The Pacific Plan for Strengthening Regional Cooperation and Integration, endorsed by Pacific Leaders in 2005, identifies a wide range of regional initiatives in the area of good governance for immediate implementation under Attachment A: Implementation Strategy: Initatives for the First Three Years (2006-2008). At Section 12.1, the Plan identifies the need to look at:
"Regional support to consolidate commitments to key institutions such as audit and ombudsman offices, leadership codes, anti-corruption institutions and departments of attorneys-general; including through judicial training and education;”
The Pacific Plan’s commitment to regionalism responds to the special challenges that many Pacific countries face because of the relatively small size of their populations and resource bases. It is essential that support to small island countries in the Pacific recognises that strategies and institutions must be sustainable in terms of their cost-effectiveness and personnel demands. In the specific context of accountability and anti-corruption activities, it is notable that while multiple institutions may exist in this sector in other countries, in the Pacific serious consideration needs to be given to realistically assessing what is possible in terms of long-term commitment by jurisdictions with small budgets and often limited access to specialist expertise. When considering the most appropriate approaches, special attention needs to be paid to ensuring that access by marginalised and disadvantages groups, including women and the rural poor who often struggle to access services provided from the capital, are addressed.
The Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) has already commenced initial work looking at regional support mechanisms for Auditors General and Ombudsmen in the region. However, audit and ombudsman are but two sets of organisations that constitute a small part of the overall “accountability frameworks” which exist in the region. Countries are increasingly looking to parliamentary committees to promote public accountability, and some governments and/or police forces have also developed Anti-Corruption Units. There has also been an increasing call in the region for Independent Anti-Corruption Commissions to be established. In some countries, there has also been a call for Leadership Codes to be entrenched, which may or may not require the establishment of some sort of oversight body/commission. In the context of the enactment of freedom of information legislation, there has also been discussion of which oversight institution should most appropriately handle appeals under a new information regime.
Taking into account the variety of accountability institutions which already exist throughout the region, as well as the proposals coming from within and outside the region to establish new organisations or strengthening existing bodies, PIFS and the Pacific Centre have also commissioned a comprehensive review of the current state of accountability institutions across the region, to feed into PIFS existing work on auditors-general and ombudsmen.
