AICOM, 11th Meeting on Compliance in the public sector (July, 6th 2015)

logo_AICOM.jpg

On June 19th 2015 AICOM, the Italian Compliance Association, held its annual meeting at the Third University of Rome (Roma TRE).
The subject of the meeting was ‘The Compliance function in the Public Administration’ with a focus on the Italian anti-corruption regulations.
Below a summary of the presentations.

Mauro Vaglio, President of the Lawyers Association of Rome

Mauro Vaglio presented the new Italian anti-corruption framework in particular illustrating the Law n. 190 of 6th November 2012, ‘Measures for the prevention and suppression of corruption and lawlessness in the public service’ and the Law n. 69 of 27th May 2015, ‘Provisions relating to crimes against the public administration, to Mafia-type associations and to false accounting’.

Nicoletta Parisi, National Anti-Corruption Authority, Professor of International Law at the University of Catania

Nicoletta Parisi described the obligations for Public Administration regarding the prevention of corruption and transparency. They require, among others, the adoption of an organizational and management model similar to the model used by private companies to comply with the Decree No. 231/2001.
Professor Parisi also presented and commented the recent “ANAC Guidelines” published on June 17th  2015 on corruption prevention for public companies or companies controlled or participated by government (pdf, 385 K, 31 pp.)

Claudio Clemente, Director of Financial Information Unit

The Italian FIU Director presented ‘The compliance function: from the financial to the public sector’ articulating the following points:

  1. The role of the PA in the national anti-corruption prevention system
  2. the Anti-Money Laundering (AML) ‘active collaboration’
  3. tools facilitating active collaboration.

Clemente underlined that governmental companies collaboration against corruption and money laundering is still insufficient nonetheless the obligations required by law.
For these reasons, a joint action between FIU and ANAC would be appropriate. This would provide more applicable rules and tools in order to facilitate compliance control processes in the public companies.

Maria Balzano, Market competition Authority (AGCM)

Dr. Balzano delivered a speech entitled “Compliance programs” on AGCM approach about this matter.
She analysed two points:

  • Guidelines: how to make compliance programs
  • The approach to rewarding compliance.

In regards to compliance programs, she said that the Authority follows an approach not only ‘prescriptive’ but instead ‘rewarding’ that is based on a rewards / sanctions system.

Tiziana Togna, CONSOB

Dr. Togna delivered a speech entitled “The Compliance function in financial firms” structured on two points:

  1. The internal control system of the financial intermediaries
  2. Roles and tasks of the Compliance function.

Togna particularly insisted on the centrality of compliance in investment services because “the Compliance function takes a central role in monitoring the rules and processes adopted for the provision of investment services.”

Economic consequences of the Anti-Money Laundering and Compliance

In the second part of the meeting, during a round table, Vittorio Pedestrian, Riccardo Siena and Silvia Vicentini presented ‘Economic Consequences of Compliance and Anti-Money Laundering’.
Regarding  the “expectations” of banks on the costs of complying with anti-money laundering requirements, the authors pointed out:

  • high investment costs already incurred (IT projects, e-learning roll-out sessions, ...), while operating costs have a marginal impact
  • checks / inspections by control authorities have already induced the strengthening of internal processes
  • rationalization initiatives balance the increased costs of regulation
  • increased costs expected for the introduction of Fourth AML Directive.

In conclusion the authors indicated the following points to the reflection for the audience.

  • Strong presence of economies of scale, high impact for small banks (AML)
  • Increase of costs expected for the introduction of the Fourth AML Directive
  • Reduction of quantity and size of regulation, and effective management of law proliferation
  • Non-compliance is much more costly than compliance.
  • The compliance costs have a greater impact on small businesses.
  • The increase in the time spent on procedures and internal regulations and reporting / communication quality to internal and external authorities
  • The necessity to increase experts in compliance.
  • Efforts by organizations to improve aggregate data and those related to risk, are a competitive advantage and improve business performance.

See also

ComplianceNet: