THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND … and planning in African countries a platform for ... vi THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN ... OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION

THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

Progress made and priorities for reform

THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

Progress made and priorities for reform

March 2017

The Collaborative Africa Budget Reform Initiative (CABRI) is an intergovernmental organisation that offers the ministries of finance and planning in African countries a platform for exchange and learning between peers. The principal objective of CABRI is to promote efficient and effective public financial management in Africa. In particular, the network aims to: • support senior budget civil servants in the management of public finance systems by developing appropriate procedures,

practices and approaches; • advance the development of member states by strengthening capacities and encouraging training and research in public

financial management; and • develop and promote common African positions on issues associated with the budget, which are of interest to Africa.

For further information about CABRI, or to obtain copies of this publication, kindly contact: CABRI Secretariat PostNet Suite 217Private Bag X 06 Highveld Park 0169 South Africa

Email: [email protected] www.cabri-sbo.org

This report was drafted by Mr Sofiane Fakhfakh with contributions by Daouda Bayili from BSI-ODI and Moustapha Doukouré from CABRI.

Production by COMPRESS.dsl | www.compressdsl.com

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

Acronyms and abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The objectives of this review and the methodology used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Definition of transparency in public finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Definition of participation in public finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2. Transparency and participation in the context of public finance reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The public finance reform strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Outline of the Strategic Plan for Public Finance Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Inherent challenges in implementing the PSRFP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3. Transparency and participation in public finance: the current status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

The status according to IBP standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

With regard to transparency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

With regard to citizen participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Key factors for success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

The current situation in the light of good practices in PFM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Expenditure incurred under exceptional or emergency circumstances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

The level of extra-budgetary operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Staff files and salary expenditure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Governance of the extractive industries sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

The control and monitoring of public finances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4. Transparency and participation in public finance: actions and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

The implementation of the actions and recommendations drawn up in 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

The actions and recommendations for the 2016 review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

iv THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis report is the result of a joint project undertaken by the Collaborative Africa Budget Reform Initiative (CABRI) and the Comité d’orientation de la réforme des finances publiques (Steering Committee for Public Finance Reform) (COREF) in the Ministry of Finance for the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The research was conducted by a team led by Mr Sofiane Fakhfakh, and which included Mr Daouda Bayili from the Budget Strengthening Initiative – Overseas Development Institute (BSI-ODI) and Mr Moustapha Doukouré from the CABRI secretariat. Ms Fiona Davis from the BSI-ODI team provided specific inputs and comments on the approach and methodology.

The team would like to thank the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and, in particular, Mr Raymond Ndudi Pfuti, Secretary General for the Budget, and Mr Ernest Izemenga Nsaa Nsaa, President of the Court of Auditors, Mr Jean Luc Mutokambali, President of the Commission économie et finances (Economic and Financial Committee) (ECOFIN) in the National Assembly, Mr Victor Batubenga Mbayi,

Departmental Head of the Inspection Général des Finances (department of the Treasury responsible for auditing public bodies), Mrs Colette Mata Ngosenganya, Head of Budget Development and Monitoring, Mr Jean-Serge Bikoro Bwalande, Co-ordinator for the Cellule de mise en œuvre de la réforme de l’Administration publique (Committee responsible for implementing public administration reform) (CMRAP) and the Ministry of the Civil Service for their involvement, co-ordination efforts and excellent support.

We would also like extend a sincere thank you to the Ministry for the Budget, the European Union, World Bank, Department for International Development (DFID), African Development Bank (AfDB), Agence Française de développement (French Development Agency) (AFD) and civil society organisations, especially Réseau Gouvernance Economique et Démocratie (Economic and Democratic Governance Network) (REGED) and Observatoire de la dépense publique (Public Expenditure Monitor) (ODEP).

Progress made and priorities for reform v

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONSAFD Agence Française de développement (French Development Agency)

AfDB African Development Bank

CABRI Collaborative Africa Budget Reform Initiative

CEMAC Central African Economic and Monetary Community

COREF Comité d’orientation de la réforme des finances publiques (Steering Committee for Public Finance Reform)

CSO civil society organisation

DEP Directions des études et de planification (Departments of Research and Planning)

DFID Department for International Development (UK)

DPSB Direction de la préparation et du suivi du budget (Directorate for Budget Preparation and Monitoring)

DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo

ECOFIN Commission économie et finances (Economic and Financial Committee) (National Assembly and Senate)

ESB États de suivi budgétaire (Budget Execution Reports)

ETD Entités territoriales décentralisées (Decentralised Territorial EntitiesEntity)

FTP financial and technical partner

IBP International Budget Partnership

IGF Inspection générale des finances (department of the Treasury responsible for auditing public bodies)

IMF International Monetary Fund

INAM Institut National d’Assurance Maladie (National Health Insurance Institute)

INTOSAI International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions

NGO non-governmental organisation

OBI Open Budget Index

OBS Open Budget Survey

ODEP Observatoire de la dépense publique (Public Expenditure Monitor)

PEFA Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability

PEMFAR Review of Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability

PFM public financial management

PGAI Plateforme de gestion de l’aide internationale (International Aid Management Platform)

PSRFP Plan stratégique de réforme des finances publiques (Strategic Plan for Public Finance Reform)

REGED Réseau gouvernance économique et démocratie (Economic and Democratic Governance Network)

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

vi THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

SUMMARYIn October 2016, a CABRI joint review team conducted research in Kinshasa, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), into the current state of transparency and citizen participation in public finance, and how this had developed since the previous joint review conducted in 2013. The review team examined the developments and identified the driving forces behind them, and proposed new actions that would promote greater transparency and participation in the context of the reforms that are being implemented.

The review team noticed positive developments over time with regard to transparency and participation, which are clearly reflected in the ranking the DRC was given in the latest Open Budget Survey (OBS) by the International Budget Partnership (IBP). In spite of these developments, however, the DRC remains in the group of countries that allow limited access to budget documents and offer very few opportunities for participation.

It is evident that the authorities are increasingly in favour of promoting transparency and demonstrate a real inclination to provide civil society organisations (CSOs) with greater opportunity for participation. The Comité d’orientation de la réforme des finances publiques (Steering Committee for Public Finance Reform) (COREF), a central unit for managing public finance reforms, with which a number of financial and technical partners are affiliated, makes every effort to implement the measures necessary to promote transparency and participation.

Such efforts are supported by a community of partners that willingly provides CSOs and the authorities with the means to encourage initiatives in this field. Such initiatives are driven by more and more CSOs, which together need to become more organised, and to harmonise their approaches and methodologies, with those of their partners and public authorities.

It is evident that, following concerted efforts by different actors, the DRC, as far as the OBS standards are concerned, has made a significant leap forward with respect to the number of documents produced and made available to the public. These developments now need to be supported by:

• producing and publishing documents that have not yet been produced, including mid-year reports;

• steadily improving the content of some of the documents that are produced and published; and

• regularly producing and/or publishing documents such as audit reports, which are being produced but are yet to be published.

Over and above the production and publication of budget documents, transparency is assessed by way of an analysis of public financial management (PFM) in the DRC, which reveals certain weaknesses that would negatively impact on the availability and accuracy of budget information. Several weaknesses having a direct or indirect impact on transparency in public finance have been identified. These concern: (i) the amount of expenditure incurred in terms of exceptional procedures; (ii) the amount relating to extra-budgetary transactions, (iii) the fact that data regarding the state payroll and staff are not complete or comprehensive; (iv) the governance of the extractive industries sector; and (v) the control and monitoring of public finances.

With the aim of improving transparency and participation in the DRC in general, the review team drew up and discussed various actions and recommendations, taking into account the recommendations already made at the time of the 2013 review. Appendix 1 shows the status of the implementation of the recommendations made in 2013, identifies challenges and proposes solutions to the obstacles that are inherent in their implementation.

The 2013 recommendations were directed especially at the authorities and concerned their functions.

The 2016 review mission notes that the institutional elements of civil society remain of paramount importance, given the role that civil society organisations (CSOs) play and are called on to play. This is why the following improvements are expected in the very short term (within the next two to three years):

• the preparation and approval of a charter for transparency and ethics in public finance, in order to promote the values of good and open governance;

Progress made and priorities for reform vii

SUMMARY

• the development and approval of a vision, values, mission, strategy and action plan, on the part of CSOs, which maps out their development projects, in consultation with all stakeholders;

• the re-examination of financing for CSOs;

• the establishment of a programme for supporting civil society, with a management unit for such a programme; and

• following the example of other countries, the creation of an online platform dedicated to Congolese civil society (starting with those acting in the area of governance).

Institutional strengthening of CSOs is a necessary step in order to institutionalise transparency and participation, and to prepare these organisations for playing an increasingly important role. Thus, most of the actions set out below, while complementing the actions set out in the 2013 review, are aimed at strengthening CSOs in the DRC; and this can be made possible only with contributions from all stakeholders, namely the CSOs themselves, the authorities and development partners.

Added to the concrete actions drawn up in this report are a few recommendations that would further promote transparency in public finance and improve the score for the DRC in the next OBS. These include:

• ensuring that budget documents are produced and published regularly, systematically and on schedule;

• adapting the format of the documents to make them compatible with the norms and standards required by the IBP; and

• making the institutions responsible for the publication of the documents aware of their responsibilities, by signing a joint order that specifies the responsibilities and deadlines relating to the production and publication of budget documents.

With regard to participation, the team recommends increasing the opportunities for citizens to participate, and that this is done throughout the budget cycle, and especially in the phase for monitoring and assessing the implementation of the budget.

INTRODUCTION1

2 THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

1. INTRODUCTION

During the 47th Annual Meeting of the African Development Bank (AfDB) in 2012, the ministers of finance and the governors of the central banks of the member countries approved a political declaration on good governance for public finance. In response to this declaration, the Collaborative Africa Budget Reform Initiative (CABRI) and the International Budget Partnership (IBP) launched a joint programme, which involves the countries that participate in CABRI, with the aim of these countries fulfilling the commitments they have made to improve public finance transparency.

OPEN BUDGET INDEX

The Open Budget Index ranks countries according to how accessible budget documents are to the public. It is based on a detailed and systematic study of current practices carried out by local experts. The index measures how accessible principal budget documents are, how much information they contain, and when they are to be distributed, in order to provide reliable information on the degree to which each country is committed to budget transparency and responsibility.

.

As part of this joint programme, in 2013 the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) launched a review carried out by CABRI and the IBP on public finance transparency in the DRC. The objectives of the review were to:

• identify gaps in transparency and participation with regard to recognised standards;

• assess how urgently the problems that were identified should be dealt with;

• assess how easily these problems might be addressed, taking into account the existing systems of financial governance; and

• reach decisions concerning priority measures that should be implemented in the short to medium term, taking the assessments mentioned above into account.

THE OBJECTIVES OF THIS REVIEW AND THE METHODOLOGY USED

The main outcome expected of the review was that concrete and practical recommendations for reform

would be drawn up, identifying actions that were both important and possible to carry out in the area of participation and transparency, and taking into account the overall context of the reforms.

Three years after the 2013 review, CABRI wanted to examine the progress made by the DRC in these areas and to assist the government in developing the next steps for reform.

The 2016 review aims to identify persistent gaps in transparency and participation. It also focuses on assessing actions carried out for reform and the driving forces behind them, in keeping with the priority measures defined at the time of the 2013 review.

Lastly, on the basis of findings from the implementation of the 2013 recommendations, there is a forward-looking component to the review; where appropriate, it provides additional recommendations for improving transparency and citizen participation in public finance in the DRC.

The review was conducted in three phases.

A research phase in the DRC, consisting of work relating to documentation, collected data and interviews with stakeholders. This phase enabled the team to undertake a contextual analysis of the progress the DRC has made in transparency and participation, in general and in relation to the matrix developed in 2013.

The next phase, which involved organising a workshop in the country, enabled the review team to share the main conclusions and recommendations with the various stakeholders, hold talks with civil servants and agree on areas of action that might bring about change and provide the necessary impetus, as part of an iterative approach, to resolve the identified problems. The conclusions, analysis and points to be taken into consideration, which were brought together during the research phase, served as a basis for discussion during the workshop.

The final phase involved writing up the review report, using the results from the research conducted in the country and the discussions that took place during the workshop. The review report summarises the information gathered during these two phases. It also determines priority reform areas and measures which show rapid results. Lastly, it specifies the

Progress made and priorities for reform 3

1. INTRODUCTION

significance of identified areas for reform, the types of possible intervention and the actors responsible for implementation.

The final draft report was shared amongst the review team, and with their counterparts in the Congolese administration and representatives of the countries that participated in the 2013 review, for any comments or suggestions.

The analytical framework used during this review was developed by CABRI and the IBP, and served as the basis for the 2013 review. It is focused on guidelines that, in a very comprehensive way, enable one to assess the status of budget transparency and participation in the DRC and to develop a strategy for remedying deficiencies and failures. The framework has been adjusted in order to bring to the fore and understand the progress made in the DRC since 2013, particularly with regard to transparency, which could not be shown in the last Open Budget Survey (OBS).

Definition of transparency in public finance Transparency is defined as:

openness about policy intentions, formulation and implementation. Budget transparency is defined as the full disclosure of all relevant fiscal information in a timely and systematic manner. (OECD 2002)

It is also defined as:

the degree to which citizens are allowed access to the government’s tax and budget decisions and strategies, and their results. By this we mean, quick and easy access to information on budgetary policy intentions, public sector accounts and forecasts, which is reliable, complete, timely, comprehensible and comparable. (Fölscher & Gay 2012)

It is clear from the second definition that transparency in public finance is assessed according to two fundamental aspects, which are:

• the availability of complete budget data concerning budget results and policies at each stage of the budget cycle; and

• the quality of the information available, with regard to it being reliable, accessible, generally understandable, comprehensive and timely.

Good practices observed at the international level in this regard, including those of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency (GIFT)1, include the concept of required standard documentation, which should be available throughout the budget process, and stress that transparency and access to information must have a legal basis.

The review used these good practices for transparency and participation in public finance, and the framework of the IBP’s OBS, as inspiration for structuring its own activities. This framework requires that eight key documents are made available to the public at specific decision and review stages throughout the budget cycle, and determines the parameters for the (financial) information that must be conveyed in each document in order to achieve these objectives for transparency in public finance. Beyond verifying that the documents were produced and published, the review team placed particular importance on the quality and comprehensiveness of the information contained in the documents, on how regularly the documents were produced and published, and on other aspects of transparency related to budget credibility.

Definition of participation in public financeCitizen participation may be defined as a process in which ordinary people take part – whether on a voluntary or obligatory basis and whether acting alone or as part of a group – with the goal of influencing a decision involving significant choices that will affect their community. Such participation may or may not take place within an institutional framework, and it may be organised either by members of civil society (for example, through class action, demonstrations, citizens’ committees, etc.) or by decision makers (for example, through referendums, parliamentary commissions and mediation, etc.). (André, Martin & Lanmarfankpotin 2012)

Good practices for public participation require that, in addition to transparency, there are significant opportunities for civil society and citizens to actively participate in decision-making and following-up on the budget, as well as independent and institutionalised monitoring.

1 GIFT is a global network that facilitates dialogue between governments, civil society organisations, the private sector and other stakeholders to find and share solutions to challenges in financial transparency and participation.


1. INTRODUCTION

In the light of a lack of norms in this area, the IBP has developed six basic principles to serve as a reference for assessing citizen participation throughout the budget cycle. These principles are that:

1. participation must take place throughout the budget process;

2. participation must take place with all governmental authorities at all levels;

3. participation must have a legal basis;

4. the objectives of public participation must be communicated in advance;

5. several mechanisms for public participation should be implemented; and

6. the public should be provided with feedback on its participation.

Participation may take several forms (provision of information, consultation, co-ordination and collaboration) and must occur throughout the budget process (preparation, implementation monitoring and presentation of financial reports). Various channels for citizen participation should be available, and citizens should receive responses from the government on their observations and recommendations.

TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN THE CONTEX T OF PUBLIC FINANCE REFORM

2


2. TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC FINANCE REFORM

The PFM system in the DRC has been the subject of diagnostic studies, which have been carried out with the support of financial and technical partners (FTPs). These studies have led to the identification of significant weaknesses, which include lack of budget credibility, inconsistency between the budget and the national development strategy, poor budgetary procedures and the ineffectiveness of the system for controlling public finances.

THE PERMANENT CONSULTATION AND MONITORING FRAMEWORK FOR PUBLIC FINANCE REFORMS

With the government and FTPs behind it, a Permanent Consultation and Monitoring Framework for Public Finance Reforms was established in September 2012.

This framework provides a space for dialogue between the government, development partners, civil society and the private sector to address various public finance reform issues, and is based on the LOFIP (Public Finance Act). It facilitates discussion and the reaching of compromises on the principal options in the LOFIP.

THE PUBLIC FINANCE REFORM STRATEGY

In response to the conclusions and recommendations of these studies, the government initiated a reform process in order to strengthen PFM, and to make lasting improvements in transparency, reliability and effectiveness, by adopting the Plan stratégique de réforme des finances publiques (Strategic Plan for Public Finance Reform) (PSRFP) on 31 March, 2010.

