Public Institutions’ Overseas Business Trip Management System Innovated

December 31, 2018

Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission

The Republic of Korea

It is expected that illicit supports provided for public institutions’ overseas business trips will be curtailed in the future, as follow-up measures issued after ‘the factual inspection regarding provision of supports for public institutions’ overseas business trips’ announced on 26 July, 2018 have been completed.

Under circumstances where public interest in overseas business trips improperly sponsored by audited agencies has increased, as shown in the increased number of public petitions for the general inspection of such trips, the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC, Chairperson Pak Un Jong) organized a pan-governmental inspection team in partnership with the Ministry of Economy and Finance, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of the Interior and Safety in order to study overseas business trips from officials of the 1,483 public institutions from May to June, 2018.

The inspection team announced on 26 July, 2018 the results of their fact-check aimed at eradicating the supervised or audited agencies’ customary practices of sponsoring overseas business trips gone on by officials of their supervisory or upper-level institutions. It also reported on the implementation plan for the follow-up measures during the Cabinet meeting on 28 August, 2018, calling on agencies of various levels to carry out the measures in an unwavering manner.

From the end of July to December, 2018, agencies of various levels overhauled their relevant statutes and standards causing improper provision of assistance for overseas business trips and established their management systems, including expanding ex-ante and ex-post disclosure of overseas business trips.

In addition, the ACRC, which is in charge of the implementation of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, amended and put in force the Code of Conduct for Public Officials in a way to include a systematic, detailed guideline for supervised or affiliated agencies to enable them to more effectively deal with improper requests from officials of their supervisory institutions regarding provision of support for their overseas work trips, and also made the standard for interpretation of the provisions under the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act more strict.

< Institutional supplementation, including the overhaul of laws, regulations and standards related to provision of assistance for overseas business trips >

As the focus of the inspection carried out this time was on complementing the existing institutions to stamp out improper aiding of overseas business trips, agencies of various levels have incorporated a principle of prohibition of money and other valuables, etc. provided for under the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act into their respective laws, regulations and standards, etc. under their jurisdiction in an active manner.

For example, the Ministry of National Defense has supplemented its Ordinance with respect to the overseas deployment of the armed forces based on the principle that an institution should bear the expenses of overseas business trips incurred by officials belonging to the institution for the visit to the field of security/dispatched troops and the evaluation of the performance of the armed forces deployed overseas, unless there is a need-based request from the Ministry of National Defense for assistance.

The Human Resources Development Service of Korea has also revised the skills contest management rules to provide for that officials of audit/supervisory institutions should participate in the WorldSkills with a budget provided by the institutions that they belong to.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, etc. has changed its business management system in a way that a budget shall not be provided for officials, etc. of audit/supervisory institutions.

The Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, the Public Procurement Service, the Rural Development Administration, the Korea Southern Power Co., Ltd. and the National Institute of Fisheries Science, etc. have enhanced their transparency related to the provision of assistance for overseas business trips by more clearly specifying the range of assistance and procedures to be undergone when receiving assistance for overseas business trips aimed at on-site verification (i.e. inspection, examination, quarantine, etc.) from their duty-related enterprises in accordance with laws and regulations, etc.

Moreover, 1,483 agencies of various levels have firmly established their ex-ante and ex-post management system with regard to overseas business trips sponsored externally.

The ACRC has offered seven recommendations to agencies of various levels, including those requiring them to set up a feasibility deliberation committee for externally sponsored overseas business trips, to come up with precise and specific deliberation criteria and to exclude a person likely to have conflicts of interest from becoming a member of the committee. To date, 1,202 agencies (81%) have completed implementation of the recommendations and the rest will finish by the first half of 2019.

< Amendment to the Code of Conduct for Public Officials and Supplementation to the Standard for Interpretation Regarding the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act >

The ACRC has enforced the Code of Conduct for Public Officials amended on 24 Dec. 2018 that prohibits a public official at a supervisory institution from making an unfair request of a public official at a supervised/affiliated institution to provide a budget for overseas business trips and that stipulates an obligation of an official at a supervised/affiliated institution to reject such unjust request, including for excessive protocol, with an aim to eradicate overseas business trips customarily sponsored by a supervised/affiliated institution.

Furthermore, it has been provided under the amended Code that if an official at a supervised institution receives the same unjust request for assisting overseas business trips again despite his/her previous rejection, he/she should report it to the Code of Conduct Official of the supervised institution and the head thereof, and the head who has been reported should notify the head of a supervisory institution of the fact that an official working for the supervisory institution repeatedly made the unjust request, so that necessary measures such as disciplinary actions, etc. can be taken against the official in question, thereby more effectively deterring unreasonable requests related to overseas business trips.

Along with this, the ACRC has supplemented the standard for interpretation of the anti-graft act, forbidding in principle any assistance for a duty-related official’s overseas business trip due to concerns over hindering fair performance of the official’s duties, unless it is recognized by legislations and standards that the purpose of such trip is to promote national interest or to attend an official event.

The ACRC notified agencies of various levels of the newly supplemented standard for interpretation of the anti-graft Act in the form of an official notice and also posted it on its official website, while incorporating it into manuals by job classification so that those in charge of certain tasks can refer to.

The vice chairperson and secretary general of the ACRC, Lee Geon-lee, said that “the inspection carried out this time aimed at improving the institutional framework such as legislations and standards, etc. as well as reforming the system of business operation in accordance with the purport of the anti-graft Act by studying the real status of assistance provided for overseas business trips in a comprehensive manner,” adding that “I believe that many of the problems that we faced at an early stage of implementation have been solved thanks to fruitful follow-up measures we have taken, including calling a halt to a project rendering assistance for improper overseas business trips, revising the Code of Conduct for Public Officials, supplementing the interpretation standard for the anti-graft Act.”

On top of this, he also stated that “I would like to call on supervisory institutions or the institutions to which public officials who broke the law belong to take disciplinary measures with regard to the case considered to be a breach of the law, and to submit the results of their institutional improvements, such as statutory reforms and an overhaul of the budget/business management system as for the case notified thereto. In the future, the ACRC will continue to encourage agencies of various levels to actively make institutional improvements, and ultimately renovate all of the existing systems and practices related to improper assistance for overseas business trips in order to enforce the anti-graft Act and the Code of Conduct for Public Officials in a way that comes up to the standard of the people.”