Subsequently, the institution proposing the draft law should describe the solution (theses – legislative intent) supposed to remove or alleviate the problems described. At the same time, the proposing institution should perform a regulatory impact assessment, including cost-benefit comparison of the proposed draft law and a corruption analysis announcement.
If the state institution preparing the proposal of a law had an obligation to describe a substantive solution with a parallel impact assessment, including corruption opportunities assesment, it would be possible to easily verify whether the proposed solutions do not deviate from the problem which they are supposed to resolve.
- European Commission: Staff Working Document, Better Regulation Guidelines, European Commission, COM(2015) 215 final, p. 22 - 24
- European Commission: Better Regulation Toolbox, SWD(2015) 111, p. 73 – 86
- Corruption Impact Assesment (CIA) methodology, 1 January 2013
- Resolution of the Government of the Czech Republic: General principles for regulation of impact assessment (RIA), 2007, updated version dated 2011, p. 18 – 19
- Methodology for determination of the amount and origin of administration burden for enterpreneurs (calculator of administration burden of enterpreneurs)
- Methodology for determination of planned costs for putting forward public policy (calculator of planned costs for putting forward public policy)
- Kohout, P. andcoll., Collection of texts of a working group for the fight against corruption, National Economic Government Council, June 2011), p. 88 - 91
- Vondráček, O., Havrda, M., 21 recipes – Anti-corruption cookbook, Recipe 13: (Poor)Quality of Czech laws, December 2013
More about methodology
Justification and sources