Outline of the Strategic Plan for Public Finance ReformThe PSRFP is structured around five main themes: (i) budget reform; (ii) tax reform and tax administration reform; (iii) improving public expenditure management; (iv) accounting reform and Treasury management reform and (v) strengthening the system for controlling public finances. This plan lists transparency among the guiding principles of the reform.

To ensure the smooth implementation of the reform, the government has taken appropriate institutional measures, including establishing an organisation

responsible for managing, co-ordinating and monitoring the implementation of the strategy, the Comité d’orientation de la réforme des finances publiques (Steering Committee for Public Finance Reform) (COREF).

Wanting to strengthen the management of public finance reform, it seemed necessary to appoint COREF a high-level decision-making and arbitration body at the political level. The government and FTPs set up a strategic political steering body, and a draft agreement was signed to this effect in September 2012, creating the Cadre permanent de concertation et de suivi des réformes des finances publiques (Permanent Consultation and Monitoring Framework for Public Finance Reforms).

The PSRFP was enacted into law with the passing of Act No. 11/011 of 13 July, 2011, on Public Finance (LOFIP). The LOFIP is an ambitious Act, which aims to firmly establish international norms and standards for PFM in the DRC, and to develop a new management culture, not only with regard to public finance but embracing public management in general (especially results-based management).

The LOFIP lays down basic principles for governance, including legality, honesty and accountability. It gives Parliament additional discretion in the area of finance, over and above the power it has to adjust the aims of public policies specified by the government, within certain limits. It establishes a means for Parliament to truly control the implementation of the budget, as well as its assessment.

The LOFIP enshrines not only financial transparency and accessibility in respect of budgets and public accounts but also accountability, effectiveness and performance in the management of public funds. It is a clear indication that the DRC supports international standards. This commitment implies management of public finances in which the actions of the authorities are inspired by and consistent with good practices, which are acknowledged as such.

The effective application of the LOFIP is dependent on several challenges being met, ones which relate specifically to strengthening political and technical consensus around the reforms, transparency of information and the implementation of the Permanent Consultation and Monitoring Framework for Public Finance Reforms.



In addition to adopting the LOFIP, the government has taken various steps that have a direct or indirect impact on transparency.

With regard to revenue, particularly revenue from natural resources, the government has undertaken initiatives that are likely to improve dialogue between the revenue collecting institutions and companies in the mining and hydrocarbon sector, including organising workshops bringing together mining companies and revenue collecting institutions in Kinshasa and Lubumbashi.

In the reform of public expenditure management, the authorities have begun: (i) streamlining the payroll process for state officials and civil servants, which is reinforced by salaries being paid directly into bank accounts, and which has allowed the government to have a more precise understanding of staff numbers and the salary envelope; (ii) revising the manual for the public finance management cycle and procedures; (iii) strengthening the management of public procurement through a clear separation of the roles of awarding and supervising public contracts, which were previously concentrated in a single body, the Conseil des adjudications (Tender Board); and (iv) strengthening the debt management system by developing a debt strategy for the medium to long term, and the continued reappraisal of the legal and regulatory framework for managing public debt.

With regard to reforming the Treasury management and accounting system, two aspects of reform have been adopted by the government, namely improving the accounting network (and how public accounting is conducted) and improving Treasury management.

Strengthening the system for controlling public finances requires strengthening of the capabilities of supervisory bodies and revising the legal and institutional frameworks of the Inspection générale des finances (department of the Treasury responsible for auditing public bodies) (IGF) and the Court of Auditors.

The government plans to continue with public finance reform in accordance with the provisions of the LOFIP, with one of the main reforms concerning the organisational frameworks of ministries through the setting up of Directions administratives et financières

(Administration and Finance Departments) to initiate a process for decentralising authorisation for payment and moving towards sector-based ministries, and gradually setting up results-based management.

Inherent challenges in implementing the PSRFPSeveral challenges must be faced in implementing the PSRFP, the principal ones being political, technical and financial. In fact, as far as the legal framework governing public finance is concerned, some of the ‘laws’ that have been technically ‘adopted’ still await political ‘approval’ (this is particularly so for the Act Laying Down the Principles Governing the Organisation of the Court of Auditors and the Draft Decree on the Creation of the General Directorate of the Treasury and Public Accounting).

Other challenges to be met relate to resources given to technical ministries to implement the state budget, and to financial information systems and Treasury management procedures.

Another challenge is compliance with good practices governing public finance.

In addition to the central administration, the IMF’s Government Finance Statistics Manual 2014 identifies entities at different levels of public administration, with political responsibilities and their own systems for PFM, budgeting and accounting. Central administration entities must be distinct from other entities in the public sector, and the distribution of responsibilities within the public sector with regard to decision-making and management (in particular, between the central administration and local authorities) must be transparent and public. In this respect, the process of decentralisation and the free administration of the provinces must be accelerated, particularly in respect of the transfer of skills.

The preparation of the budget should follow an established schedule and comply with well-defined budget and macroeconomic policy objectives, and budget implementation, monitoring and data dissemination must be carried out according to clear procedures.

Budget data must conform to recognised quality standards, and financial activities must be subject to safeguards and effective internal control.



From a managerial point of view, the authorities must meet challenges related to limited management capabilities and lack of accountability.

The budget is a public policy instrument; consequently, budget work must be consistent with national and sectoral priorities. The influence of political considerations in the allocation of appropriations must be reduced as far as possible.

Lastly, the implementation of the PSRFP faces a geographical challenge, due to the size of the country combined with inadequate means of communication. This factor has an impact on collecting revenue, complicates budget preparation and implementation, especially in the context of decentralisation, and amplifies co-ordination problems.

3 TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE: THE CURRENT STATUS


3. TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE: THE CURRENT STATUS

Transparency and participation in public finance are assessed not only in relation to the documents that are produced and published, but also in relation to recognised practices and standards. The DRC must meet the challenges set out above in order to establish the foundations of transparent PFM.

An analysis of the current status regarding transparency and participation was conducted on the basis of: interviews and documents submitted by the authorities; the results of the 2015 OBS, the 2012 Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) assessment, the 2015 Review of Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability (PEMFAR); and the status of the implementation of public finance reform in the DRC.

Although the DRC is not part of the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC), it is committed, nevertheless, to the progressive implementation of reforms similar to those provided for in the directives for the area and adopted by neighbouring countries.

At the legal and regulatory level, the analysis reveals that provisions governing transparency have not yet been included in the DRC’s legal framework. Despite the lack of weight given to it, the country has increasingly comprehensive budget documentation. Other weaknesses in the legal framework governing public finance in the DRC are characterised by the delay in passing the Act Laying Down the Principles Governing the Organisation of the Court of Auditors and the Decree on Budgetary Governance. The implementation of these provisions would have a positive impact on promoting transparency, and accountability and control, in public finances.

THE STATUS ACCORDING TO IBP STANDARDS

With regard to transparencyIn the latest OBS, carried out by the IBP in 2015, the DRC was given a score of 39 on the Open Budget Index (OBI), a score well above the 18 the country received in 2012. Thanks to this, the DRC went from 78th in 2012 to 69th in 2015 in the country rankings.

Nevertheless, the score is below the overall average of 45, and the DRC remains one of a group of countries that make a minimal amount of budget information available to the public.

Despite recent efforts, the government of the DRC has proved inconsistent with regard to the documents it makes public over the course of a given year, or from one year to the next.

Change in transparency over time

Extensive

Substantial

Limited

Minimal

Scant or none

2008 2010 2012 2015

1

18

39

6

Source: IBP

Regional comparison

Global average

Mali

Benin

Cameroon

Senegal

Burkina Faso

Dem. Rep. of Congo

Niger

Chad

Scant or none

Minimal Limited Substantial Extensive

5

17

39

43

43

44

45

46

45

Source: IBP

The Open Budget Survey by the IBP’s OBS (2015) and the CABRI review mission (2016) noted the positive developments with regard to transparency in the DRC since the 2013 review, and that the developments are supported by several good initiatives, such as:

• the publication of certain budget documents by the Ministry for the Budget, which constitutes a significant contribution towards greater transparency (these documents include the Citizens’ Budget, and the Pre-Budget Report); and

• an improvement in the comprehensiveness of the executive’s Draft Budget and the Approved Budget.

Nevertheless, the pace of development has slowed due to inadequate communication infrastructure



and the poor quality of budget data, in particular the information in États de suivi budgétaire (Budget Execution Reports) (ESBs), the Citizens’ Budget and the Finance Bill:

• ESBs do not include implementation at the level of revenue, do not report on variances and the percentage of expenditure incurred, and do not present expenditure according to all applicable classifications;

• the Citizens’ Budget is still too complicated, lacks good graphic design, does not explain the technical terms used, and does not provide the contact details of the person to be contacted should additional information be required; and

• the Finance Bill still does not include medium-term projections for appropriations or information on public debt.

Since 2012, the government has certainly increased the amount of budget information that it makes available to the public. However, it has made no progress with regard to the Year-End Report, which it produces but has not made public within the prescribed time periods. Also, it has not produced and published the Mid-Year Report or the Audit Report:

• With regard to the Year-End Report, which is called the Rapport de reddition des comptes (Accountability Report) in the DRC, the Accountability Bill for the year N-1 must be produced each year and must be examined by the National Assembly before the Finance Bill for the year N+1 is voted on. The Accountability Report produced by the Court of Auditors is not published consistently, as is the case with the Accountability Bill and Act. There has been no indication to date as to who is responsible for publishing these documents. The Accountability Act, once passed, usually enters into the public domain in the same way as the Finance Act.

• For the Mid-Year Review, the authorities prepare the Rapports d’exécution de la loi des finances (Report on the Implementation of the Finance Act) (RELF), which is presented during the orientation seminar and which is then sent to the National Assembly together with the Finance Bill for the year N+1. This report does not meet the OBI requirements in terms of content. A RELF does not compare what has been carried out

with what was accomplished over the same period in the previous year, does not include what is expected to be carried out in the second half of the year, and does not list accomplishments according to the same classifications applicable when the budget was drawn up and passed (e.g. according to the administrative classification for expenditure); and

• The Court of Auditors is responsible for producing and publishing Audit Reports. However, the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors, which normally would be required to summarise the observations and recommendations made in the Audit Reports, has never been produced and, consequently, is not accessible. This is a major weakness in the area of transparency. The production and publication of Audit Reports would certainly have an immediate impact on the ranking given to the DRC in the next OBS.

While the production and publication of budget documentation (such as the executive’s Draft Budget, the Approved Budget and the In-Year Reports) is becoming more regular, it is not yet institutionalised. Despite the efforts that have been made, certain weaknesses persist and should be highlighted. These include, in particular, the absence of information on performance, medium-term projections and the relationship between the budget and sectoral policies.

In addition, the review mission noted that significant action has been undertaken recently to strengthen the relationship between the budget and public policy, and thereby to promote transparency. This action includes the production of a unifying document for national strategic development and a medium-term budget framework, as well as the preparation of sectoral strategies and medium-term sectoral frameworks for sector-based expenditure, particularly for the ministries of agriculture, public health, rural development, primary and secondary education, and infrastructure. However, it should be noted that budgetary allocations do not yet meet the objectives of the sectoral strategies.

With regard to citizen participation The score of 13 out of 100, which the DRC received in the IBP’s 2015 OBI, indicates that the government provides few opportunities for the public to participate in the budget process. This score, which is significantly lower than the overall average of 25 for the region, indicates that there are insufficient opportunities



for participation, and places the DRC in the group of countries providing very few opportunities for citizen participation in the process of preparation, formulation, implementation monitoring and financial reporting.

Regional comparison

Global average

Mali

Benin

Cameroon

Senegal

Burkina Faso

Dem. Rep. of Congo

Niger

Chad

Scant or none

Minimal Limited Substantial Extensive

2

4

4

10

13

13

17

29

25

Source: IBP

The team believes that the situation has changed since the last OBS review.2 Indeed, in addition to the opportunities granted by the executive to civil society to participate in the preparation phase of the budget, through participating in budget conferences and budget orientation seminars, the legislative branch, for its part, provides significant opportunities for citizen participation (in particular, when the Accountability Bill and the Finance Bill are debated).

These opportunities arise at meetings of the National Assembly’s Economic and Financial Committee (ECOFIN). The Court of Auditors, on the other hand, has not provided a single opportunity for participation. Although the plenary sessions of Parliament are open, contributions by members of the public are not permitted. Likewise, CSOs may only attend, not participate.

The initiative taken to set up participatory mechanisms in Entités territoriales décentralisées (Decentralised Territorial Entities) (ETDs) through participatory budget preparation should also be highlighted. The initiative has been launched in a limited number of ETDs and it is recommended that this mechanism for citizen participation be promoted at the provincial and in other local levels.

Although authorities certainly offer CSOs opportunities for participation during the budget preparation phase,

2 See Appendix 3 for further detail.

such opportunities are seldom given during the phases of implementing the Finance Act and monitoring its implementation. For the time being, the authorities are considering the most suitable way to involve CSOs throughout the budget cycle.

Key factors for successAlthough the DRC is not a CEMAC member, and is involved only in an observational capacity, all directives adopted in the area of public finance have provided impetus for progress in transparency and citizen participation. To this end, the LOFIP has adopted most of the CEMAC directives, particularly those relating to budget classification, medium-term budget forecasting and the budget timetable. However, the directive on the Code of Transparency has not yet been taken on board.3

The establishment of COREF, and its central role in the implementation of public finance reforms, in general and those relating to transparency and participation, in particular, as well as the implementation of the PROFIT-Congo project, have allowed for interventions that have had and should continue to have a positive impact on transparency and participation.

Moreover, the review team notes that many CSOs, but especially the Réseau gouvernance économique et démocratie (Economic and Democratic Governance Network) (REGED) and the Observatoire de la dépense publique (Public Expenditure Monitor) (ODEP), which is charged with monitoring public expenditure, have played a leading role in promoting transparency and participation. They have taken advantage of the opportunities provided to participate in various meetings, which has been made possible by the authorities, particularly the Direction de la préparation et du suivi du budget (Directorate for Budget Preparation and Monitoring) (DPSB), having accepted this involvement and showing a willingness to allow greater openness and transparency.

The role played by various development partners of the DRC, who have supported this effort and desire for greater transparency and openness, should also be highlighted. As part of the PROFIT-Congo project, and other projects, development partners fund

3 Directive No. 06/11-UEAC-190-CM-22 on the Code of Transparency and Good Governance in Public Finance Management.



initiatives on behalf of civil society, allowing for greater transparency and greater citizen participation in public finance.4

THE CURRENT SITUATION IN THE LIGHT OF GOOD PRACTICES IN PFM

From another viewpoint, despite the significant progress made in regard to the publication of documents, transparency and participation are also assessed by analysing PFM in the DRC in the light of good practices observed internationally, which reveals the main weaknesses having a negative impact on transparency.

Political considerations lead to situations where the allocation of appropriations circumvents the instructions relating to the implementation of the Finance Act. Making use of emergency procedures works in favour of certain expenditures while others are done away with.An interviewee

Expenditure incurred under exceptional or emergency circumstances Good practice in the area of expenditure incurred under exceptional or emergency circumstances requires that it does not exceed a certain threshold provided for, and that recourse be made to such procedures only when it is justified.

The first observation to be made with regard to expenditure in terms of emergency or exceptional procedures is the large amount it represents. The expenditure incurred under emergency procedures can exceed the threshold of 60 per cent of total expenditure, which substantially reduces budget credibility and comprehensiveness of the data. There has been a considerable increase in expenditure in terms of exceptional and emergency procedures in recent years. This includes expenditure not only on disarmament, reintegration programmes and security, but also on other sectors such as health.

4 Such development partners include the European Union, the World Bank and the French Development Agency.

The second observation is that other expenditure categories may make use of these emergency procedures, despite the circumstances not being urgent or exceptional (as is the case with transfers to ETDs).

The eligibility criteria provided for in the Inter-Ministerial Decree of 29 December, 2008, on the creation, organisation and functioning of a committee responsible for carrying out exceptional expenditure operations, have rarely been complied with, and the procedure providing for emergency spending in the chain of expenditure is not yet in operation.

Transparency in public finance implies that all revenue voted on should fund all authorised expenditure. Transparency also implies that the rules governing the management of public expenditure are complied with.

Budget implementation is about making certain that resources are used in accordance with the budget listings and are available to administrators in time, ensuring that public services are delivered efficiently, and that the regulations are complied with.

Changes in the economic and socio-political situation, and the progress made in implementing plans and programmes, may require adjustments to be made to the initial plan; however, any expenditure that is not in line with the budget’s dedicated appropriations requires an amendment to the Finance Act, and may not be carried out by way of emergency or exceptional procedures.

Adjustments using emergency procedures may be, and generally are, made at the expense of other priorities set by the authorities when the annual Finance Bill is presented. This may lead to budget implementation rates that vary from one ministry to another (some ministries may find themselves with rates of incurred expenditure close to 200 per cent, while others may have rates lower than 50 per cent).

When emergency or exceptional procedures are used, regulatory or legislative provisions are not applied. They are bypassed, or they are interpreted flexibly, with extensive use being made of provisions reserved for truly urgent or exceptional situations. Sometimes, it is difficult to identify the real reason for these procedures being used – it could be due to administrative negligence or the circumvention of cumbersome



procedures in order for the budget to be implemented on time.

