Criteria for yourself: the lawyer told how awards were distributed in ARMA

Rewarding civil servants is a tool to stimulate effective work, but in the Agency for Search and Management of Assets, this mechanism was used extremely questionably. As evidenced by the inspection of the National Agency for Public Service, the management of ARMA introduced its own bonus rules that do not correspond to the current legislation. About it in an exclusive comment UNN said lawyer, honored lawyer of Ukraine Volodymyr Bogatyr.

Details

The NADS twice checked the activities of ARMA in 2023, in particular regarding employee bonuses. It turned out that the regulation on bonuses, approved back in 2017, contained incorrect criteria that allowed bonuses to be paid based on subjective indicators. For example:

· effectiveness of achieving set goals with rational use of resources;

· prevention of negative circumstances that could negatively affect the work of the agency;

· participation in increasing the institutional capacity of the body.

And this directly contradicted the Standard Regulation on bonusing of civil servants, which was approved by the order of the Ministry of Social Policy.

Separately, the Regulations of the ARMA stated that bonusing of employees depends on the high-quality performance of functions and gave a rather extensive list of them.

“How to evaluate the quality performance of functions – remained unknown, because there were no administrative documents regarding the procedure for determining this criterion in ARMA. It turned out that the results of work within the framework of the new criterion are evaluated by the heads of independent structural units, who “provide the head of ARMA with reasonable information about the performance of tasks and functions , assigned to structural divisions”. In other words, the question of whether an employee is worthy of receiving a bonus was decided at their own discretion by the management of departments and offices, and the final decision was made by the head,” Bogatyr noted.

Despite the revealed violations, the results of NADS inspections remain virtually non-public. Report documents are not publicized, and information about identified problems is usually kept only for the internal use of the agency and the body that carried out the inspection.

Bogatyr emphasized that it is precisely the lack of publicity that creates space for the repetition of such abuses. If the public does not have access to the results of inspections, it is almost impossible to ensure transparency and accountability of public authorities.

Later, ARMA still issued a new regulation on bonuses, removing the controversial norms. However, the question of how much these manipulations cost the state remains open.

Compliance with financial discipline and ensuring the publicity of inspection results are necessary steps to restore confidence in ARMA’s work. Without it, scandals surrounding 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 to real changes in public administration.

Let’s add

Recently, the head of the Agency for Search and Management of Assets, Olena Duma, received an “excellent” rating based on the results of the evaluation of official activities in 2024. This means that she will not only keep her position, but also receive an award for her “outstanding achievements”.

However, numerous scandals surrounding the agency call into question the transparency and effectiveness of its leadership. Thus, under the leadership of Elena Duma, ARMA repeatedly found itself at the center of loud scandals. One of the latest was an investigation into possible fake disability certificates received by agency employees. Experts emphasized that if the allegations are confirmed, it should be not only a reason for resignation, but also an impetus for a large-scale review of the agency’s work.

In addition, anti-corruption organizations, in particular Transparency International Ukraine, repeatedly criticized the agency for non-compliance with European standards. They emphasized populism, controversial communication and violation of the presumption of innocence in cases handled by 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. Such a 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 avoiding public consideration of controversial issues.