(6) VETTING AND LUSTRATION

Question 1

What is vetting?

Answer 1

the screening of ppl in public institutions/where public trust to verify their integrty and capacity to fulfil their positions in support of new regime

Question 2

vetting processes exclude from public institutions persons who

Answer 2

lack integrity

Question 3

consequences of vetting:

Answer 3

• mandatory removal from position
• prevention from new positions
• encouragmenet to voluntarily resign
• face public disclosure

Question 4

vetting =

Answer 4

assessing integrty to determine suitability for public employment

Question 5

Vetting vs purges

Answer 5

purges target ppl for their membership/connection to group rather than individual responsibility

Question 6

vetting processes should be prescribed and bound by?

Answer 6

legislative acts and due process requirements and then based on individual assessments

Question 7

to be procedurally fair, vetting should provide

Answer 7

right to appeal decision

Question 8

what institutions targeted by vetting?

Answer 8

can be broad/narrow but UN OHCR says should prioritise
* military
* intelligence services
* judiciary
* police

Question 9

2 forms of screening for vetting

Answer 9

1) Replacement process - replace those who lack integrity
2) reappointment process - all individuals removed and need to reapply

can use a combo of both!

Question 10

issues with vetting?

Answer 10

• availability and reliability of info
• financial limits
• capacity deficits - takes time to educate and give proper training to perform new functions!
• security risks
• political manipulation
• governance gap

Question 11

critical to the success of vetting are what features

Answer 11

1) independent vetting committee
2) right to appeal decisions

Question 12

Vetting in Iraq - overview of De-Baathification programme

Answer 12

• Policy undertaken by the new Iraqi gov to remove Baath party’s influence in new political system after US led invasion in 2003
• created by foreigners mainly w limited understanding of Baath party

Question 13

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

1) Design a vetting programme not a purge

what was the lesson?

Answer 13

• Was a purge not vetting
• Program involved large scale politically based dismissals based on rank in civil service/Baath party but was ineffective and incoherent –> d
• no individual assessment on the basis of competence, participation in HR abuses etc

Question 14

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

Consequence of purge whereby ppl weren’t judged individually

Answer 14

perpetrators weren’t also identified – widespread fear that they were at large

Question 15

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

2) Know your target

What was the lesson?

Answer 15

• De-baathificaiton designed by foreigners! Only little data was used to actually desig the program – aimed at speed not quality
• US officials in Iraq adopted a broad, ambitious de-Baathifi cation policy without a detailed understanding of the Baath Party, the Iraqi military, public institutions, or civil service, or of actual Iraqi conditions and preferences

Question 16

1) Design a vetting programme not a purge

What was a problematic assumption wrt purge in De-Baathification

Answer 16

• Key assumption nwas that any member of top four ranks was ideologically involved or committed sever violations of human rights

Question 17

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

3) Set Clear, Realistic Objectives

Answer 17

• Expectations were unreaslitic – conflation of dif objectives – not about delivering justice to victims or getting punishments

Question 18

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

3) Set Clear, Realistic Objectives

Answer 18

• Expectations were unreaslitic – conflation of dif objectives – not about delivering justice to victims or getting punishments

Question 19

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

4) Don’t create a monster

Answer 19

• o Should be independent from politics
• o Program in Iraq used for political manipulation against political opponents
• o Lack of transparency meant couldn’t’ be seen as credible

Question 20

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

5) Consult and educate

Answer 20

• Need to do this to obtain accurate info
• Greatest effectiveness when public opinmioms are incorporated

Question 21

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

6) Look to the Future

Answer 21

• o De-Baathification looked backwards! So aimed at getting rid of people didn’t fully think through the consequences of a purge – there was no set of crtieria for future recruitment ot government service- many dismissed found their way back into public service – nothing to stop wave of fresh violators
• o Tightly focused vetting efforts can pave the way for reform

Question 22

Lessons from De-Baathification programme

7) Observe basic standards of fairness

Answer 22

• Failure to have basic due process and observe HR standards – MUST RESPECT THE RULE OF LAW otherwise can undermine post-conflict reconstruction and TJ goals
• here lack of transparency of reporting of dismissals
• no appeals criteria defined
• even in judicial vetting, all former baath party members (not even senior ones) barred from participating