One of the consequences of making excessive use of exceptional procedures is that the ceilings set in the Budget Commitment Plan are not complied with. The appropriations granted to sectors such as the social sector or the infrastructure sector in the Budget Commitment Plan are already low, but nonetheless are not complied with, by virtue of the use made of exceptional procedures. Accordingly, appropriations granted to these sectors are implemented poorly, if at all.

The level of extra-budgetary operations The review mission, furthermore, noted the issue of the high level of extra-budgetary operations, which by far exceeds 10 per cent of expenditure and/or the total revenue for the budget.

The term ‘extra-budgetary operations’ generally corresponds to government transactions that are not included in the annual budget or in the central government’s general report.

The budget and the financial statements of central government, namely the budget review, the management account for senior accounting officers and the balance of payments, should track all expenditure and revenue operations so that they may be placed before, and be reviewed and approved by the legislature after the end of the tax year.

Extra-budgetary operations include a wide variety of measures (e.g. social security or pension plans, and discretionary or secret funds). More recently, public resources from the extraction of natural resources, foreign aid (aid projects or programmes), revenue deriving from privatisation, and public-private partnerships have also been considered extra-budgetary operations if they are not reported in the Accountability Act.

In the DRC, there is still a high level of such operations, which are not reported in the financial statements of the central government (e.g. jobs and resources in public institutions and in social security), and this undermines the comprehensiveness of the information in the budget documentation that is produced and published.

In addition, the information on the revenue and expenditure related to projects funded by sponsors,

which is included in the budgets, ESBs and budget reports remains largely incomplete (PEFA 2012). In 2014, 67 per cent of expenditure funded externally was off-budget according to the Accountability Act (World Bank 2012).

The Plateforme de la gestion de l’aide internationale (International Aid Management Platform) (PGAI), created nearly a decade ago, aims to provide information on all external aid received, but finds it difficult to work efficiently because data are only partially available because of a lack of co-ordination between PGAI experts and those of financial partners.

Staff files and salary expenditureAnother factor identified by the review mission is that data relating to staff files and how they correspond to payroll files are not complete or sufficiently detailed. Data on staff numbers in the civil service are not comprehensive, and it is difficult to accurately project the total payroll, which represents approximately 40 per cent of public expenditure.

This situation is a result of there being no single payroll file that includes all government employees. Such a file would allow for a more precise understanding of the human resources situation and of public expenditure related to the payroll.

A project that aims to combine all payroll files into a single reference file is currently being implemented according to a timeframe set by the government. For the moment, according to some interviewees, the file is yet to include all public service employees.

Combining the payroll files, and using the banking system for the payment of civil servants’ salaries, would lead to a substantially clearer understanding of the staff numbers in the civil service, and of the total payroll.

The government has decided to use the banking system to pay civil servants, and the banks that are part of this initiative (launched in 2011) will improve transparency and generate data on actual payments and any potential payroll surplus.

Today, the total number of staff (officials and civil servants) who have bank accounts is more than 650 000, which means that the rate of staff using bank accounts is approximately 65 per cent. With the objective of reaching 100 per cent, this leaves just



over 350 000 members of staff still to move over to banking.5

Governance of the extractive industries sectorImproving governance and information in the extractive industries sector remains a challenge, especially in the case of state-owned companies operating in the mining sector.

Some companies profit from royalties, which should be paid to the Treasury, persist in disposing of assets without calling for tenders and without taking the provisions of an ad hoc decree adopted by the government into account. The process for transforming state-owned companies into trading companies, particularly the process for the sale of assets, must be closely monitored by the authorities.

The authorities should draw inspiration from international best practices in order to tackle the illegal exploitation of natural resources and to successfully complete the revision of the hydrocarbon and mining codes.

Over the past three years, efforts have been made by the authorities to improve governance and transparency in the extractive industries sector. At present, almost all of the contracts signed by the government in respect of the oil, mining and forestry sectors are accessible to the public.

The country has taken up the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, and publishes regular reports on revenue from natural resources as part of this initiative. However, it must continue striving to ensure that there is a successful, competitive tender process in the awarding of mining, oil and forestry contracts.

The control and monitoring of public financesParliament (the National Assembly and the Senate) and the Court of Auditors are responsible for the external monitoring and control of public finances. The capacity to externally control and monitor is indispensable in keeping the legislature and the judiciary informed about how the executive carries out its authorised tasks, and to give citizens an account of its use of public money.

For Parliament and the Court of Auditors to be able to assess the implementation of the budget and the

5 Data derived from interviews.

effective use of public funds, it is essential that these two institutions have extensive powers to examine reports by the executive.

In terms of the Constitution, the government must table the Finance Bill for the year in the National Assembly by no later than 15 September of each year. Moreover, insofar as the Constitution stipulates that the second session opens on 15 September and closes on 15 December, the members have a period of 90 days to review the Finance Bill. The Accountability Act must be passed first. Over the previous few years, the deadlines for introducing the Finance Bill have not been complied with and discussions have been held in extraordinary sessions.

While the Senate is involved only in the second reading of the Finance Bill, as an exception to the Constitutional provision that Bills are to be tabled in one of the two parliamentary chambers, the Finance Bill is always tabled in the National Assembly.

The review of the Finance Bill by the National Assembly involves a detailed account of revenue and expenditure. Through amendments to the Bill, the National Assembly frequently increases expenditure, offsetting this by increasing the revenue projections. However, these projections, as passed in the Finance Act, ultimately prove to be unrealistic, with very low, and constantly declining, implementation rates.

With regard to the control exercised by Parliament, and in order to strengthen this control and make it more effective, a procedures manual for reviewing Finance Acts was produced and approved by both ECOFIN committees. This manual, which should be an appendix to the rules of procedure for both chambers of Parliament, clearly and precisely presents the processes and all formalities to be completed by Parliament in order to better follow up on the action taken by the executive.

The jurisdiction of the Court of Auditors is set by the Constitution. The Court of Auditors falls under the National Assembly. Under the conditions set in the Finance Act, it controls the management of state finances and public property, as well as auditing the accounts of the provinces, the ETDs and other public bodies.

The Court of Auditors for the DRC has not changed since 2006 and to date there has been no



legislation laying down the principles governing its organisation, and which truly establishes it as an independent Supreme Audit Institution, as defined by the International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions, of which it is a member.

The Court of Auditors does not have the means to control more than 50 per cent of total expenditure. Given the understaffing of magistrats (judicial officers), the Court is forced to limit itself to only a few expenditure categories that are considered to be a risk. The Court has monitored public procurement for a period of three months, and has controlled Heavily Indebted Poor Countries expenditure for four-and-a-half years. It has also audited several state-owned companies. The Court does not have the means to

exercise judicial authority over Treasury officials (accountants), which would be a way to control a large portion of expenditure.

In order to reinforce the role of the Court of Auditors, a private member’s Bill laying down the principles governing the organisation, composition and functioning of the Court of Auditors, which has already been introduced in the National Assembly, must be reviewed and voted on. This Bill enshrines the independence of the institution, as well as its administrative and financial autonomy. It strengthens the Court of Auditors’ role in controlling public finances and assessing public policies, entrusting it with, among other missions, the auditing of government accounts.

TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE: AC TIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4


4. TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC FINANCE: ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The actions and recommendations set out here are based on the recommendations made in 2013, which are in the process of being implemented.

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DRAWN UP IN 2013

The recommendations and actions of the 2013 review mission are divided into three categories: horizontal actions and recommendations, recommendations and actions relating to transparency, and recommendations and actions relating to participation.6

An overall assessment of the implementation of the recommendations and actions proposed by the 2013 review mission are presented below. A detailed account of the implementation of the actions and recommendations to be found in the appendices.

With regard to the horizontal recommendations, the actions that have been and/or are currently still being implemented are principally as follows:

• improving the common understanding of transparency and participation;

• developing the Draft Decree on Budgetary Governance, which would constitute the legal framework for transparency and participation; and

• including in the Draft Decree the provisions relating to transparency and participation noted during the present review mission, in particular a common understanding of transparency and citizen participation, the involvement of civil society in monitoring and assessing projects, and the creation of formalised frameworks allowing for criticism by civil society.

With regard to the recommendations relating to transparency, the actions concern:

• interconnecting all departments in the chain of expenditure (which is ongoing), in order to facilitate the production of information on expenditure, with a view to it being published, while efforts are being made to respect the budget calendar as much as possible; and

6 For details of the implementation of the recommendations, see Appendix 1.

• publishing the Government Action Plan for the Budget, no later than one month before introducing the annual Finance Bill, submitting it to the government at the same time as the Bill and, as soon as it is adopted, placing it before Parliament, together with the other relevant documents.

However, the review team found that there was no internal or external mission to analyse the current content of key documents, as was recommended in relation to the standards for comprehensiveness required by the IBP, to ascertain how they might be improved, if necessary. In addition, in the provinces, budget documents are published in hard copy and in limited numbers, because of logistical issues and lack of funds.

With regard to the recommendations relating to participation, the review mission notes that:

• CSOs are participating more and more in the budget preparation process;

• CSOs that attend the meetings produce analyses of the budget;

• CSOs, organised into groups with shared concerns, participate in activities for the sectors relevant to them (e.g. public finance, health, education and gender issues); and

• at the provincial level, CSOs attend some sessions of the ECOFIN committees and the plenary sessions of the provincial assemblies. In some ETDs, they play a role in the budgetary process within the framework for participatory budgeting.

The principal weakness that has still not been corrected is participation in monitoring the implementation of the budget using data on the implementation, and producing analytical reports. The same situation pertains in respect of the inclusion of civil society in the systems for monitoring and assessing projects in the field.

Several of the 2013 recommendations concern strengthening the role of civil society in the following ways:

• developing the capacity of civil society (including the media) at all levels, through a greater understanding of financial legislation, budgetary analysis, the use



of reports, management, implementation and assessment;

• involving civil society in the work of planning and developing sectoral draft budgets;

• including civil society in the systems for monitoring and assessing projects in the field;

• including civil society in the drafting of action plans and legal provisions, through COREF; and

• highlighting how the Cadre de concertation de la société civile (Consultation Framework for Civil Society) might be used for organised and permanent stakeholder participation.

The review team found that only certain actions and recommendations have been implemented, with a significant portion of the actions and recommendations still in the process of being implemented. The review team stressed the need to increase efforts so as to continue with the implementation of these actions, especially by:

• improving the comprehensiveness of the documents provided, by analysing the current content of key documents in relation to the standards for comprehensiveness required by the IBP;

• complying with the agenda for preparing the budget, in order to have time to engage with citizens and meet legal deadlines;

• producing and publishing a Mid-Year Report in accordance with international standards;

• as suggested in 2013, involving civil society in the work of planning and developing sectoral draft budgets, as well as in the systems for monitoring and assessing projects in the field;

• systematically publishing the Year-End Report within the prescribed time periods; and

• publishing the results of actions taken (the activity report) by the IGF.

These recommendations and actions are of crucial importance for the promotion of transparency and citizen participation.

THE ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE 2016 REVIEW

The actions and recommendations described below were presented, discussed and approved at a feedback workshop including all stakeholders, which was organised at the end of the assignment in the field.7

Actions Most of the actions proposed by the 2016 review mission focus on consolidating the rights to which civil society is entitled, and on preparing CSOs for new steps to be taken in promoting transparency and participation. The recommendations are in line with the 2013 recommendations, and are intended to ensure that the DRC has more professional and responsible CSOs acting in accordance with the rules of ethics and integrity.

Action 1: The preparation and approval of a Charter for Transparency and Ethics in Public Finance, in order to promote the values of good and open governance.

This Charter seeks to bring together the obligations and duties of the stakeholders in the area of public finance, and to establish a non-exhaustive list of the standards of behaviour expected of stakeholders in terms of transparency and participation.

The Charter allows for further clarification on the definitions of transparency and participation, and for these definitions to be widely shared, in order to define the basic practices relating to transparency and participation, to organise access to information and to organise an assessment of information on public finance. It also allows for an explanation of related concepts in the Draft Decree on Governance, and definitions of practical implementation methods.

The Charter further provides for an explanation of the pillars and principles of transparency and participation, organisation of the relationships between different actors, and the defining of rules of good conduct and ethics with regard to access to information and citizen participation.

7 For a detailed account of the actions, see Appendix 2.



Action 2: The development and approval of CSOs’ vision, values, mission, strategy and action plan, which map out their development projects, in consultation with all stakeholders.

If a person dreams of something, it is just a dream; but if many dream together, it is the beginning of something new.A Brazilian proverb

The current status of CSOs is that each one must define its own organisational structure, framework, strategy and medium- to long-term development plan.8 As part of the development project for CSOs, each must have a vision. Defining and communicating a vision makes it possible to identify common objectives and co-ordinate the efforts of each CSO, and increases the chances of achieving these objectives. Among other things, a vision sets a challenge, simplifies decision-making and provides motivation and direction.

In addition, CSOs must have a mission that identifies who does what, to whom, why and how. This is the foundation of a CSO’s identity and its driving force. It is the timeless raison d’être of the organisation and the basis of its image.

Values are a central concept in public life. They are the principles with which our ways of being and acting must comply. These principles must be ones that CSOs regard as ideal and that make the people or behaviour to which they are attributed desirable or worthy.

The vision, mission and values must guide CSOs in the development of their strategy and action plan for development, professionalisation and independence.

The vision, mission, values, strategy and action plan for development of a CSO must be discussed, debated and approved by the CSO, and then realised.

Action 3: A re-examination of the funding of CSOs.

Funding is the driving force behind the development of any project, entity or group. Without funding, no organisation can move forward with its projects or programmes.

8 When talking of CSOs, we refer to those operating in the area of governance in general, and specifically in the area of public finance.

CSOs in the DRC lack financial resources and do not have the capital base necessary to fund their activities. To a large extent, they depend on funding from the authorities and development partners. They are not able to generate resources by way of their actions and activities, and private companies do not fund such organisations.

Moreover, the DRC will not have reliable, ‘sound’ CSOs if these are not able to generate the resources required to fund their activities and projects, which is why there is a need to re-examine the funding of CSOs.

This re-examination must be conducted jointly by all stakeholders, with the involvement of the government and development partners, in particular, in order to decide on the legal framework that will govern the funding of CSOs, and to identify how and through which instruments (accreditation, minimum criteria, performance contracts, etc.) CSOs would have access to government or multinational lines of funding.

The re-examination of CSO funding must lead to the setting of required performance criteria for access to certain types of funding, as well as the determination of the funding ceiling and type of funding to be granted, taking into account activities, actions, organisational structure, products, and so on.

From a sustainability point of view, this funding should incorporate a requirement that the professionalism of members of CSOs be increased so as to bring in the expertise necessary to make self-financing possible.

Action 4: The establishment of a programme for supporting civil society, and a management unit for such a programme.

This programme is to be set up and funded by development partners. It is to contribute to the professionalisation of CSOs, to create a space and a framework for consultation and dialogue between CSOs, to advise CSOs and provide them with services, and to promote the creation and organisation of CSOs

Such a programme, which in many countries is funded by the European Union, aims to strengthen civil society’s effective contribution to the country’s socio-economic development, and to assist in enhancing the capacities of CSOs and their national partners by opening up spaces for dialogue and collective learning. It promotes the

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principes

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id%C3%A9alisme_(philosophie)



building of trust between public actors and CSOs around a shared vision for development and through a joint analysis of experiences and good practices.

As part of carrying out this action, a discussion should be held between the government and partners to consider ways and means of setting up such a programme, to decide on its budget and management structure, and so on.

Action 5: The creation of a platform (with an online presence) dedicated to Congolese civil society (starting with those acting in the area of governance), following the example of other countries.

This platform will be an interactive, participatory and community platform, which brings Congolese CSOs together in one space, thus facilitating networking, access to information and the sharing of opportunities. The platform must target CSOs and FTPs throughout the DRC. Other national partners can support this platform in various ways.

The platform, which must be accessible online, should promote CSOs in the DRC, in co-operation with other actors sharing the same purpose. Such a platform is set up with the intention of creating a society in which non-state actors (CSOs, the private sector, etc.) are involved in a dialogue process with the government to define, implement, and monitor and assess projects and programmes and public policies in the DRC. It will strengthen CSOs with regard to their capacity to develop, implement and assess, as well as influence decisions relating to public policies and programmes.

The platform could become an indispensable organisation on issues relating to promoting and strengthening the capacities of civil society, could develop both internal and external centres of excellence, and could implement the most effective and innovative strategies, actions, methodologies and tools.

RecommendationsAs far as transparency is concerned, and with regard to the production and publication of budget documents, the recommendations are as follows:

• ensure that budget documents are produced and published regularly, systematically, and within the prescribed time periods;

• adapt the format of the documents to make them compatible with the norms and standards required by the IBP; and

• make the institutions that are responsible for the publication of the documents they produce aware of their responsibilities, by signing a joint order that specifies the responsibilities and deadlines relating to the production and publication of budget documents.

As far as participation is concerned:

• generally promote citizen participation throughout the budget cycle (this participation must be organised and its format agreed upon); and

• opportunities for participation must be agreed upon with the government, especially, and a continual dialogue must be maintained to promote these opportunities.

To achieve the above:

• hold regular consultation framework meetings, and include issues relating to transparency and participation as standing items on meeting agendas; and

• diversify the mechanisms for transparency and participation.


APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Status of the implementation of the recommendations made in 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Appendix 2: 2016 Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Appendix 3: 2016 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Appendix 4: Prioritisation of the 2016 actions and recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Appendix 5: Schedule for implementing the actions and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Appendix 6: The production and publication of budget documents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Appendix 7: The production and publication of documents – the team’s observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Appendix 8: Status of the implementation of the Six Principles of Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Appendix 9: Institutions consulted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

APPENDICES


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

1: S

tatu

s of

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

mad

e in

201

3

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Im

plem

enta

tion

stat

us

Obs

erva

tions

(obs

tacl

es, s

oluti

ons,

etc

.)

Hor

izon

tal r

ecom

men

datio

nsSt

reng

then

pub

lic a

cces

s to

info

rmati

on: i

mpr

ove

the

feat

ures

of

the

web

sites

for t

he M

inis

try

for t

he

Budg

et, F

inan

ce a

nd P

lann

ing.

Muc

h bu

dget

info

rmati

on is

ava

ilabl

e an

d ac

cess

ible

to

the

publ

ic o

n th

ese

site

s: w

ww

.bud

get.

gouv

.cd

and

http:

//m

infin

rdc.

com

/min

fin/.

In p

artic

ular

, thi

s in

form

ation

co

ncer

ns:

• th

e m

onth

ly B

udge

t Exe

cutio

n Re

port

s (E

SBs)

;•

the

Citiz

ens’

Bud

get;

• in

stru

ction

s re

latin

g to

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f the

bud

get n

+1;

• th

e G

over

nmen

t Acti

on P

lan

for t

he B

udge

t (PB

AG),

a st

rate

gy d

ocum

ent u

ntil 2

016;

• th

e su

mm

ary

repo

rt fo

r the

bud

get o

rien

tatio

n se

min

ar

and

budg

et c

onfe

renc

es; a

nd

• th

e Pu

blic

Pol

icy

Ass

essm

ent R

epor

t;

Tech

nolo

gica

l dev

elop

men

ts h

ave

mad

e so

me

impr

ovem

ents

po

ssib

le:

• th

e w

ebsi

te fo

r the

Min

istr

y fo

r the

Bud

get h

as h

ad a

new

ho

me

page

sin

ce 2

014,

whi

ch m

akes

it m

ore

appe

alin

g,

a re

sult

of th

e w

ork

done

by

two

IT s

peci

alis

ts tr

aine

d in

So

uth

Afri

ca fo

r thi

s pu

rpos

e (t

he c

entr

al g

over

nmen

t bu

dget

cov

ered

all

the

cost

s th

is tr

aini

ng);

and

• it

is n

ow p

ossi

ble

to fi

nd c

erta

in in

form

ation

on

civi

l se

rvan

ts, u

sing

thei

r nam

es a

nd s

ervi

ce n

umbe

rs.

Oth

er d

ocum

ents

, suc

h as

the

Acco

unta

bilit

y Ac

t, ha

ve b

een

prod

uced

but

hav

e no

t bee

n po

sted

on

the

web

site

s fo

r the

M

inis

trie

s of

Fin

ance

and

the

Budg

et, a

lthou

gh th

ere

is n

o pa

rticu

lar

obst

acle

to th

eir p

ublic

ation

.

Insti

tutio

ns, s

uch

as th

e Co

urt o

f Aud

itors

, hav

e w

ebsi

tes,

but

they

do

not

pub

lish

esse

ntial

doc

umen

ts o

n th

ese

site

s an

d th

ey d

o no

t m

aint

ain

the

site

s pr

oper

ly. S

uch

has

been

the

case

for t

he C

ourt

of

Audi

tors

sin

ce th

e ex

pira

tion

of it

s w

ebsi

te h

ostin

g co

ntra

ct, w

hich

w

as in

itial

ly w

ith a

n FT

P.

This

issu

e re

gard

ing

the

mak

ing

of d

ocum

ents

pub

lic o

n w

ebsi

tes

is a

cul

tura

l one

. The

Cou

rt o

f Aud

itors

pro

duce

s an

d di

strib

utes

it

s do

cum

ents

by

prin

ting

them

. How

ever

, it h

as n

ot re

new

ed it

s w

ebsi

te h

ostin

g co

ntra

ct, w

hich

ori

gina

lly w

as p

art o

f a p

roje

ct.

Unti

l the

web

site

is v

iew

ed a

s a

tool

to b

e us

ed to

mak

e go

vern

men

t ag

enci

es a

nd th

eir a

ction

s m

ore

visi

ble,

the

requ

irem

ent t

hat

info

rmati

on b

e di

strib

uted

sho

uld

be s

tron

gly

enco

urag

ed

thro

ugh

an o

ffici

al d

ocum

ent.

In th

is s

piri

t, th

e D

raft

Dec

ree

on

Budg

etar

y G

over

nanc

e w

hich

is b

eing

fina

lised

by

CORE

F is

the

idea

l op

port

unit

y to

reso

lve

this

issu

e.


APPENDICES

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Im

plem

enta

tion

stat

us

Obs

erva

tions

(obs

tacl

es, s

oluti

ons,

etc

.)

Hor

izon

tal r

ecom

men

datio

nsG

o be

yond

sim

ply

publ

ishin

g do

cum

ents

, and

dev

elop

a d

istr

ibuti

on

stra

tegy

by,

for e

xam

ple,

usin

g th

e pr

ess.

Doc

umen

ts a

re p

ublis

hed

in th

e G

azett

e, w

hich

, in

prin

cipl

e,

for t

hose

who

are

not

on

the

list f

or fr

ee d

istr

ibuti

on, m

ust b

e pa

id fo

r. H

owev

er, a

larg

e po

rtion

of d

ocum

ents

, esp

ecia

lly

thos

e fr

om th

e Co

urt o

f Aud

itors

, are

pro

duce

d in

har

d co

py

and

dist

ribut

ed fr

ee o

f cha

rge

in th

e re

leva

nt d

epar

tmen

ts.

• Th

ere

is a

Com

mun

icati

on C

omm

ittee

in th

e M

inis

try

for

the

Budg

et.

• Th

e D

EP (D

epar

tmen

t of R

esea

rch

and

Plan

ning

) pro

duce

s a

quar

terl

y re

view

enti

tled

Echo

s du

Bud

get w

hich

is

a m

agaz

ine

on b

udge

t matt

ers,

fully

fund

ed o

ut o

f the

M

inis

try’

s bu

dget

. Iss

ue 0

01 (A

pril–

June

201

6) d

ealt

with

th

e fo

llow

ing

topi

cs, a

mon

g ot

hers

: (i)

cont

rolli

ng th

e pa

yrol

l, w

hich

wou

ld m

ake

it po

ssib

le to

sav

e 10

bill

ion

Cong

oles

e fr

ancs

per

qua

rter

in th

ree

min

istr

ies

and

five

prov

ince

s; (i

i) th

e ap

prov

al o

f new

bud

get c

lass

ifica

tions

; (ii

i) th

e pr

esen

tatio

n of

the

Fina

nce

Amen

dmen

t Bill

; an

d (iv

) the

par

ticip

ator

y bu

dget

(ben

efits

, dev

elop

men

t pr

oces

s, a

ctor

s, c

onte

nt, f

orum

for f

eedb

ack,

etc

.)

Giv

ing

rene

wed

impe

tus

to th

e Co

mm

unic

ation

Com

mitt

ee is

an

orde

r giv

ing

it st

atut

ory

form

, whi

ch in

is th

e pr

oces

s of

bei

ng

sign

ed. T

he c

omm

ittee

will

co-

ordi

nate

the

flow

of i

nfor

mati

on b

oth

inte

rnal

ly a

nd e

xter

nally

.

Use

cou

ld b

e m

ade

of th

e U

nite

d N

ation

s’ O

kapi

rad

io, w

hich

has

m

any

liste

ners

thro

ugho

ut th

e co

untr

y, a

nd w

hich

wou

ld b

e w

illin

g to

off

er fr

ee b

road

cast

s on

tran

spar

ency

and

citi

zen

parti

cipa

tion

in

PFM

. In

fact

, Rad

io O

kapi

usu

ally

bro

adca

sts

this

typ

e of

info

rmati

on

and

disc

ussi

on.

Mak

e th

e do

cum

ents

pro

vide

d m

ore

com

preh

ensiv

e: a

naly

se th

e cu

rren

t co

nten

t of k

ey d

ocum

ents

in re

latio

n to

th

e st

anda

rds f

or c

ompr

ehen

siven

ess

requ

ired

by th

e IB

P to

see

how

they

m

ay b

e im

prov

ed.

Ther

e w

as n

o in

tern

al o

r ext

erna

l mis

sion

to a

naly

se th

e cu

rren

t con

tent

of k

ey d

ocum

ents

in re

latio

n to

the

stan

dard

s fo

r com

preh

ensi

vene

ss re

quire

d by

the

IBP

to s

ee h

ow th

ey

may

be

impr

oved

if n

eces

sary

.

The

syst

em fo

r fol

low

ing-

up o

n re

com

men

datio

ns is

wea

k.

Ther

e is

now

a n

eed

to o

rgan

ise

the

prod

uctio

n an

d pu

blic

ation

of

docu

men

ts. C

olla

bora

tion

betw

een

thos

e w

ho p

rodu

ce re

port

s,

thos

e w

ho a

re a

utho

rised

to s

end

them

to b

e pu

blis

hed,

and

thos

e w

ho p

ublis

h on

site

, sho

uld

be re

gula

ted.

The

role

of e

ach

acto

r, an

d th

e tim

e gi

ven

to c

ompl

ete

the

assi

gned

wor

k or

task

mus

t be

spec

ified

.

To th

is e

nd, i

t is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at C

ORE

F fir

st o

rgan

ise

a w

orks

hop

brin

ging

toge

ther

the

rele

vant

adm

inis

trati

ons

and

civi

l soc

iety

to

appr

ove

the

cont

ent o

f the

eig

ht d

ocum

ents

requ

ired

by th

e IB

P, a

nd

othe

r pub

lishe

d do

cum

ents

, and

defi

ne p

racti

cal w

ays

to p

ublis

h th

e do

cum

ents

(res

pons

ibili

ty fo

r the

ir pr

oduc

tion,

sen

ding

them

to b

e pu

blis

hed,

and

act

ual o

n-si

te p

ublic

ation

).

The

Dra

ft D

ecre

e on

Bud

geta

ry G

over

nanc

e m

ust p

rovi

de fo

r an

orde

r to

be is

sued

to re

gula

te th

is a

spec

t.


APPENDICES

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Im

plem

enta

tion

stat

us

Obs

erva

tions

(obs

tacl

es, s

oluti

ons,

etc

.)

Hor

izon

tal r

ecom

men

datio

nsSt

reng

then

the

role

of c

ivil

soci

ety:

st

reng

then

the

capa

city

of c

ivil

soci

ety

(incl

udin

g th

e m

edia

) at a

ll le

vels,

th

roug

h a

bett

er u

nder

stan

ding

of

fina

ncia

l leg

islati

on, b

udge

tary

an

alys

is, h

ow to

mak

e us

e of

repo

rts,

m

anag

emen

t, im

plem

enta

tion

and

asse

ssm

ent.

FTPs

that

sup

port

pub

lic fi

nanc

e re

form

and

thos

e th

at

prov

ide

supp

ort i

n th

e pr

ovin

ces

are

mak

ing

vari

ous

effor

ts to

st

reng

then

the

capa

city

of c

ivil

soci

ety

to h

elp

it pl

ay a

gre

ater

ro

le in

the

budg

et p

roce

ss, i

n pa

rticu

lar m

akin

g us

e of

bud

get

docu

men

ts.

As

part

of t

his

supp

ort,

civi

l soc

iety

has

ben

efite

d fr

om

trai

ning

cou

rses

dea

ling

with

the

anal

ysis

of F

inan

ce B

ills.

Ap

prox

imat

ely

60 o

rgan

isati

ons

atten

ded

mee

tings

to

prod

uce

the

2016

bud

get r

evie

w a

naly

sis.

Acco

rdin

g to

the

Pres

iden

t of E

COFI

N in

the

Nati

onal

A

ssem

bly,

civ

il so

ciet

y (w

hich

has

con

firm

ed th

ese

stat

emen

ts) p

artic

ipat

es in

the

budg

et re

view

pro

cess

th

roug

h EC

OFI

N, a

long

side

mem

bers

of p

arlia

men

t and

m

inis

try

offici

als,

whe

re it

is fr

ee to

exp

ress

its

view

s, ju

st a

s pa

rliam

enta

rians

are

.

To m

ake

lasti

ng g

ains

wou

ld re

quire

a c

ode

of g

ood

cond

uct

gove

rnin

g ci

tizen

par

ticip

ation

to b

e cr

eate

d.

High

light

how

the

Cadr

e de

co

ncer

tatio

n de

la so

ciét

é ci

vile

(C

onsu

ltatio

n Fr

amew

ork

for C

ivil

Soci

ety)

, whi

ch h

as b

een

set u

p, m

ay

be u

sed

for o

rgan

ised

and

perm

anen

t st

akeh

olde

r par

ticip

ation

.

The

cons

ulta

tion

fram

ewor

k is

mor

e fo

cuse

d on

pol

itica

l is

sues

.

The

grou

ps o

f CSO

s, o

rgan

ised

acc

ordi

ng to

sha

red

conc

erns

, ar

e w

orki

ng o

ut w

ell a

nd d

oing

goo

d w

ork

parti

cipa

ting

in

activ

ities

in th

eir r

elev

ant s

ecto

rs (e

.g. l

aw e

nfor

cem

ent,

heal

th, e

duca

tion)

.

Form

alis

e th

e co

mm

unic

ation

bet

wee

n ci

vil s

ocie

ty a

nd C

ORE

F, in

pa

rticu

lar b

y se

tting

up

a co

mm

unic

ation

sys

tem

bet

wee

n CO

REF

and

OD

EP, a

n um

brel

la o

rgan

isati

on fo

r CSO

s co

ncer

ned

with

fin

anci

al g

over

nanc

e.

Incl

ude

civi

l soc

iety

in th

e dr

aftin

g of

acti

on p

lans

and

lega

l pro

visio

ns,

thro

ugh

CORE

F (th

e St

eerin

g Co

mm

ittee

for P

ublic

Fin

ance

Ref

orm

).

As

rega

rds

form

ulati

ng te

xts,

civ

il so

ciet

y w

as in

vite

d by

CO

REF

to p

artic

ipat

e in

dev

elop

ing

the

Publ

ic F

inan

ce B

ill

(LO

FIP

draft

) in

2011

.

CORE

F al

so in

volv

ed c

ivil

soci

ety

in th

e de

velo

pmen

t of t

he B

ill

rela

ting

to th

e Co

urt o

f Aud

itors

in 2

013.

The

sam

e w

as d

one

for t

he D

raft

Dec

ree

on B

udge

tary

G

over

nanc

e in

201

5.


APPENDICES

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Im

plem

enta

tion

stat

us

Obs

erva

tions

(obs

tacl

es, s

oluti

ons,

etc

.)

Hor

izon

tal r

ecom

men

datio

nsIm

prov

e th

e co

mm

on u

nder

stan

ding

of

tran

spar

ency

and

par

ticip

ation

: fin

d op

port

uniti

es to

info

rm so

ciet

y of

the

defin

ition

s of t

rans

pare

ncy

and

parti

cipa

tion

prop

osed

in th

is re

port

. Fo

r exa

mpl

e, in

clud

e th

ese

defin

ition

s in

the

annu

al C

itize

ns’ B

udge

t and

in

the

new

text

on

good

fina

ncia

l go

vern

ance

, whi

ch is

bei

ng d

evel

oped

by

CO

REF.

Pub

lish

a m

emor

andu

m o

n tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd p

artic

ipati

on.

Effor

ts a

re b

eing

mad

e to

impr

ove

the

com

mon

un

ders

tand

ing

of tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd p

artic

ipati

on.

The

Citiz

ens’

Bud

get p

ublis

hed

by th

e M

inis

try

for t

he B

udge

t in

clud

es s

ideb

ars

prov

idin

g th

ese

vari

ous

defin

ition

s.

Whe

n sp

eaki

ng in

Par

liam

ent a

nd to

the

pres

s, th

e au

thor

ities

re

fer t

o th

ese

topi

cs.

The

Dra

ft D

ecre

e on

Bud

geta

ry G

over

nanc

e do

es n

ot in

clud

e th

ese

defin

ition

s.

No

awar

enes

s ca

mpa

igns

hav

e be

en o

rgan

ised

to r

aise

aw

aren

ess

amon

g ci

tizen

s ab

out t

hese

issu

es. H

owev

er, t

he

issu

es h

ave

been

add

ress

ed d

urin

g th

e tr

aini

ng c

ours

es r

un

by C

ORE

F.

Rais

e aw

aren

ess

and

help

peo

ple

who

wor

k in

the

pres

s to

spe

cial

ise

in tr

ansp

aren

cy in

pub

lic fi

nanc

e an

d ci

tizen

par

ticip

ation

.

Set u

p a

prod

uctio

n un

it w

ithin

OD

EP fo

r the

tran

spar

ency

and

pa

rtici

patio

n aw

aren

ess

prog

ram

me,

whi

ch in

clud

es li

sten

ing

and

exch

ange

gro

ups

in th

e pr

ovin

ces,

in F

renc

h an

d ot

her n

ation

al

lang

uage

s.

