and decisions of the Latvian government, and will compromise independence of the Corruption Prevention Bureau's investigators.

The proposals will also enable the Corruption Prevention Bureau's chief to fire officers who successfully investigate, for instance, high-profile crimes, or transfer to a different department those investigators who examine officials' declarations of income, said the union.

On the other hand, the Corruption Prevention Bureau's experts said that the amendments would eliminate several contradictory legal provisions concerning the bureau's employees, and the amendments would finally designate the bureau's employees as civil servants.

As reported, the amendments also state that the head of the Corruption Prevention Bureau may not serve for more than two consecutive terms, and that the prime minister has the right to check the bureau's decisions and lift them if they are found to be against the law. Likewise, the amendments propose that the prime minister will have the right to order the bureau to take a specific decision. This, however, will not concern the bureau's corruption prevention function and examination of political parties' finances.