Abstract
The draft European Union Directives on public procurement will not be able to entirely fulfil their objectives of transforming purchasing culture and leading to a more ethical conduct between parties. In this article an account is given of research that has highlighted that public procurement should be grasped not by concentrating on corruption, but, on the contrary, even assuming good intentions. Self-cleaning, probity auditing and the identification of illicit conduct are positive means of prevention. The brute force approach of hard law and penalisation is not the only way. However, the draft directives do not reflect this recognition.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We focus on the
-
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement 2012.
-
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors 2012.
-
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the award of concession contracts 2012.
-
Willams-Elegbe [5].
Williams-Elegbe [5], 25–27.
The three main parts of the NIGP definition is referred.
Code of Ethics—NIGP http://www.nigp.org/eweb/StartPage.aspx?Site=NIGP&webcode=abt-codeofethics.
Pünder, Priess, Arrowsmith [3].
Arrowsmith, Priess, Friton [1], pp. 4–7.
Shead [4], p. 66.
Beth [2], slide 10.
Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors; and Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts.
Proposal of the new Directive Article 15. “Principles of procurement”—“Contracting authorities shall treat economic operators equally and without discrimination and shall act in a transparent and proportionate manner.”
Article 21. of Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement.
Article 39. of the Proposal.
Article 39/a. of the Proposal.
Article 22. of the Proposal.
Article 22 of the Proposal 01.2012.
Exclusion grounds.
Article 55. of the Proposal—Exclusion grounds.
References
Arrowsmith, S., Priess, H.-J., Friton, P.: Self-cleaning—an emerging concept in EC public procurement law? In: Pünder, H., Priess, H.J., Arrowsmith, S. (eds.) Self-Cleaning in Public Procurement Law, pp. 1–32. Carl Heymanns Verlag, Schriften der Bucerius Law School, Cologne (2009)
Beth, E.: Integrity in public procurement: mapping out good practices. Detailed outline of the report OECD Symposium. Paris, 30 November (2006). http://www.oecd.org/governance/fightingcorruptioninthepublicsector/37864282.pdf
Pünder, H., Priess, H.J., Arrowsmith, S. (eds.): Self-Cleaning in Public Procurement Law. Carl Heymanns Verlag, Schriften der Buserius Law School, Cologne (2009)
Shead, B.: Probity auditing: keeping the bureaucrats honest? Aust. J. Public Adm. 60(2), 66–70 (2001)
Williams-Elegbe, S.: Fighting Corruption Public Procurement—A Comparative Analysis of Disqualification of Debarment Measures. Studies in International Law. Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This article is based on a presentation given at the Annual Conference on European Public Procurement Law, organised by ERA 11–12 October 2012 in Trier.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tátrai, T. Ethical public procurement. ERA Forum 14, 59–68 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-013-0290-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-013-0290-3