Intr

oduc

e th

e co

ncep

ts o

f tra

nspa

renc

y an

d ci

tizen

par

ticip

ation

in

the

Dra

ft D

ecre

e on

Bud

geta

ry G

over

nanc

e, w

hen

it is

bei

ng fi

nalis

ed

by C

ORE

F.

Intr

oduc

e tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd c

itize

n pa

rtici

patio

n w

hen

mak

ing

the

LOFI

P ac

cess

ible

to a

larg

er a

udie

nce,

for c

ivil

serv

ants

and

oth

er

offici

als

oper

ating

in p

ublic

and

pri

vate

org

anis

ation

s.

Cons

ider

how

to e

nhan

ce tr

ansp

aren

cy

and

parti

cipa

tion

at th

e pr

ovin

cial

le

vel i

n th

e co

ntex

t of d

ecen

tral

isatio

n:

enco

urag

e th

e pu

blic

ation

of p

rovi

ncia

l bu

dget

doc

umen

ts a

nd in

volv

e ci

vil

soci

ety

in th

e pr

oces

s of d

evel

opin

g an

d m

onito

ring

prov

inci

al b

udge

ts a

nd

dece

ntra

lised

serv

ices

. Thi

s sho

uld

take

in

to a

ccou

nt th

e le

sson

s lea

rned

from

on

goin

g in

itiati

ves,

at t

he p

rovi

ncia

l le

vel,

in p

artic

ular

(e.g

. sup

port

from

th

e W

orld

Ban

k an

d th

e U

NDP

), an

d ca

n bu

ild o

n ce

rtai

n al

read

y-sp

onso

red

prog

ram

mes

or o

nes t

hat a

re

star

ting

up.

In th

e pr

ovin

ces,

civ

il so

ciet

y pa

rtici

patio

n is

enc

oura

ged

by F

TPs,

whi

ch p

rovi

de s

uppo

rt fo

r thi

s at

diff

eren

t lev

els

acco

rdin

g to

the

vari

ous

prov

ince

s.

Ther

e w

ere

som

e in

itial

diffi

culti

es b

ut, t

hank

s to

the

trai

ning

th

ey re

ceiv

ed, p

rovi

ncia

l aut

hori

ties

now

und

erst

and

that

pa

rtici

patio

n is

nec

essa

ry.

For t

he m

omen

t, bu

dget

doc

umen

ts a

re p

ublis

hed

in h

ard

copy

and

in li

mite

d nu

mbe

rs.

One

pro

vinc

e ha

s ev

en p

ublis

hed

budg

et s

tatis

tics

(in

parti

cula

r, on

reco

vere

d re

venu

e).

In c

erta

in p

rovi

nces

, the

pro

ducti

on o

f mul

tiple

doc

umen

ts

pose

s a

finan

cial

pro

blem

, and

ther

e is

als

o a

prob

lem

of

logi

stics

(reg

ardi

ng w

ebsi

tes)

.

Toda

y, th

e pr

esen

ce o

f mem

bers

of c

ivil

soci

ety

is a

ccep

ted

in

the

ECO

FIN

com

mitt

ees

and

in th

e pl

enar

y se

ssio

ns, a

nd s

ome

prov

ince

s ha

ve ta

ken

subs

tanti

al in

itiati

ves,

suc

h as

pro

vidi

ng

civi

l soc

iety

with

fully

-equ

ippe

d bu

ildin

gs a

nd m

eans

of

tran

spor

t.

The

Foru

m fo

r Citi

zen

Parti

cipa

tion,

the

char

ter o

n th

e pa

rtici

pato

ry b

udge

t mec

hani

sm, t

rain

ing

cour

ses

on th

e pa

rtici

pato

ry b

udge

t and

coa

chin

g ac

tiviti

es a

re s

ome

of th

e m

any

oppo

rtun

ities

to e

nhan

ce tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd

parti

cipa

tion

at th

e pr

ovin

cial

leve

l.

The

Min

istr

y fo

r Dec

entr

alis

ation

, with

sup

port

from

the

PAD

L (L

ocal

Dev

elop

men

t Sup

port

Pro

ject

), ha

d cr

eate

d a

spac

e fo

r co

mm

unic

ation

for p

rovi

nces

on

a w

ebsi

te s

olel

y de

dica

ted

to th

e pr

ovin

ces.

The

site

has

bee

n do

wn

sinc

e th

e PA

DL

proj

ect c

ame

to

an e

nd.

The

expe

rien

ces

and

good

pra

ctice

s in

cer

tain

pro

vinc

es, w

hich

hav

e se

en a

n in

crea

se in

reve

nue

due

to p

ositi

ve c

olla

bora

tive

effor

ts

invo

lvin

g ci

vil s

ocie

ty, s

houl

d be

sha

red.


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Budg

et p

repa

ratio

n Pu

blish

the

budg

et st

rate

gy o

ne m

onth

be

fore

intr

oduc

ing

the

budg

et a

nd

send

ing

it to

the

Nati

onal

Ass

embl

y.

Unti

l the

201

6 Fi

nanc

e Ac

t was

dev

elop

ed, t

he s

trat

egy

docu

men

t was

the

gove

rnm

ent’s

pro

gram

me

tran

slat

ed in

to a

bud

get,

in th

e fo

rm o

f a b

udge

t pr

ogra

mm

e fo

r gov

ernm

ent a

ction

. As

such

, it i

s su

bmitt

ed to

the

gove

rnm

ent

for a

dopti

on a

t the

sam

e tim

e as

the

annu

al F

inan

ce B

ill.

As

soon

as

it is

ado

pted

, it i

s se

nt to

Par

liam

ent t

oget

her w

ith th

e ot

her

docu

men

ts.

Publ

ishi

ng th

e do

cum

ent o

ne m

onth

bef

ore

intr

oduc

ing

the

annu

al F

inan

ce B

ill

prov

ed n

ot to

be

poss

ible

.

As

from

201

7, th

e go

vern

men

t has

und

erta

ken

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f a m

ediu

m-t

erm

bud

get

fram

ewor

k (C

BMT)

as

a ro

lling

, thr

ee-y

ear b

udge

t pl

anni

ng to

ol, w

hich

is re

quire

d to

be

avai

labl

e as

par

t of t

he b

udge

t dev

elop

men

t pro

cess

. Th

e CB

MT

was

ado

pted

on

1 Ju

ne a

nd s

ent t

o Pa

rliam

ent.

It w

as, t

here

fore

, req

uire

d to

be

publ

ishe

d on

the

web

site

in Ju

ne.

Set t

he d

ates

for p

ress

con

fere

nces

re

latin

g to

the

budg

et in

adv

ance

.Pr

ess

conf

eren

ces

are

the

resp

onsi

bilit

y of

the

finan

ce a

nd b

udge

t min

iste

rs.

They

are

sup

pose

d to

take

pla

ce a

fter

the

adop

tion

of th

e Fi

nanc

e Bi

ll in

the

Coun

cil o

f Min

iste

rs.

Pres

s co

nfer

ence

s ar

e he

ld a

nd th

e pr

oced

ures

app

lied

are

thos

e us

ed to

invi

te

the

pres

s to

maj

or e

vent

s. T

he d

ate

for a

pre

ss c

onfe

renc

e is

dep

ende

nt o

n th

e fin

ding

s fr

om P

arlia

men

t’s re

view

of t

he F

inan

ce A

ct.

The

Dra

ft D

ecre

e on

Bud

geta

ry G

over

nanc

e ex

pres

sly

prov

ides

for t

hese

con

fere

nces

, whi

ch

are

thus

insti

tutio

nalis

ed. T

he p

ress

con

fere

nce

on

the

budg

et, w

hich

may

be

held

no

late

r tha

n tw

o da

ys a

fter

the

Fina

nce

Act h

as b

een

adop

ted,

or

durin

g th

e fir

st w

eek

of Ja

nuar

y if

the

Fina

nce

Act

has

not b

een

adop

ted.

Reas

sess

the

proc

ess f

or d

evel

opin

g th

e in

vest

men

t bud

get s

o as

to ta

ke

budg

etar

y co

nstr

aint

s int

o ac

coun

t.

Befo

re th

e bu

dget

circ

ular

from

the

Min

iste

r for

the

Budg

et is

pub

lishe

d, h

is

colle

ague

in th

e M

inis

try

of P

lann

ing

publ

ishe

s a

budg

et c

ircul

ar to

pro

vide

a

fram

ewor

k fo

r the

cap

ital e

xpen

ditu

re fo

reca

st. T

his

circ

ular

con

tain

s in

form

ation

and

a p

roje

ct o

utlin

e in

tend

ed to

be

used

by

the

budg

etar

y ac

tors

in

the

rele

vant

min

istr

ies

and

insti

tutio

ns to

pre

pare

the

inve

stm

ent b

udge

t.

A co

py o

f the

circ

ular

is fi

led

with

the

DPS

B.

The

2017

circ

ular

was

sig

ned

on 1

0 M

ay 2

016,

and

the

vari

ous

sect

ors

wer

e in

vite

d to

sub

mit

thei

r for

ecas

ts to

the

Min

istr

ies

for P

lann

ing

and

the

Budg

et.

The

DCB

(Min

istr

y fo

r Bud

geta

ry C

ontr

ol) a

naly

ses

the

sect

oral

fore

cast

s in

the

light

of t

he d

iscu

ssio

ns in

the

budg

et c

onfe

renc

es. I

n th

e co

nfer

ence

s, h

owev

er,

the

‘inve

stm

ent’

sec

tion

is th

e la

st to

be

exam

ined

and

dis

cuss

ed la

st, a

nd th

en

only

for a

few

min

utes

, bec

ause

the

parti

cipa

nts

are

tired

and

in a

hur

ry to

leav

e.

To im

prov

e fo

reca

sts,

min

istr

ies

and

insti

tutio

ns a

re e

ncou

rage

d to

use

a

‘pre

-inve

stm

ent’

bud

get s

ectio

n: in

tend

ed fo

r stu

dies

to e

nsur

e a

grea

ter

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

cost

s in

volv

ed o

r the

feas

ibili

ty o

f pro

ject

s, s

o th

at s

ecto

ral

acto

rs h

ave

wel

l-doc

umen

ted

inve

stm

ent p

roje

cts.

Offi

cial

s in

the

Min

istr

y of

Pla

nnin

g in

tend

to

deve

lop

a pu

blic

inve

stm

ent p

rogr

amm

e (P

IP),

whi

ch w

ill b

e an

eff

ectiv

e to

ol fo

r bud

get p

lann

ing.

As

part

of t

his

plan

, a c

onsu

ltant

is e

xpec

ted

to

be re

crui

ted

to p

rodu

ce a

gui

de fo

r dev

elop

ing

the

PIP,

to tr

ain

staff

on

how

to u

se th

e gu

ide

and

to w

ork

with

the

acto

rs in

volv

ed in

dev

elop

ing

an e

ffec

tive

docu

men

t, w

hich

allo

ws

the

mos

t pr

oduc

tive

proj

ects

to b

e ta

ken

into

acc

ount

to a

gr

eate

r deg

ree.


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Budg

et p

repa

ratio

n St

reng

then

the

invo

lvem

ent o

f sec

tora

l m

inis

trie

s in

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f the

bu

dget

.

Parti

cipa

tion

on th

e pa

rt o

f min

istr

ies

is g

aine

d th

roug

h th

e su

ppor

t giv

en to

the

budg

et m

anag

emen

t uni

t by

the

sub-

man

ager

s fo

r app

ropr

iatio

ns fr

om th

e D

PSB

in p

ositi

ons

at m

inis

trie

s an

d in

stitu

tions

.

The

mem

bers

of t

he b

udge

t man

agem

ent u

nit,

mad

e up

of t

he S

ecre

tary

G

ener

al, t

he F

inan

cial

Adv

isor

to th

e M

inis

ter,

the

DEP

, the

Dire

ctor

of G

ener

al

Serv

ices

, and

the

Budg

et C

ontr

olle

r, ta

ke p

art i

n bu

dget

con

fere

nces

at w

hich

th

ey s

peak

abo

ut th

e sp

ecifi

c is

sues

that

con

cern

thei

r dep

artm

ents

.

Poor

bud

get m

anag

emen

t (fr

eeze

s on

ap

prop

riatio

ns p

reve

nting

them

from

bei

ng u

sed

in c

erta

in m

inis

trie

s an

d in

stitu

tions

, and

bei

ng

used

inst

ead

in o

ther

s, w

hich

see

an

expo

nenti

al

use

of b

udge

t app

ropr

iatio

ns) r

esul

ts in

a la

ck

of m

otiva

tion

on th

e pa

rt o

f sec

tora

l act

ors

to p

rovi

de fo

reca

sts

for e

xpen

ditu

re. T

heir

parti

cipa

tion

is m

erel

y a

form

alit

y.

Invo

lve

civi

l soc

iety

in th

e w

ork

of

plan

ning

and

dev

elop

ing

sect

oral

dra

ft bu

dget

s.

Parti

cipa

tion

and

invo

lvem

ent i

s sti

ll lim

ited

to a

few

dyn

amic

gro

ups

in c

ivil

soci

ety,

with

sha

red

conc

erns

, fro

m s

ecto

rs s

uch

as h

ealth

, edu

catio

n an

d la

w

enfo

rcem

ent.

In a

dditi

on, c

ivil

soci

ety

parti

cipa

tes

exte

nsiv

ely

in b

udge

t ori

enta

tion

deba

tes

and

budg

et c

onfe

renc

es.

The

real

diffi

cult

y fa

cing

civ

il so

ciet

y is

sup

port

for

its

activ

ities

. With

out i

ts o

wn

reso

urce

s, it

turn

s to

th

e st

ate

and

its

part

ners

.

Ther

e is

, thu

s, a

nee

d fo

r the

sta

te a

nd it

s de

velo

pmen

t par

tner

s to

find

a s

oluti

on s

o th

at

civi

l soc

iety

can

car

ry o

ut it

s m

issi

on a

nd d

o so

in

depe

nden

tly.

Com

ply

with

the

agen

da fo

r pre

parin

g th

e bu

dget

in o

rder

to h

ave

time

to e

ngag

e ci

tizen

s and

mee

t leg

al

dead

lines

.

Effor

ts h

ave

been

mad

e ov

er th

e pa

st t

wo

year

s re

gard

ing

publ

ishi

ng th

e ci

rcul

ar.

The

Nati

onal

Ass

embl

y co

mm

ende

d th

e go

vern

men

t for

intr

oduc

ing

the

annu

al

Fina

nce

Bills

in ti

me.

How

ever

, the

pol

itica

l situ

ation

can

resu

lt in

dis

rupti

ons

to

the

sche

dule

, as

was

the

case

for t

he 2

017

fore

cast

, whi

ch w

as in

trod

uced

on

25

Oct

ober

201

6.

The

prin

cipa

l ste

ps in

the

sche

dule

for b

udge

tary

wor

k (t

he o

rien

tatio

n se

min

ar

in Ju

ly a

nd b

udge

t con

fere

nces

in A

ugus

t) a

re n

ot a

lway

s re

spec

ted.

Thi

s ha

s a

nega

tive

impa

ct o

n th

e tim

e pe

riod

s al

loca

ted

to m

inis

trie

s an

d in

stitu

tions

to

deve

lop

thei

r pre

limin

ary

budg

et p

roje

cts,

giv

en th

e da

tes

on w

hich

the

budg

et

circ

ular

is s

ent o

ut.

The

budg

et c

ircul

ars

for t

he la

st th

ree

tax

year

s (2

015,

201

6 an

d 20

17) w

ere

draw

n up

on

19 Ju

ne 2

014,

26

June

201

5, a

nd 1

8 Ju

ne 2

016,

resp

ectiv

ely.

Som

etim

es, b

efor

e th

ey a

re o

ffici

ally

pub

lishe

d, th

ere

are

alre

ady

dead

lines

in

the

vari

ous

sche

dule

s, w

hich

hav

e no

t bee

n m

et, c

once

rnin

g th

e pl

an fo

r pr

epar

ator

y ac

tiviti

es in

the

circ

ular

s.

The

sign

ing

of th

e do

cum

ents

is s

ubje

ct to

the

min

iste

r’s s

ched

ule.

The

Dra

ft D

ecre

e on

Gov

erna

nce

incl

udes

pe

rman

ent d

eadl

ines

to a

llow

for a

ste

adie

r sc

hedu

le fo

r bud

get p

repa

ratio

n.

The

budg

et c

ircul

ar w

ould

be

limite

d ac

cord

ing

to th

e pr

actic

al p

roce

dure

s an

d in

dica

tors

for

deve

lopi

ng b

udge

ts.


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

budg

et

Prep

are

and

publ

ish a

Mid

-Yea

r Rep

ort

The

publ

ishe

d do

cum

ent d

oes

not c

ompl

y w

ith th

e st

anda

rds

requ

ired

by

the

IBP.

It is

not

a M

id-Y

ear R

epor

t, bu

t a B

udge

t Exe

cutio

n Re

port

with

a fe

w

addi

tiona

l com

men

ts.

In fa

ct, i

t is

inte

nded

that

the

curr

ent d

ocum

ent b

e se

nt to

Par

liam

ent t

oget

her

with

the

annu

al F

inan

ce A

ct.

CORE

F sh

ould

org

anis

e a

wor

ksho

p br

ingi

ng

toge

ther

civ

il so

ciet

y an

d th

e re

leva

nt

adm

inis

trati

ons

to a

ppro

ve th

e co

nten

t of t

he

eigh

t key

doc

umen

ts re

quire

d by

the

IBP,

and

ot

her p

ublis

hed

docu

men

ts.

Publ

ish fi

nanc

ial a

nd n

on-fi

nanc

ial

info

rmati

on re

latin

g to

the

payr

oll,

by m

akin

g a

mon

thly

ann

ounc

emen

t th

at sa

larie

s hav

e be

en p

aid,

and

by

pub

lishi

ng th

e na

mes

of t

he

empl

oyee

s.

Fina

ncia

l inf

orm

ation

rela

ting

to th

e pa

yrol

l and

the

nam

es o

f em

ploy

ees

are

not

bein

g co

mm

unic

ated

to th

e or

gani

satio

ns re

spon

sibl

e fo

r pay

ing

sala

ries

(ban

ks

and

acco

unts

dep

artm

ents

). Th

ere

is n

ow a

sin

gle

file,

aft

er th

e pr

oces

s be

gun

in

2014

to m

erge

sev

eral

file

s.

This

file

con

tain

s a

mon

thly

a li

st in

dica

ting

the

tota

l pay

roll

that

has

bee

n pa

id,

as w

ell a

s na

mes

and

sta

ff n

umbe

rs fo

r the

min

istr

ies

and

insti

tutio

ns c

once

rned

.

The

nam

es, t

here

fore

, are

ava

ilabl

e, b

ut th

ey c

anno

t be

publ

ishe

d on

the

web

site

du

e to

the

larg

e vo

lum

e (1

098

166

gov

ernm

ent o

ffici

als

in 2

016)

.

Paym

ents

are

mad

e fr

om th

e 15

th o

f eac

h m

onth

, with

the

syst

em g

ivin

g offi

cial

s th

e ab

ility

to e

nqui

re v

ia S

MS

abou

t the

ir si

tuati

on, i

n pa

rticu

lar t

o m

ake

sure

th

at th

ey a

re o

n th

e lis

t.

In th

e ev

ent o

f a p

robl

em w

ith p

aym

ents

, offi

cial

s ar

e in

form

ed b

y m

eans

of a

fo

rm, d

esig

ned

by th

e Pa

yrol

l Dep

artm

ent,

whi

ch is

sen

t to

them

.

Impl

emen

t the

pro

visio

ns o

f the

LO

FIP

whi

ch p

rovi

de fo

r pro

visio

nal

appr

opria

tions

with

rega

rd to

act

s of

war

and

disa

ster

s.

The

LOFI

P an

d th

e bu

dget

cla

ssifi

catio

ns h

ave

prov

ided

for t

hese

issu

es, w

hich

ar

e re

gula

rly

gran

ted

appr

opria

tions

and

this

has

bee

n th

e ca

se fo

r sev

eral

yea

rs:

expe

nditu

re re

latin

g to

sec

urit

y (s

peci

al fu

nds

for i

nter

venti

on),

and

disa

ster

s an

d ca

tast

roph

es (f

or h

uman

itaria

n in

terv

entio

n).

Thes

e ap

prop

riatio

ns m

ay b

e us

ed o

nly

whe

n th

e ev

ent f

or w

hich

they

are

inte

nded

occ

urs.

U

nfor

tuna

tely

, the

se re

sour

ces

are

som

etim

es

used

as

rese

rve

appr

opria

tions

, and

som

etim

es

with

out r

eadj

ustin

g th

e bu

dget

.

The

prob

lem

lies

with

the

fact

that

im

plem

enta

tion

proc

edur

es a

re n

ot a

pplie

d. T

hus,

th

is is

a m

atter

of p

oliti

cal w

ill.

Appl

y th

e pr

ovisi

ons o

f the

LO

FIP

with

re

gard

to th

e tr

ansf

er a

nd p

aym

ent o

f ap

prop

riatio

ns

––


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

budg

et

Publ

ish c

ompr

ehen

sive

info

rmati

on

on p

ublic

pro

cure

men

t, in

tim

e (in

pa

rticu

lar,

invi

tatio

ns to

tend

er,

cont

ract

s, e

tc.)

The

ARM

P (P

ublic

Pro

cure

men

t Reg

ulat

ory

Auth

orit

y) h

as a

lega

l obl

igati

on to

pu

blis

h: (i

) the

pro

cure

men

t pla

n; (i

i) th

e D

AO (t

ende

r doc

umen

ts),

a m

inim

um o

f on

e m

onth

pri

or to

the

subm

issi

on o

f ten

ders

; (iii

) pro

visi

onal

noti

ficati

on w

ith

info

rmati

on re

latin

g to

com

petit

ors

on th

e gr

ound

s fo

r rej

ectio

n or

the

reas

on

for n

on-a

ccep

tanc

e; (i

v) th

e ke

y in

form

ation

on

the

sign

ed c

ontr

act fi

ve d

ays

after

the

publ

icati

on o

f pro

visi

onal

noti

ficati

on; a

nd (v

) the

enti

re c

ontr

act,

in th

e ca

se o

f a n

egoti

ated

con

trac

t.

It is

als

o re

quire

d to

mak

e th

e m

inut

es o

f the

pub

lic o

peni

ng s

essi

on a

vaila

ble

to

the

tend

erer

s.

Info

rmati

on o

n pu

blic

pro

cure

men

t is

publ

ishe

d on

the

ARM

P w

ebsi

te,

in p

artic

ular

the

tend

er d

ocum

ents

and

the

resu

lts

from

the

asse

ssm

ent

com

mitt

ees.

How

ever

, som

e co

ntra

cts

are

agre

ed o

n w

ithou

t go

ing

thro

ugh

the

orga

nisa

tions

pro

vide

d fo

r th

is, n

otab

ly th

e pu

blic

pro

cure

men

t com

mitt

ee,

and

are

not l

iste

d. O

ther

s ar

e ag

reed

on

thro

ugh

nego

tiatio

n an

d ar

e no

t dis

clos

ed o

r pub

lishe

d.

For t

he la

test

com

plet

ed ta

x ye

ars,

the

valu

e of

ne

gotia

ted

cont

ract

s is

as

follo

ws:

201

3 –

5.65

per

ce

nt; 2

014

– 16

.92

per c

ent;

and

201

5 –

59.4

7

The

fact

that

regu

latio

ns fo

r pub

lic p

rocu

rem

ent

are

not c

ompl

ied

with

cal

ls in

to q

uesti

on th

e cr

edib

ility

of t

he in

form

ation

that

is p

ublis

hed

(as

not c

ompr

ehen

sive

) and

the

tran

spar

ency

of

publ

ic p

rocu

rem

ent.

Incl

ude

civi

l soc

iety

in th

e sy

stem

s for

m

onito

ring

and

asse

ssin

g pr

ojec

ts in

th

e fie

ld.

Civi

l soc

iety

is o

nly

occa

sion

ally

and

irre

gula

rly

invo

lved

in a

ctivi

ties

for

mon

itorin

g pr

ojec

ts in

the

field

.

Ther

e is

not

yet

an

offici

al d

ocum

ent p

rovi

ding

a fr

amew

ork

for t

he p

lann

ed

invo

lvem

ent r

efer

red

to in

the

Dra

ft D

ecre

e on

Gov

erna

nce.

The

vie

w h

eld

by

the

IGF

is th

at th

is in

volv

emen

t is

impo

rtan

t for

con

trol

ling

publ

ic fi

nanc

e an

d pr

oper

ty.

How

ever

, the

lack

of s

uffici

ent fi

nanc

ial r

esou

rces

is a

lim

iting

fact

or.

Ther

e is

a n

eed

for t

he s

tate

and

its

deve

lopm

ent

part

ners

to fi

nd a

sol

ution

so

that

civ

il so

ciet

y m

ay

carr

y ou

t its

mis

sion

, and

do

so in

depe

nden

tly.

It w

ould

be

wis

e to

furt

her c

lari

fy th

e ov

ertu

res

mad

e on

this

issu

e in

the

Dra

ft D

ecre

e on

Bu

dget

ary

Gov

erna

nce.

Crea

te fo

rmal

ised

fram

ewor

ks fo

r cr

itici

sm, t

o al

low

civ

il so

ciet

y to

co

ntrib

ute

to th

e im

prov

emen

t of P

FM.

Criti

cism

is a

form

of p

artic

ipati

on. C

ritic

ism

, peti

tioni

ng in

par

ticul

ar, i

s pr

ovid

ed

for i

n a

gene

ral s

ense

in th

e pr

ovis

ions

of t

he C

onsti

tutio

n.

No

mea

sure

s ha

ve b

een

take

n in

rela

tion

to th

is re

com

men

datio

n.

The

IGF

stat

utes

pro

vide

for c

ritic

ism

to b

e ta

ken

into

acc

ount

.

Lack

of p

oliti

cal w

ill.

Ther

e is

a n

eed

to fo

rmal

ise

and

clar

ify th

e re

fere

nces

in th

e Co

nstit

ution

in th

e D

raft

Dec

ree

on B

udge

tary

Gov

erna

nce,

the

code

of g

ood

cond

uct f

or c

ivil

soci

ety,

etc

.

How

ever

, the

ris

ks o

f tar

gete

d/tr

ivia

l den

unci

ation

sh

ould

not

be

unde

resti

mat

ed.


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

budg

et

Publ

ish th

e qu

arte

rly re

port

on

inve

stm

ents

mad

e.Th

ere

is a

Dep

artm

ent f

or th

e Co

ntro

l and

Mon

itorin

g of

Inve

stm

ents

in th

e M

inis

try

of P

lann

ing,

but

it d

oes

not a

lway

s m

anag

e to

get

out

into

the

field

and

w

hen

it do

es, i

t cov

ers

only

a fe

w p

rovi

nces

.

The

Plan

ning

and

Bud

getin

g D

epar

tmen

t als

o or

gani

ses

cont

rol m

issi

ons

in th

e fie

ld to

see

the

actu

al p

roje

cts

them

selv

es, a

nd th

e de

gree

to w

hich

they

hav

e be

en c

arri

ed o

ut, a

nd ir

regu

lari

ties

are

often

dis

cove

red.

Due

to a

lack

of m

eans

, ho

wev

er, s

uch

mis

sion

s aff

ect o

nly

a fe

w p

rovi

nces

and

do

not t

ake

plac

e ev

ery

year

.

The

repo

rts

on th

ese

orga

nisa

tions

wer

e pu

blis

hed

on th

e w

ebsi

te o

f the

M

inis

try

of P

lann

ing,

but

it is

no

long

er u

p an

d ru

nnin

g.

Publ

ishi

ng E

SBs

on a

qua

rter

ly b

asis

sho

uld

be e

noug

h, b

ut th

e re

port

s of

ass

ets

are

not e

xhau

stive

due

to th

e si

gnifi

cant

am

ount

s fa

lling

out

side

the

expe

nditu

re

cycl

e .

The

mul

titud

e of

dep

artm

ents

resp

onsi

ble

for m

onito

ring,

in th

e co

ntex

t of t

here

be

ing

insu

ffici

ent r

esou

rces

for r

unni

ng th

e de

part

men

ts, r

esul

ts in

ineff

ectiv

enes

s an

d in

effici

ency

.

Unti

l the

re is

a g

reat

er r

ation

alis

ation

of t

he

insti

tutio

nal i

nves

tmen

t man

agem

ent f

ram

ewor

k (e

.g. u

ntil a

n or

gani

satio

n re

spon

sibl

e fo

r m

anag

ing

the

PIP

is c

reat

ed),

reso

urce

s sh

ould

be

pool

ed, e

spec

ially

with

rega

rd to

goi

ng in

to th

e fie

ld fo

r mon

itorin

g an

d co

ntro

l pur

pose

s.

To s

tren

gthe

n in

vest

men

t dis

cipl

ine,

esp

ecia

lly

for i

nves

tmen

ts fu

nded

usi

ng e

xter

nal r

esou

rces

, it

wou

ld b

e be

nefic

ial t

o ha

ve a

pro

visi

on in

the

year

ly F

inan

ce A

ct p

rohi

bitin

g th

e ca

rryi

ng o

ut o

f an

y ac

tiviti

es n

ot li

sted

in th

e St

ate

Budg

et.

Set u

p a

mec

hani

sm fo

r mon

itorin

g th

e PI

P.

Ensu

re th

at th

e w

ebsi

te M

inis

try

for P

lann

ing

is

onlin

e.


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Acco

untin

g an

d fin

anci

al re

port

sDi

gitis

e an

d in

terc

onne

ct a

ll de

part

men

ts in

the

chai

n of

ex

pend

iture

, inc

ludi

ng th

e DR

GC

(Gen

eral

Acc

ount

abili

ty D

epar

tmen

t).

All d

epar

tmen

ts in

the

chai

n of

exp

endi

ture

are

inte

rcon

nect

ed. T

he D

RGC,

ho

wev

er is

not

par

t of t

he c

hain

of e

xpen

ditu

re.

Disc

lose

the

repo

rt a

t the

end

of t

he

tax

year

.Th

e re

port

for t

he e

nd o

f the

tax

year

is p

ublis

hed

only

in th

e G

azett

e, w

hich

, in

prin

cipl

e, m

ust b

e bo

ught

. It i

s no

t pub

lishe

d on

the

min

istr

y w

ebsi

te.

Rais

e th

e aw

aren

ess

in a

dmin

istr

ation

s of

the

cons

eque

nces

of n

ot p

ublis

hing

the

repo

rt,

and

regu

late

the

prod

uctio

n an

d pu

blic

ation

of

doc

umen

ts a

s pr

opos

ed a

bove

(see

the

first

ho

rizon

tal r

ecom

men

datio

n on

str

engt

heni

ng

publ

ic a

cces

s to

info

rmati

on).

Set u

p a

natio

nal n

etw

ork

of p

ublic

ac

coun

tant

s, a

nd p

ublis

h al

l the

repo

rts

prod

uced

by

this

netw

ork.

A ne

twor

k of

pub

lic a

ccou

ntan

ts w

orth

y of

the

nam

e ha

s no

t bee

n se

t up

in

the

DRC

. The

acc

ount

ants

cur

rent

ly in

the

Publ

ic A

ccou

nts

Dep

artm

ent a

re n

ot

suffi

cien

tly in

volv

ed in

the

proc

ess

for e

xpen

ditu

re (p

aym

aste

rs) a

nd d

o no

t hav

e th

e re

quire

d in

form

ation

on

the

man

agem

ent o

f the

bud

get,

whi

ch is

hel

d in

par

t by

the

Trea

sury

and

Pay

men

t Aut

horis

ation

Dep

artm

ent.

A na

tiona

l net

wor

k of

pub

lic a

ccou

ntan

ts is

in th

e pr

oces

s of

bei

ng s

et u

p. It

is d

epen

dent

on

the

sign

ing

of th

e D

raft

Dec

ree

on th

e Cr

eatio

n of

the

Gen

eral

Dire

ctor

ate

of P

ublic

Acc

ount

s, o

f whi

ch it

is

an

exte

nsio

n. T

his

proj

ect h

as b

een

subm

itted

to

the

rele

vant

gov

ernm

enta

l bod

ies.

Prod

uce

and

publ

ish th

e re

port

on

the

man

agem

ent o

f sta

te p

ublic

fina

nces

, pu

blic

pro

pert

y, a

nd th

e ac

coun

ts fo

r th

e pr

ovin

ces,

ETD

s and

gov

ernm

ent

bodi

es.

A re

port

on

the

man

agem

ent o

f sta

te p

ublic

fina

nces

, pub

lic p

rope

rty,

and

th

e ac

coun

ts fo

r the

pro

vinc

es, E

TDs

and

gove

rnm

ent b

odie

s ha

s no

t yet

bee

n pu

blis

hed.

This

repo

rt h

as n

ot b

een

prod

uced

.

The

LOFI

P pr

ovid

ed fo

r the

Con

solid

ation

Act

, w

hich

brin

gs to

geth

er th

e bu

dget

s of

the

cent

ral

gove

rnm

ent a

nd th

e pr

ovin

ces

with

rega

rd to

bo

th fo

reca

sting

and

impl

emen

tatio

n. T

he F

inan

ce

Acts

and

bud

get d

ecre

es a

re c

ontr

olle

d by

the

Cour

t of A

udito

rs, w

hich

mor

e ge

nera

lly c

ontr

ols

publ

ic fi

nanc

es a

nd p

rope

rty.

Fro

m a

tech

nica

l and

le

gal p

oint

of v

iew

, it i

s po

ssib

le to

dev

elop

this

do

cum

ent.

As

thin

gs s

tand

at p

rese

nt, p

rodu

cing

it

wou

ld b

e di

fficu

lt be

caus

e of

an

issu

e ar

ound

re

liabl

e in

form

ation

bei

ng a

vaila

ble

due

to p

oor

publ

ic a

ccou

nting

, and

esp

ecia

lly b

ecau

se o

f the

ne

ar-a

bsen

ce o

f mat

eria

l acc

ounti

ng.

Rest

ruct

urin

g pu

blic

pro

pert

y an

d fin

ance

m

anag

emen

t in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith th

e pr

ovis

ions

of

the

LOFI

P an

d th

e RG

CP (G

ener

al P

ublic

Ac

coun

ting

Regu

latio

ns) s

houl

d en

able

us

to fi

nd a

so

lutio

n to

this

pro

blem

.


