Criteria for themselves: lawyer tells how ARMA distributed bonuses
Kyiv • UNN
The ARMA leadership has introduced its own bonus rules that contradict the law and are based on subjective criteria. The results of NACP inspections remain non-public, which creates risks of repeated violations.
Bonuses for civil servants are a tool to stimulate effective work, but this mechanism has been used in an extremely questionable manner at the Asset Recovery and Management Agency. According to the inspection of the National Agency on Civil Service, the ARMA management introduced its own bonus rules that do not comply with the current legislation. This was stated in an exclusive commentary to UNN by Volodymyr Bohatyr, a lawyer, Honored Lawyer of Ukraine.
The NACP audited ARMA's activities twice in 2023, including the bonus system. It turned out that the regulation on bonuses, approved in 2017, contained incorrect criteria that allowed bonuses to be paid based on subjective indicators. For example:
- efficiency of achieving the set goals with the rational use of resources;
- prevention of negative circumstances that could adversely affect the agency's work;
- Participation in improving the institutional capacity of the body.
And this directly contradicted the Model Regulations on Bonuses for Civil Servants approved by the order of the Ministry of Social Policy.
Separately, the ARMA Regulation stated that bonuses for employees depended on the quality of their functions and provided a rather extensive list of them.
"How to evaluate the quality of performance remained unknown, as ARMA had no regulatory documents on the procedure for determining this criterion. It turned out that the results of work under the new criterion are assessed by the heads of independent structural units, who "provide the Head of ARMA with substantiated information on the performance of tasks and functions assigned to the structural units." In other words, the question of whether an employee was worthy of receiving an award was decided at the discretion of the heads of departments and offices, and the final decision was made by the Head," Bogatyr said.
Despite the revealed violations, the results of the NACS inspections remain virtually non-public. Reporting documents are not publicized, and information about the problems identified is usually kept for internal use only by the agency and the body that conducted the inspection.
Bohatyr emphasized that it is the lack of publicity that creates space for such abuses to be repeated. If the public does not have access to the results of inspections, it is almost impossible to ensure transparency and accountability of government agencies.
Later, the ARMA did issue a new regulation on bonuses, removing the controversial provisions. However, the question of how much these manipulations cost the state remains open.
Ensuring financial discipline and making the results of inspections public are necessary steps to restore trust in ARMA's work. Without this, scandals around the agency will remain a constant threat to its reputation. According to the lawyer, publishing the results of inspections and discussing problems openly can be the first step towards real change in public administration.
Add
Recently, the head of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency, Olena Duma, received an "excellent" rating in her performance evaluation for 2024. This means that she will not only retain her position, but will also receive a bonus for her "outstanding achievements.
However, numerous scandals around the agency call into question the transparency and effectiveness of its leadership. For example, under Olena Duma's leadership, ARMA has repeatedly been at the center of high-profile scandals. One of the most recent was an investigation into possible fake disability certificates that agency employees received. Experts emphasized that if the allegations are confirmed, this should not only be grounds for resignation, but also an impetus for a large-scale review of the agency's work.
In addition, anti-corruption organizations, including Transparency International Ukraine, have repeatedly criticized the agency for not meeting European standards. They emphasized populism, contradictory communication, and violation of the presumption of innocence in cases handled by the ARMA.
Another important aspect is the lack of public control over the agency's activities. The Public Council under ARMA dissolved itself three months ago due to systematic violations of the requirements for public involvement. This situation, according to former members of the public council, is beneficial to the head of the agency, Olena Duma, because the lack of control allows her to avoid public consideration of controversial issues.
