Participants in the panel discussion held by AMAN recommended that such asset disclosures which are being filled must be transparent, and limited to elected government officials,politicians, and some high ranking officials in the three authorities.
The pannel discussed a report prepared on the Palestinian experience in presenting asset disclosure and the suitability of this experience with national standards in terms of appointed people in submitting such disclosures or the method of preservation and the use of these statements by relevant authorities or how to deal with them in terms of confidentiality or publicity and to make such disclosures transparent to the public.
The panel was attended by representatives of relevant parties such as the Corruption Crimes Court, The State Audit and Administrative Control Burea, The Public Prosecution, the General Personnel Council, The Ministry of Justice and the police along with other civil society institutions and journalists, whereas, the Anti-Corruption Mission was absent.
Dr.Ahmad Abu Dayya, author of the report pointed out the existence of many challeneges and difficulties facing the Palestinian experience in providing asset disclosure, importantly the number of parties appointed to fill these disclosures according to the law, which were estimated at 260 thousand employees in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, in addition to the absence of validation of the information and data of these disclosures as well as their confidentiality which can only by revealed by a decision from the competent court.
In regards to the legal framework regulating asset disclosure, the most prominent difficulties were the lack of legal provisions in providing disclosures and privately preserving them to parties which do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Anti-Corruption Commission, as well as the diversity of the disclosures and oversight parties. Moreover the absence of any legal provisions obliging those pointed from political posts such as the President, Ministers, members of the Legislative Council, judges and members of the Public Prosecution to submit asset disclosure regularly through their time in duty.
In addition, the Palestinian experience in submitting disclosures faces other challenges such as irresponsibility by some sectors and parties appointed due to absence of deterrence, or the failure in applying penalties by law or the inadequancy of these penalties, along with the difficulty of not being able to enumerate the appointed parties and the duplication of asset disclosure.
The participants emphasized the importance of openess from the principle of absolute secrecy in dealing with asset disclosure and aim for publicity for atleast high ranking positions and publishing them in general, through regulations or a system or a unified guide of procedures for submitting asset disclosure and the identification of those appointed in submitting such disclosures and the the appointed party to oversight the procedure, dates of submission and periodicity, and the mechanism of examination, validation and preservation, along with the objectives that seek to fulfill the procedure.
On the other hand, the participants recommended that the numbers of appointed parties to fill disclosures must be limited to government officials, politicians whom are appointed and elected in the three authorities and some high ranking positions, along with regulating the asset disclosure formats in order to be used electronically, as well as the need for the Anti-Corruption Commission to fulfill its part in validating the information and data submitted, and to stop performing this task under the pretext of confidentiality, followed by the activation and enhancement of penalties for violatiors either refraining from such submissions or non-committed parties to the submission date.