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Acco

untin

g an

d fin

anci

al re

port

sPu

blish

all

spec

ific

Audi

t Rep

orts

.U

nder

the

Cons

tituti

on (A

rticl

e 18

0) th

e An

nual

Rep

ort f

rom

the

Cour

t of

Acco

unts

may

be

publ

ishe

d, b

ut it

has

not

yet

bee

n pr

oduc

ed

All s

peci

fic A

udit

Repo

rts

from

the

Cour

t of A

udito

rs a

re to

be

prod

uced

and

pu

blis

hed

in th

e G

azett

e, b

ut n

ot o

n a

web

site

.

The

Cour

t of A

udito

rs h

as a

web

site

, but

it d

oes

not p

ublis

h es

senti

al d

ocum

ents

on

the

site

and

do

es n

ot m

aint

ain

the

site

pro

perl

y. In

fact

, the

si

te h

as n

ot w

orke

d si

nce

the

expi

ratio

n of

the

web

site

hos

ting

cont

ract

initi

ally

take

n up

by

an F

TP. T

o pr

oduc

e it

s do

cum

ents

, it p

rints

and

th

en d

istr

ibut

es th

em to

the

rele

vant

peo

ple

and

depa

rtm

ents

.

Her

e, th

e is

sue

rega

rdin

g m

akin

g do

cum

ents

pu

blic

on

web

site

s is

a c

ultu

ral o

ne.

The

Pres

iden

t of t

he C

ourt

of A

udito

rs p

lans

to

rest

ore

the

Cour

t’s w

ebsi

te in

ord

er to

pub

lish

all

repo

rts

prod

uced

by

the

insti

tutio

n on

the

site

.

Prod

uce

and

publ

ish th

e Co

mm

enta

ry

on th

e Ac

coun

tabi

lity

Bill.

The

Com

men

tary

on

the

Acco

unta

bilit

y Bi

ll is

pro

duce

d an

d pu

blis

hed

in th

e G

azett

e, b

ut n

ot o

n a

web

site

.

The

situ

ation

is a

s fo

llow

s:20

13: B

ill in

trod

uced

on

13 Ju

ne 2

014,

and

obs

erva

tions

sen

t to

Parli

amen

t on

22

Sept

embe

r20

14: B

ill in

trod

uced

on

03 S

epte

mbe

r 201

1, a

nd o

bser

vatio

ns s

ent t

o Pa

rliam

ent o

n 29

Sep

tem

ber

2015

: Bill

intr

oduc

ed o

n 30

Aug

ust 2

016,

and

obs

erva

tions

sen

t to

Parli

amen

t on

26 O

ctob

er

See

the

com

men

ts a

nd re

com

men

datio

ns re

latin

g to

pro

duci

ng a

nd p

ublis

hing

repo

rts.

Publ

ish th

e re

sults

of a

ction

take

n by

th

e IG

F.Th

e IG

F pr

oduc

es: (

i) it

s ac

tion

prog

ram

me,

sub

mitt

ed to

the

supe

rvis

ory

auth

orit

y fo

r app

rova

l; (ii

) qua

rter

ly re

port

s; a

nd (i

ii) a

n an

nual

repo

rt.

Non

e is

pub

lishe

d in

the

Gaz

ette,

or i

n an

y m

edia

inte

nded

for t

he p

ublic

.

The

IGF

does

not

pub

lish

its

Audi

t Rep

orts

on

any

web

site

s. T

hey

are

inte

nded

fo

r the

sup

ervi

sory

aut

hori

ty a

nd th

e au

dit s

pons

or.

No

tech

nica

l, or

gani

satio

nal o

r man

ager

ial

obst

acle

s re

stri

ct p

ublic

ation

, bey

ond

a ce

rtai

n id

ea o

f eth

ics

and

a du

ty o

f res

erve

in th

e IG

F.

The

publ

icati

on o

f the

IGF

repo

rts

shou

ld b

e ra

ised

du

ring

the

disc

ussi

ons

on th

e pr

oduc

tion

and

publ

icati

on o

f rep

orts

, in

parti

cula

r the

pro

ducti

on

of q

uart

erly

, bi-a

nnua

l and

ann

ual r

epor

ts, i

n th

e ap

prop

riate

ver

sion

s.

The

findi

ngs

are

to b

e tr

ansl

ated

into

the

regu

lato

ry te

xt p

lann

ed fo

r thi

s pu

rpos

e.


APPENDICES

Spec

ific

reco

mm

enda

tions

Inco

rpor

ating

fore

ign

aid

Set u

p a

perm

anen

t fra

mew

ork

for

cons

ulta

tion

betw

een

spon

sors

’ ag

enci

es, t

he P

GAI

, the

DPS

B, th

e CS

P (S

hare

d Se

rvic

es C

entr

e) a

nd

the

sect

oral

min

istr

ies i

n or

der t

o im

prov

e th

e fo

rmat

for t

he e

xcha

nge

of

info

rmati

on in

rela

tion

to th

e ne

eds o

f va

rious

gov

ernm

ent u

sers

.

Enco

urag

ed b

y a

deve

lopm

ent p

artn

er, t

he W

orld

Ban

k, th

e go

vern

men

t has

ad

opte

d an

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Ord

er o

n Co

-ord

inati

ng th

e Ac

tors

in th

e Ar

ea o

f Ex

tern

al R

esou

rces

.

The

orde

r doe

s no

t tak

e in

to a

ccou

nt a

min

istr

y in

volv

ed in

man

agin

g ex

tern

al

reso

urce

s, w

hich

has

cre

ated

diffi

culti

es fo

r its

app

licati

on.

Anot

her d

ifficu

lty

is a

feel

ing

amon

gst s

ome

FTPs

that

they

are

vie

wed

as

civi

l se

rvan

ts re

spon

sibl

e fo

r im

plem

entin

g go

vern

men

t dec

isio

ns w

ith s

peci

fical

ly

requ

ired

resp

onse

tim

es.

The

PGAI

is a

dat

a ba

nk th

at s

uppl

ies

the

platf

orm

via

the

Inte

rnet

.

At fi

rst,

foca

l poi

nts

from

the

min

istr

ies

in c

harg

e of

Fin

ance

, the

Bud

get,

Co-

oper

ation

, som

e pr

ovin

ces

(e.g

. sup

plie

s ac

quire

d an

d offi

cial

s tr

aine

d) a

nd F

TPs

exch

ange

d in

form

ation

.

With

con

necti

vity

issu

es, d

ue to

low

ban

dwid

th, v

ario

us a

ctor

s ha

ve a

band

oned

th

e pl

atfor

m.

The

DPB

(Pla

nnin

g an

d Bu

dgeti

ng D

epar

tmen

t), t

he D

epar

tmen

t for

the

Co-

ordi

natio

n of

Ext

erna

l Res

ourc

es a

nd th

e PG

AI d

o no

t wor

k to

geth

er s

uffici

ently

.

Inad

equa

te fi

nanc

ial a

nd m

ater

ial r

esou

rces

.

Spee

d up

the

adop

tion

of d

raft

dec

rees

and

the

draft

agr

eem

ent b

etw

een

the

gove

rnm

ent a

nd

FTPs

to a

llow

con

trol

led

inte

racti

on b

etw

een

the

PGAI

and

its

part

ners

, whi

ch a

re th

e be

nefic

iary

m

inis

trie

s an

d in

stitu

tions

and

the

FTPs

.

Stre

ngth

enin

g th

e sy

stem

for c

ompu

teris

ing

the

PGAI

.

Prov

ide

aid

info

rmati

on o

n th

e PG

AI o

n a

regu

lar b

asis

In th

e lig

ht o

f the

abo

ve, t

he s

ituati

on is

wor

seni

ng a

s tim

e pa

sses

. A

s ab

ove

Impl

emen

tatio

n ag

enci

esA

s ab

ove

Proj

ect u

nit

As

abov

e


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

2: 2

016

Actio

ns

Actio

nsIm

pact

Indi

cato

rs

of a

chie

vem

ent

Activ

ities

St

akeh

olde

rs9

Com

pleti

on

time

Leve

l of

com

plex

ity

A1. T

he p

repa

ratio

n an

d ap

prov

al

of a

Cha

rter

for T

rans

pare

ncy

and

Ethi

cs in

Pub

lic F

inan

ce, i

n or

der t

o pr

omot

e th

e va

lues

of g

ood

and

open

go

vern

ance

.

Very

hig

h Ch

arte

r co-

sign

ed b

y th

e va

riou

s st

akeh

olde

rs, a

nd

publ

ishe

d

Org

anis

ation

of d

iscu

ssio

ns

Cons

ulta

tion

and

co-o

rdin

ation

Appr

oval

dur

ing

the

roun

d ta

ble

disc

ussi

ons

Co-s

igni

ng o

f the

Cha

rter

Publ

icati

on a

nd d

istr

ibuti

on

CORE

F (L

)

CSO

s, th

e au

thor

ities

, FT

Ps

06 m

onth

sN

ot v

ery

com

plex

A2. T

he d

evel

opm

ent a

nd a

ppro

val o

f CS

Os’

vis

ion,

val

ues,

mis

sion

, str

ateg

y an

d ac

tion

plan

, whi

ch m

ap o

ut th

eir

deve

lopm

ent p

roje

cts,

in c

onsu

ltatio

n w

ith a

ll st

akeh

olde

rs.

Hig

h Vi

sion

, mis

sion

and

val

ues

disc

usse

d an

d ap

prov

ed,

co-s

igne

d by

CSO

s an

d pu

blis

hed

Stra

tegi

es a

nd a

ction

pla

ns

appr

oved

and

pub

lishe

d

Dis

cuss

ion

on th

e vi

sion

, mis

sion

and

val

ues

Appr

oval

, sig

ning

and

pub

licati

on

Dis

cuss

ions

on

the

stra

tegy

and

acti

on p

lan,

ap

prov

al a

nd p

ublic

ation

CSO

s (L

)

The

auth

oriti

es,

FTPs

06 m

onth

sN

ot v

ery

com

plex

A3. A

re-e

xam

inati

on o

f the

fund

ing

of C

SOs.

Lo

wRe

port

on

the

fund

ing

of

CSO

s in

the

DRC

The

orga

nisa

tion

of d

iscu

ssio

ns w

ith th

e go

vern

men

t and

CSO

s

Appr

oval

of t

he o

utlin

e an

d cr

iteria

for

CSO

fund

ing

Reco

rdin

g th

e ou

tline

and

cri

teria

for

CSO

fund

ing

in a

repo

rt

The

publ

icati

on o

f the

repo

rt

FTPs

(L)

Gro

upe

inte

r ba

illeu

rs (I

nter

-Sp

onso

r Gro

up)

(GIB

), th

e au

thor

ities

03 m

onth

sN

ot c

ompl

ex

A4. T

he e

stab

lishm

ent o

f a

prog

ram

me

for s

uppo

rting

civ

il so

ciet

y, a

nd a

man

agem

ent u

nit f

or

such

a p

rogr

amm

e.

Med

ium

Prog

ram

me

draw

n up

, sig

ned

and

the

man

agem

ent u

nit i

s op

erati

onal

Dis

cuss

ion

on th

e pr

ogra

mm

e co

mpo

nent

s

Iden

tifica

tion

and

form

ulati

on

The

sign

ing

of th

e pr

ogra

mm

e

Man

agem

ent u

nit s

et u

p (r

ecru

itmen

t, bu

dget

, pr

emis

es, w

ebsi

te u

p an

d ru

nnin

g, e

tc.)

EU (L

)

CSO

s, P

ublic

Fi

nanc

e G

IB,

CORE

F, th

e au

thor

ities

12 m

onth

sVe

ry

com

plex

A5. T

he c

reati

on o

f a p

latf

orm

(with

an

onl

ine

pres

ence

) ded

icat

ed to

Co

ngol

ese

civi

l soc

iety

(sta

rting

w

ith th

ose

actin

g in

the

area

of

gove

rnan

ce),

follo

win

g th

e ex

ampl

e of

ot

her c

ount

ries

.

Very

hig

hPl

atfor

m is

ope

ratio

nal

and

onlin

ePl

atfor

m a

dmin

istr

ation

uni

t set

up

Prov

isio

n of

pla

tfor

m m

anag

emen

t bud

get

Iden

tifica

tion

of th

e co

nten

t

Crea

tion

of th

e w

ebsi

te

Platf

orm

is o

nlin

e

WB

(L)

Oth

er F

TPs,

CS

Os,

CO

REF

12 m

onth

sCo

mpl

ex

9 Re

spon

sibi

lity

for

carr

ying

out

the

acti

on r

ests

wit

h th

e le

ad s

take

hold

er, i

ndic

ated

wit

h th

e le

tter

‘L’.


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

3: 2

016

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Impa

ctIn

dica

tors

of

ach

ieve

men

t St

akeh

olde

rsCo

mpl

etion

tim

eLe

vel o

f co

mpl

exit

y

R1. E

nsur

e th

at b

udge

t doc

umen

ts a

re p

rodu

ced

and

publ

ishe

d re

gula

rly,

sys

tem

atica

lly a

nd

on s

ched

ule.

Very

hig

h Re

ceiv

ing

high

er

scor

es in

the

next

O

BS

CORE

F (L

)

Min

istr

ies

for t

he B

udge

t, Fi

nanc

e,

and

the

Econ

omy,

PG

AI, D

GI (

the

gove

rnm

ent t

ax a

utho

rity

), D

GD

A (G

ener

al D

irect

orat

e of

Cus

tom

s an

d Ex

cise

), D

GRA

D (D

irect

orat

e G

ener

al

of A

dmin

istr

ative

, Jud

icia

l, La

nds

and

Parti

cipa

tion

Reve

nue)

, the

pro

vinc

es,

CSO

s

06 m

onth

sN

ot c

ompl

ex

R2. A

dapt

the

form

at o

f the

doc

umen

ts to

mak

e th

em c

ompa

tible

with

the

norm

s an

d st

anda

rds

requ

ired

by th

e IB

P.

Hig

h Re

ceiv

ing

high

er

scor

es in

the

next

O

BS

CSO

s (L

)

Min

istr

ies

for t

he B

udge

t, Fi

nanc

e, a

nd

Plan

ning

, PG

AI, t

he p

rovi

nces

06 m

onth

sN

ot c

ompl

ex

R3. M

ake

the

insti

tutio

ns th

at a

re re

spon

sibl

e fo

r the

pub

licati

on o

f the

doc

umen

ts th

at th

ey

prod

uce

awar

e of

thei

r res

pons

ibili

ties,

by

sign

ing

a jo

int o

rder

that

spe

cifie

s th

e re

spon

sibi

lities

an

d de

adlin

es re

latin

g to

the

prod

uctio

n an

d pu

blic

ation

of b

udge

t doc

umen

ts.

Med

ium

O

rder

s si

gned

FTPs

(L)

Min

istr

ies

for t

he B

udge

t, Fi

nanc

e,

and

Plan

ning

, BCC

(Cen

tral

Ban

k of

the

Cong

o), t

he p

rovi

nces

03 m

onth

sN

ot v

ery

com

plex

R4. G

ener

ally

pro

mot

e ci

tizen

par

ticip

ation

th

roug

hout

the

budg

et c

ycle

. Thi

s pa

rtici

patio

n m

ust b

e or

gani

sed,

and

its

fram

ewor

k de

cide

d on

.

Hig

h CS

O in

volv

ed in

th

e pr

oces

s fo

r m

onito

ring

and

asse

ssin

g pr

ojec

ts

EU (L

)

Oth

er F

TP, M

inis

trie

s fo

r the

Bud

get,

Fina

nce,

and

Pla

nnin

g, C

ORE

F, P

GAI

, CS

Os,

the

prov

ince

s

03 m

onth

s Co

mpl

ex

R5. H

old

regu

lar c

onsu

ltatio

n fr

amew

ork

mee

tings

, and

incl

ude

issu

es re

latin

g to

tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd p

artic

ipati

on a

s st

andi

ng it

ems

on m

eetin

g ag

enda

s.

