THE PREVENTION OF CRIME AND THE TREATMENT OF OFFENDERS IN ISRAEL: 1995 REPORT
THE OMBUDSMAN AS A MEANS OF PUBLIC
SECTOR CORRUPTION CONTROL
Introduction
The State Comptroller (Ombudsman) Basic Law of 1988 and the State
Comptroller Law (Consolidated Version) of 1958 together mention the term
"integrity" or "ethical conduct" five times but without defining that
crucial term. Whatever scholars, researchers and previous comptrollers
have said about the term only goes to emphasize its vagueness and the
difficulty of pinning it down to a working definition.
In the light of this, generations of comptrollers have seen it their duty
to lay down an ad hoc operational definition of the term for each single
field of public affairs, to specify what constitutes an offense against
integrity in that specific field and what are the criteria by which
ethical conduct may be recognized. In other words, one of the tasks of all
comptrollers is to give retroactive content to this elusive term, usually
after some questionable behavior has required investigation.
The Response of Comptrollers to Prevalent Unethical Conduct
It is noteworthy that despite the centrality of a comptroller's duty to
report instances of unethical behavior, this undefined 'grey' area has
received rather 'grey' treatment by comptrollers. They do not enlighten
the public sufficiently to grey the effectiveness of their monitoring and
the results of their responses to incidents of improper conduct, and this
when such information would build up the supportive public opinion that is
essential to reinforce the official response to such behavior.
On the credit side of the balance, the comptrollers and their public
statements have exercised considerable influence on a number of laws,
regulations and rulings intended to build up a normative basis for
integrity in public service, especially insofar as concerns conflicts of
interest, civil servants receiving favors, favoritism, restrictions on
supplementary employment and business, restrictions on the use of
information, etc.
As the the social, public and political climate changes with time so will
the boundaries of the comptrollers' sphere of interest have to shift to
follow the changes. It is vital that comptrollers be alert to such shifts
in practice and norms. It is no coincidence that the 1989 Comptroller's
Annual Report dealt extensively with a practice that had not appeared in
any previous Report, namely making politically inspired appointments to
the Civil Service. This practice, which the Comptroller disqualified as
'unethical' had mushroomed in the immediately preceding period.
In organizations situated more towards the fringes of public and political
affairs, the concept of ethical behavior is defined much more 'flexibly'
than in central institutions of government, so flexibly as to verge on
criminality. These bodies encompass a goodly part of public administration
local government authorities, public corporations, organizations
supported from government funds in one way or another, the General
Federation of Trade Unions, the Jewish Agency, universities, etc. The
danger is clear of allowing what is forbidden in one sector of public
administration to remain 'normal' and permitted in another sector. Bad
habits are not so easily confined within theoretical boundaries.
The issue of ethical public behavior has not remained the exclusive
concern of Comptrollers-General. There is barely a piece of legislation or
regulation or directive concerned with internal control and audit that
does not mention the term. The most obvious example is the 1992 Internal
Audit Law that requires an internal auditor, responsible, inter alia, to
the Comptroller-General, to be appointed in every public agency. (See the
article by U. Berlinski in this report.) The State Comptroller Law was the
inspiration and source for this law and for all other attempts in Israel
to impose external and internal controls on the conduct of civil and
public servants.
Conclusions
* The Comptroller-General is the universally accepted arbiter of
ethical and unethical conduct iii Israeli public affairs and fits/her role
is vital to the conduct of government an(i administration.
* The improbity and venality regularly discovered and condemned by a
series of Comptrollers demonstrates that certain unacceptable practices
are normative among large sub-groups of Israeli society, to the extent
that such groups seem to have been informally accorded special rights in
certain public agencies and institutions. The norm in such groups is to
assume that what is good for the group is good for the State. This in
itself is dangerous, but a further danger is that the habit of ignoring
the laws and rights of the State on behalf of the group spills over into
ignoring the laws of the State for one's own personal benefit.
* Most improper and unethical behavior is found not in central government
institutions but in the public administration network and flourishes there
because of the absence of strict control by the highest central
authorities.
* The chief contributions of Comptrollers to ethical public conduct is in
their very definition of what constitutes an offense to such a norm and in
the consensual acceptability of those pronouncements.
* Their advancement of legislation and regulation on the subject is also
of great importance. That said, however, it is beyond cavil that norms of
organizational behavior are chiefly the result of the authority and
personal example of those who head the organization.
* Many factors the absence of forceful authority, decrees that are too
hard for civil and public servants to sustain, "blurred" norms or an
absence of norms, low pay, short-term solutions that ignore long-term
basic goals all these have combined to generate an unwritten, informal
code of behavior that operates alongside the formal code. The State and
its governing institutions have not paid sufficient attention, and in
sufficient time, to these negative norms. Untreated, these weeds will
choke off ethical behavior in public administration. The medium- and
long-term damage to Israeli public affairs and society is not worth the
short-term savings or profits real or imagined, monetary or other.
* It is very difficult to maintain proper norms of conduct in daily public
life when such pernicious practices go on and the statutory authorities
either turn a blind eye to them or even give their tacit approval. This is
one of the most urgent threats to the conduct of public administration
in Israel. Without doubt it will not be at all easy to pull up these
'weeds', but it is vital that we begin to do so. The very pronouncements
of the Comptroller-General that such practices are intolerable and an
offense to ethical administration is a vital first act in the battle
against them, and in that lies much of the importance of Comptrollers-
General to our society.
This article is abstracted from one published in: A. Friedberg, The
Ombudsman in Israel: Theory and Practice. Academon, Jerusalem, 1994.