Question 23

Standards of Fairness and Vetting

Answer 23

• like judicial process, those subject to vetting processes have rights too
• ie presumptiomn of innocent
• evaluation according to known and reasonable criteria
• right to appeal
• conducted efficiently

Question 24

Lustration

Answer 24

• A form of vetting programs adopted in postcommunist countries of former Soviet Union
• broader than vetting due to symbolic/moral cleansing element

Question 25

Institutional aspects of lustration

Answer 25

screening of officials with positions in public and semipublic institutions for employment purposes. The composition of the government is changed

Question 26

Symbolic aspects of aspects of lustration

Answer 26

o revealing the past, truth telling, public revelations. It lustrates the past. Symbolic change/moral cleansing can indirectly lead to institutional change

Question 27

Lustration- combination of institutional and symbolic measures eg

Answer 27

o Providing access to the files of the secret police.
o Compulsory public disclosures

Question 28

Does lustration have a broader scope than vetting?

Answer 28

Yes, not just focused on security sector but wider range of public and quasi public and social institutions (eg, bakning, universities, churches, media)

Question 29

Is there. aright of states to use lustration?

Answer 29

Yes - ECtHR recognised R to use lustration policies to uphold democracy - but should only be temporary in nature (Rekvenyi v Hungary)

Question 30

lessons from de-baaathification

Answer 30

1) vetting not a purge
2) know your target
3) Set Clear, Realistic Objectives
4) Don’t create a monster
5) Consult and create
6) look to future
7) observe basic standards of fairness

Question 31

what do lustration laws illustrate?

Answer 31

particular conditions for holding public office in the new democracy by persons associated w former regimes

Question 32

lustration laws were designed to

Answer 32

deal with abuses of power by previous regimes and asa a means of rebuilding society after transition

Question 33

Czechoslovakia lustration laws

Answer 33

disqualified high ranking communists, members of secret police + collaborators - no discretion/room for mitigating circumstances –> could only be downgraded to position not subject to lustration

Question 34

Hungary lustration laws

Answer 34

‘naming the guilty’ method of public officials
* could be exposed and retain position or resign and not be exposed

Question 35

Hungary lustration laws

Answer 35

‘naming the guilty’ method of public officials
* could be exposed and retain position or resign and not be exposed

Question 36

Poland lustration laws

Answer 36

effectively offered tainted officials a 2nd chance in exchange for confession of past involvement in the former regime

Question 37

dif btw Czech vs Polish and Hungary lustration methods

Answer 37

• Czech had an exclusive method vs latter daopted inclusive method to deal with officials

Question 38

Main dif btw hungarian and polish inclusive methods of lustration

Answer 38

• Hungary: exposure conducted top-down and externally imposed on officials
• Poland: confession took bottum up approach and initiated by tained officials submitting affidavit

Question 39

critique of lustraation laws based on dismissal

Answer 39

seen not as purification but as a continuation of past practices (same act just dif regime/new gov)

BUT this change and lustration through dismissal creates clear line btw past and present

Question 40

lustration via exposure - critique

Answer 40

argue it perpetuates continutiyt w past bc of reliance on archives of old regime which may not be reliable

but also exposure fulfills truth function too + can help public to scrutinise officials w questoinable past, bridging gap btw the opporessed and elite

Question 41

lustration via confession - benefit

Answer 41

bottom up approach means the truth is given reflecting change of heart and attitudes, fulfills normative meaning in this way - demonstrating change in loyalty etc

Question 42

most effective form of lustration

Answer 42

dismissals found to have strongest +ve effect on trust in gov, pehraps due to its punitive aspect signalling achieving justice

Question 43

which method of lustration is least effective

Answer 43

exposure least efficient
* wasn’t shown that exposure shows discontinuity with the past

Question 44

effectiveness of confession as lustration method

Answer 44

significicantly increased trust in some cases - irrespective of political context –> shows the importance of an internal method of giving truth (normative and symbolic role demonstrating change of heart whereas exposure is externally driven)