Low

Min

utes

of t

he

mee

tings

that

are

or

gani

sed

WB

(L)

Oth

er F

TP, M

inis

trie

s fo

r the

Bud

get,

Fina

nce,

and

Pla

nnin

g, C

ORE

F, P

GAI

03 m

onth

s N

ot c

ompl

ex


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

4: P

rior

itisa

tion

of th

e 20

16 a

ction

s an

d re

com

men

datio

ns

Actio

ns a

nd re

com

men

datio

nsIm

pact

Com

plex

ity

5 4 3 2 1 00

12

34

5

1; 4

2; 4

2; 3

3; 4

3; 3

3; 2

4; 4

4; 3

4; 2

Complexity

Impa

ct

A14

3

A2

33

A3

14

A4

3

A5

42

R14

4

R23

4

R32

3

R43

2

R52

4Ra

ting

scal

e

Impa

ct: V

ery

high

(4) H

igh

(3) M

ediu

m (2

) Low

(1)

Le

vel o

f com

plex

ity:

Not

com

plex

(4) N

ot v

ery

com

plex

(3) C

ompl

ex (2

) Ver

y Co

mpl

ex (1

)

Hig

h-pr

iori

ty a

ctio

ns:

A1,

A2

Hig

h-pr

iori

ty r

ecom

men

dati

ons:

R1

, R2

Prio

rity

act

ions

: A

5Pr

iori

ty r

ecom

men

dati

ons:

R5

, R3,

R4

Low

-pri

orit

y ac

tion

s:

A3,

A4


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

5: S

ched

ule

for i

mpl

emen

ting

the

actio

ns a

nd re

com

men

datio

ns

S1 2

017

S2 2

017

S1 2

018

S2 2

018

A4

R1

R4

R2

R3

A1

R5

A2

A3

A5


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

6: T

he p

rodu

ction

and

pub

licati

on o

f bud

get d

ocum

ents

Doc

umen

t (R

ecom

men

ded

publ

icati

on d

ate/

dead

line)

Pr

oduc

edPu

blis

hed

Pre-

Budg

et R

epor

t (A

t le

ast

one

mon

th b

efor

e th

e ex

ecuti

ve b

udge

t pr

opos

al is

sub

mitt

ed to

the

Nati

onal

Ass

embl

y fo

r re

view

)Ye

sYe

s

Dra

ft E

xecu

tive

Budg

et

(May

be

publ

ishe

d w

hile

it is

bei

ng r

evie

wed

by

the

legi

slati

ve a

utho

rity

but

bef

ore

it is

app

rove

d)Ye

sYe

s

The

App

rove

d Bu

dget

(N

o la

ter

than

thr

ee m

onth

s aft

er it

s ap

prov

al b

y th

e le

gisl

atur

e)Ye

sYe

s

The

Citiz

ens’

Bud

get

(By

the

sam

e de

adlin

e as

for

the

docu

men

t to

whi

ch t

he C

itize

ns’ B

udge

t co

rres

pond

s (e

.g. t

he C

itize

ns’ B

udge

t fo

r th

e bu

dget

tha

t ha

s be

en a

dopt

ed m

ust

be m

ade

publ

ic n

o la

ter

than

thr

ee m

onth

s aft

er t

he b

udge

t is

app

rove

d by

the

le

gisl

atur

e)

Yes

Yes

In-Y

ear

Repo

rts

(No

late

r th

an t

hree

mon

ths

after

the

end

of t

he p

erio

d co

vere

d by

the

rep

ort)

Yes

Yes

Mid

-Yea

r Re

view

(N

o la

ter

than

thr

ee m

onth

s aft

er t

he e

nd o

f the

per

iod

cove

red

by t

he r

evie

w, i

n ot

her

wor

ds t

hree

mon

ths

after

the

m

iddl

e of

the

tax

yea

r)

Yes

(not

acc

ordi

ng to

the

re

quir

ed s

tand

ard)

N

o

Year

-end

rep

ort

(No

late

r th

an 1

2 m

onth

s aft

er t

he e

nd o

f the

tax

yea

r to

whi

ch it

rel

ates

)Ye

s N

o (p

ublis

hed

late

)

Audi

t Re

port

(N

o la

ter

than

18

mon

ths

after

the

end

of t

he t

ax y

ear

to w

hich

it r

elat

es)

Not

pro

duce

dN

o


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

7: T

he p

rodu

ction

and

pub

licati

on o

f doc

umen

ts –

the

team

’s ob

serv

ation

s

Doc

umen

t Th

e te

am’s

obse

rvati

ons

Pre-

Budg

et R

epor

tTh

e bu

dget

str

ateg

y do

cum

ent i

s sh

ared

and

dis

cuss

ed, b

ut is

not

sen

t to

the

legi

slat

ure

with

in th

e pr

escr

ibed

tim

e pe

riod

s.

Draft

Exe

cutiv

e Bu

dget

The

Fina

nce

Bill

is d

eem

ed to

be

the

Dra

ft E

xecu

tive

Budg

et. I

t doe

s no

t inc

lude

mul

ti-ye

ar e

xpen

ditu

re a

ccor

ding

to e

cono

mic

and

adm

inis

trati

ve

clas

sific

ation

s. It

als

o do

es n

ot in

clud

e a

mul

ti-ye

ar re

venu

e fo

reca

st b

y re

venu

e ca

tego

ry a

nd s

ourc

e. L

astly

, it d

oes

not i

nclu

de in

form

ation

on

the

com

posi

tion

of th

e de

bt a

t the

beg

inni

ng a

nd e

nd o

f the

bud

get y

ear.

The

Appr

oved

Bud

get

The

obse

rvati

ons

(of w

eakn

esse

s) m

ade

in re

spec

t of t

he D

raft

Exe

cutiv

e Bu

dget

als

o ap

ply

to th

e Ap

prov

ed B

udge

t.

The

Citiz

ens’

Bud

get

The

Citiz

ens’

Bud

get (

BC) i

s pu

blis

hed

late

.

The

BC is

too

tech

nica

l. It

mus

t be

unde

rsta

ndab

le to

bot

h th

ose

with

an

expe

rt k

now

ledg

e an

d th

ose

with

a la

yper

son’

s kn

owle

dge

of p

ublic

fin

ance

. The

BC

mus

t pro

vide

exa

mpl

es a

nd d

efini

tions

for t

he fe

w te

chni

cal t

erm

s us

ed.

The

BC w

ould

ben

efit f

rom

bei

ng m

ore

user

-fri

endl

y an

d ap

peal

ing,

and

mus

t con

tain

det

ails

of t

he a

utho

ritie

s (d

epar

tmen

ts o

r peo

ple)

to b

e co

ntac

ted

for f

urth

er in

form

ation

.

In-Y

ear R

epor

tsTh

e Bu

dget

Exe

cutio

n Re

port

s (E

SBs)

can

be

cons

ider

ed to

be

In-Y

ear R

epor

ts. T

heir

cont

ent m

ust b

e im

prov

ed b

y de

velo

ping

the

anal

ysis

of t

he

disc

repa

ncie

s be

twee

n th

e fo

reca

sts

and

impl

emen

tatio

n.

ESBs

mus

t adh

ere

to in

tern

ation

al s

tand

ards

(or n

ation

al o

nes

if th

ere

are

any)

for t

he d

istr

ibuti

on o

f dat

a.

ESBs

mus

t pre

sent

act

ual r

even

ue a

nd e

xpen

ditu

re a

ccor

ding

to th

e sa

me

clas

sific

ation

s us

ed w

hen

draw

ing

up th

e bu

dget

. ESB

s m

ust c

ompa

re

actu

al re

venu

e an

d ex

pend

iture

with

the

sam

e pe

riod

s fo

r the

pre

viou

s ye

ar.

Mid

-Yea

r Rev

iew

The

Repo

rt o

n th

e Im

plem

enta

tion

of th

e Fi

nanc

e Ac

t (RE

LF) f

or y

ear N

is s

ent t

o th

e N

ation

al A

ssem

bly,

with

all

the

docu

men

ts s

ent t

oget

her w

ith

the

Fina

nce

Bill

for t

he y

ear N

+1.

The

RELF

for t

he e

nd o

f Jun

e 20

15 w

as n

ot p

ublis

hed.

The

one

rela

ting

to th

e fir

st h

alf o

f 201

6 w

as a

lso

not p

ublis

hed,

but

it w

as in

clud

ed in

the

budg

et d

ocum

enta

tion

that

was

sen

t to

the

Nati

onal

Ass

embl

y to

geth

er w

ith th

e an

nual

Fin

ance

Bill

, to

be re

view

ed a

nd v

oted

on.

The

RELF

nei

ther

justi

fies

nor e

xpla

ins

the

disc

repa

ncie

s be

twee

n th

e fo

reca

sts

and

wha

t was

act

ually

car

ried

out

. It d

oes

not p

rovi

de a

com

paris

on

with

wha

t was

car

ried

out

in th

e sa

me

peri

od o

f the

pre

viou

s ye

ar.

The

RELF

doe

s no

t pro

vide

a fo

reca

st o

f wha

t is

expe

cted

to b

e ca

rrie

d ou

t in

the

seco

nd h

alf o

f the

yea

r.

The

RELF

doe

s no

t sta

te w

hat w

as c

arri

ed o

ut a

ccor

ding

to th

e sa

me

clas

sific

ation

s us

ed w

hen

draw

ing

up a

nd v

oting

on

the

budg

et (e

.g. a

ccor

ding

to

the

adm

inis

trati

ve c

lass

ifica

tion

for e

xpen

ditu

re).

Year

-end

repo

rtTh

e m

anag

emen

t rep

ort f

or 2

012

has

been

pub

lishe

d an

d is

ava

ilabl

e. T

hose

rela

ting

to m

anag

emen

t for

201

3 an

d 20

14 w

ere

prod

uced

but

wer

e no

t pub

lishe

d. T

he o

ne re

latin

g to

man

agem

ent f

or 2

015

has

just

bee

n se

nt to

the

Nati

onal

Ass

embl

y to

be

revi

ewed

and

vot

ed o

n.

It s

houl

d be

not

ed th

at, f

rom

a le

gal p

oint

of v

iew

, the

Acc

ount

abili

ty B

ill fo

r the

yea

r N-1

mus

t be

exam

ined

and

vot

ed o

n by

the

Nati

onal

Ass

embl

y be

fore

the

Fina

nce

Bill

for t

he y

ear N

+1 is

exa

min

ed a

nd p

asse

d. T

his

prov

isio

n ha

s be

en c

ompl

ied

with

; the

Acc

ount

abili

ty A

cts

have

bee

n dr

awn

up a

nd p

asse

d w

ithin

the

pres

crib

ed ti

me

peri

ods,

but

they

hav

e no

t bee

n pu

blis

hed.

The

2012

stu

dy o

f the

Acc

ount

abili

ty A

ct s

how

s th

at th

e in

form

ation

it c

onta

ins

is n

ot c

ompr

ehen

sive

.

Audi

t Rep

ort

The

Annu

al R

epor

t fro

m th

e Co

urt o

f Aud

itors

has

not

bee

n pr

oduc

ed a

nd, c

onse

quen

tly, h

as n

ot b

een

publ

ishe

d.

The

annu

al IG

F re

port

has

bee

n pr

oduc

ed, b

ut is

del

iver

ed o

nly

to th

e to

p br

ass.

It h

as n

ot b

een

mad

e pu

blic

.

The

revi

ew m

issi

on w

as n

ot a

ble

to ju

dge

the

repo

rt fo

rmat

or c

onte

nt.


APPENDICES

Appe

ndix

8: S

tatu

s of

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

Six

Prin

cipl

es o

f Par

ticip

ation

The

Six

Prin

cipl

es o

f Par

ticip

ation

The

team

’s ob

serv

ation

s

Parti

cipa

tion

mus

t tak

e pl

ace

durin

g al

l sta

ges o

f the

bud

get c

ycle

.Pa

rtial

ly c

ompl

ied

with

: par

ticip

ation

take

s pl

ace

durin

g pa

rt o

f the

dra

win

g up

and

ass

essm

ent o

f th

e bu

dget

, and

par

t of t

he im

plem

enta

tion

(civ

il so

ciet

y pa

rtici

patio

n in

the

Publ

ic P

rocu

rem

ent

Regu

lato

ry A

utho

rity

).

Opp

ortu

nitie

s fo

r civ

il so

ciet

y pa

rtici

patio

n ar

e pr

ovid

ed d

urin

g bu

dget

con

fere

nces

and

whe

n th

e bu

dget

ori

enta

tion

sem

inar

is h

eld.

Publ

ic p

artic

ipati

on c

an c

ompl

emen

t/su

ppor

t the

role

of t

he le

gisla

ture

s an

d hi

gher

con

trol

insti

tutio

ns, a

nd th

e ro

le o

f the

exe

cutiv

e in

the

draw

ing

up a

nd im

plem

enta

tion

of th

e bu

dget

.

Parti

ally

com

plie

d w

ith: h

ighe

r con

trol

insti

tutio

ns d

o no

t inv

olve

civ

il so

ciet

y.

Parti

cipa

tion

mus

t hav

e a

lega

l bas

is.Th

e re

leva

nt p

rovi

sion

s in

the

LOFI

P ar

e sti

ll to

be

clar

ified

.

Obj

ectiv

es m

ust b

e co

mm

unic

ated

in a

dvan

ce.

The

gove

rnm

ent m

ust c

lear

ly sp

ecify

the

scop

e of

the

cons

ulta

tion.

Not

com

plie

d w

ith: i

nvita

tions

to a

tten

d bu

dget

con

fere

nces

and

the

budg

et o

rien

tatio

n se

min

ar

wer

e no

t sen

t out

ear

ly e

noug

h.

Mec

hani

sms f

or p

artic

ipati

on in

the

diffe

rent

stag

es o

f the

pro

cess

, and

fo

r con

sulti

ng v

ario

us p

opul

ation

gro

ups,

mus

t exi

st.

Not

com

plie

d w

ith: t

here

are

no

form

al m

echa

nism

s at

pre

sent

.

It is

impo

rtan

t to

expl

ain

to th

e pu

blic

how

its c

ontr

ibuti

ons h

ave

been

us

ed in

bud

get d

ecisi

ons,

impl

emen

tatio

n an

d co

ntro

l.N

ot c

ompl

ied

with

.


APPENDICES

Appendix 9: Institutions consulted

GovernmentInspection générale des finances (department of the Treasury responsible for auditing public bodies)

Comité d’orientation de la réforme des finances publiques (Steering Committee for Public Finance Reform)

Direction de la préparation et du suivi budgétaire (Budget Development and Monitoring Department)

Direction du trésor et de l’ordonnancement (Treasury and Payment Authorisation Department)

Direction de la paie (Payroll Department)

Direction du contrôle budgétaire (Budget Control Department)

Plateforme de gestion de l’aide et des l’investissements (Aid and Investment Management Platform)

ParliamentECOFIN in the National Assembly

ECOFIN in the Senate

Court of Auditors

Civil Society OrganisationsODEP (Observatoire de la dépense publique) (Public Expenditure Monitor)

REGED (Réseau gouvernance économique et démocratie) (Economic and Democratic Governance Network)

Development partnersEuropean Union

World Bank

African Development Bank

Agence Française de Développement (French Development Agency)

DFID (Department for International Development (UK))


BIBLIOGRAPHY

André P, with Martin P & Lanmarfankpotin G (2012) Citizen participation. In Côté L & Savard J-F (eds) Encyclopedic dictionary of public administration.

CABRI (Collaborative Africa Budget Reform Initiative) (2014) Transparence des finances publiques et participation en RDC, état d’avancement et priorités de réforme (Transparency in public finance and participation in the DRC: Progress made and priorities for reform). Pretoria: CABRI.

Circular No. 003/CAB/ME/MIN.BUDGET/2016 of 18 June 2016, containing instructions relating to developing the state budget for the 2017 tax year.

Fölscher A & Gay E (2012) Transparency in public finance and participation in Africa. Activity report. Pretoria: CABRI.

IBP (International Budget Partnership) (2012a) Open Budget Survey 2012. Washington DC: IBP.

IBP (2012b) Open Budget Survey 2012: Democratic Republic of the Congo. Washington DC: DRC, IBP.

IBP (2015a) Open Budget Survey 2015. Washington DC: IBP.

IBP (2015b) Open Budget Survey 2015: Democratic Republic of the Congo. Washington DC: DRC, IBP.

Ministry for the Budget (2013) Stratégie budgétaire de la mandature et trajectoire des finances publiques 2012–2016 (Public finance developments and the budget strategy for the 2012–2016 term of office), July.

Ministry of Finance (2013) Stratégie cadre de la mise en œuvre de la loi N°11/011 du 13 juillet 2011 relative aux finances publiques (Strategy Framework for Implementing Act No. 11/011 of 13 July, 2011, Relating to Public Finance), March.

Ministry of Finance (2016a) Chantiers des réformes 2016 et perspectives 2016 (2016 Reform efforts and 2016 outlooks), August.

Ministry of Finance (2016b), État des lieux de la réforme des finances publiques en RDC (The Status of Public Finance Reform in the DRC), May.

ODEP (Public Expenditure Monitor) & REGED (2016) Analyse du projet de loi de finances pour l’exercice 2016 (Analysis of the Finance Bill for the 2016 tax year), November 2016.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development) (2002) Best practices for budget transparency. Paris: OECD.

PEFA (2012) Evaluation de la gestion des finances publiques de la RDC selon la méthodologie PEFA (Assessment of public finance management in the DRC, according to PEFA methodology).

Plan stratégique de réforme des finances publiques (Strategic plan for public finance reform), 2010.

REGED (Economic and Democratic Governance Network) (2014) Rapport d’analyse du projet de loi de finances 2015 des organisations de la société civile (Analysis report for the 2015 Finance Bill from civil society organisations).

Williams G & Ghonda E (2012) L’économie politique de la gestion des finances publiques en République Démocratique du Congo (The political economy of public finance management in the Democratic Republic of the Congo). Brighton: The Policy Practice.

World Bank (2012) Revue de la Gestion des Dépenses Publiques et de la Responsabilisation Financière, accroître l’efficacité et l’efficience du secteur public pour promouvoir la croissance et le développement (Review of public expenditure management and financial accountability: Increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the public sector to promote growth and development), Volume 1.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

CABRI Secretariat

PostNet Suite 314

Private Bag X 06

Waterkloof

0145

South Africa

Tel: +27 (0)12 492 0022

www.cabri-sbo.org

Documents

THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND … and planning in African countries a platform for ... vi THE CURRENT STATE OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION IN ... OF TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION