Advanced

Self‐Cleaning vid uteslutning av leverantörer till följd av brott som innefattar bestickning eller korruption

Eriksson, Linnea LU (2017) JURM02 20171
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats behandlar self-cleaning vid uteslutning av leverantörer till följd av brott som innefattar bestickning eller korruption. Närmare bestämt utreder uppsatsen vilka bedömningsgrunder en upphandlande myndighet börha vid bedömningen av en leverantörs self-cleaning härom.

Som en konsekvens av att ha begått brott som innefattar bestickning eller
korruption kan en leverantör uteslutas från att få delta i offentliga
upphandlingar. Men enligt den nyligen införda lagen (2016:1145) om
offentlig upphandling ska en leverantör som omfattas av någon uteslutningsgrund numera inte uteslutas om denne visar sig tillförlitlig genom att ha;
1. ersatt eller åtagit sig att ersätta skador som har orsakats av brottet
eller missförhållandet,
2.... (More)
Denna uppsats behandlar self-cleaning vid uteslutning av leverantörer till följd av brott som innefattar bestickning eller korruption. Närmare bestämt utreder uppsatsen vilka bedömningsgrunder en upphandlande myndighet börha vid bedömningen av en leverantörs self-cleaning härom.

Som en konsekvens av att ha begått brott som innefattar bestickning eller
korruption kan en leverantör uteslutas från att få delta i offentliga
upphandlingar. Men enligt den nyligen införda lagen (2016:1145) om
offentlig upphandling ska en leverantör som omfattas av någon uteslutningsgrund numera inte uteslutas om denne visar sig tillförlitlig genom att ha;
1. ersatt eller åtagit sig att ersätta skador som har orsakats av brottet
eller missförhållandet,
2. klargjort förhållanden och omständigheter på ett uttömmande sätt
genom att aktivt samarbeta med de utredande myndigheterna, och
3. vidtagit konkreta tekniska, organisatoriska och personalmässiga
åtgärder som är ägnade att förhindra brott eller missförhållanden.

Bestämmelsen är allmänt formulerad och det finns lite vägledning att tillgå i form av förarbeten, praxis och doktrin avseende vad sådana självsanerande åtgärder bör bestå av mer konkret. Det torde således bli svårt för leverantörer att förutse vad som kommer att krävas vid en self-cleaning. Det torde även bli svårt för upphandlande myndigheter att bedöma en self-cleaning. Denna otydlighet kan sannolikt leda till att olika upphandlade myndigheter bedömer likvärdiga self-cleanings olika. Mot denna bakgrund finns det enligt min uppfattning ett behov av vägledning på området. Sådan vägledning hade lämpligtvis kunnat ges av den nyligen inrättade Upphandlingsmyndigheten. I denna uppsats formuleras frågor som enligt min mening skulle kunna utgöra ett underlag för upphandlande myndigheters bedömning av en self-cleaning. Underlaget skulle med fördel också kunna användas av leverantörer för att öka förståelsen för vad som kan tänkas förväntas av leverantören i samband med en self-cleaning. Underlaget består av ett antal frågeställningar som den upphandlande myndigheten bör besvara vid sin bedömning.

För att undersöka hur den nya bestämmelsen om self-cleaning torde komma
att tillämpas har ledning tagits av hur självsanerande åtgärder används i
andra rättsområden och även till viss del i andra rättsordningar. Därutöver har angränsade frågeställningar beaktats. I övrigt har upphandlingsrättens grundläggande principer tillmätts stor betydelse, inte minst proportionalitets- och likabehandlingsprincipen.

Att alla leverantörer respektive upphandlande myndigheter skulle tillämpa
samma underlag som vägledning för genomförandet respektive
bedömningen av en self-cleaning skulle enligt min mening öka
förutsägbarheten avseende den nya bestämmelsens tillämpning. Detta skulle
innebära stora rättssäkerhetvinster. (Less)
Abstract
This essay concerns self-cleaning in connection with exclusion of public
contract suppliers due to bribery or corruption. More specifically, the essay examines on what grounds contracting authorities should assess a self-cleaning.

As a consequence of being found guilty of bribery or corruption, suppliers can be excluded from the procurement procedure. However, the newly introduced Swedish Public Procurement Act provides that any economic operator that is subject to exclusion now may provide evidence to the effect that measures taken by the economic operator are sufficient to demonstrate its reliability despite the existence of a relevant ground for exclusion. If such evidence is considered as sufficient, the economic operator concerned... (More)
This essay concerns self-cleaning in connection with exclusion of public
contract suppliers due to bribery or corruption. More specifically, the essay examines on what grounds contracting authorities should assess a self-cleaning.

As a consequence of being found guilty of bribery or corruption, suppliers can be excluded from the procurement procedure. However, the newly introduced Swedish Public Procurement Act provides that any economic operator that is subject to exclusion now may provide evidence to the effect that measures taken by the economic operator are sufficient to demonstrate its reliability despite the existence of a relevant ground for exclusion. If such evidence is considered as sufficient, the economic operator concerned shall not be excluded. For this purpose, the operator shall prove that it has;
1. paid or undertaken to pay compensation in respect of any damage
caused by the criminal offence or misconduct;
2. clarified the facts and circumstances in a comprehensive manner by
actively collaborating with the investigating authorities; and
3. taken concrete technical, organisational and personnel measures that
are appropriate to prevent further criminal offences or misconduct.

Neither the Act nor legislative history, case law and legal doctrine provide specific guidance on what concrete measures constitute sufficient selfcleaning.
Consequently, it will probably be difficult for suppliers to foresee
what measures constitute sufficient self-cleaning. For the same reason it will likely be difficult for contracting authorities to assess a self-cleaning. This uncertainty may cause different contracting authorities to assess equivalent self-cleanings differently. In my opinion, there is thus need for guidance on this matter. Such guidance could possibly be provided by the newly established National Agency for Public Procurement. In this essay, I will formulate questions that in my view can constitute the basis for contracting authorities’ assessment of self-cleanings. Suppliers could also use such a guidance to gain insight on what is required for a self-cleaning to be regarded as sufficient. This basis consists of a number of questions that the contracting authorities should include in their assessment.
In order to examine how the newly introduced provision on self-cleaning
will be applied, the use of self-cleaning measures in other branches of law and legal systems have served as guidance. Adjacent questions have also been taken into account. Moreover, the fundamental principles of
procurement law have been found to be of great significance, not least the principles of proportionality and equal treatment.

In conclusion, if all suppliers and contracting authorities were to apply the same basis as guidance when implementing and assessing a self-cleaning, legal certainty in regards to the newly introduced provision would improve. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Eriksson, Linnea LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Self-cleaning in connection with exclusion of public contract suppliers due to bribery or corruption
course
JURM02 20171
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
offentlig upphandling, self-cleaning, komparativ rätt, EU-rätt, upphandlingsrätt, självsanerande åtgärder, upphandling.
language
Swedish
id
8908999
date added to LUP
2017-06-13 15:57:54
date last changed
2017-06-13 15:57:54
@misc{8908999,
  abstract     = {This essay concerns self-cleaning in connection with exclusion of public
contract suppliers due to bribery or corruption. More specifically, the essay examines on what grounds contracting authorities should assess a self-cleaning.

As a consequence of being found guilty of bribery or corruption, suppliers can be excluded from the procurement procedure. However, the newly introduced Swedish Public Procurement Act provides that any economic operator that is subject to exclusion now may provide evidence to the effect that measures taken by the economic operator are sufficient to demonstrate its reliability despite the existence of a relevant ground for exclusion. If such evidence is considered as sufficient, the economic operator concerned shall not be excluded. For this purpose, the operator shall prove that it has;
1. paid or undertaken to pay compensation in respect of any damage
caused by the criminal offence or misconduct;
2. clarified the facts and circumstances in a comprehensive manner by
actively collaborating with the investigating authorities; and
3. taken concrete technical, organisational and personnel measures that
are appropriate to prevent further criminal offences or misconduct.

Neither the Act nor legislative history, case law and legal doctrine provide specific guidance on what concrete measures constitute sufficient selfcleaning.
Consequently, it will probably be difficult for suppliers to foresee
what measures constitute sufficient self-cleaning. For the same reason it will likely be difficult for contracting authorities to assess a self-cleaning. This uncertainty may cause different contracting authorities to assess equivalent self-cleanings differently. In my opinion, there is thus need for guidance on this matter. Such guidance could possibly be provided by the newly established National Agency for Public Procurement. In this essay, I will formulate questions that in my view can constitute the basis for contracting authorities’ assessment of self-cleanings. Suppliers could also use such a guidance to gain insight on what is required for a self-cleaning to be regarded as sufficient. This basis consists of a number of questions that the contracting authorities should include in their assessment.
In order to examine how the newly introduced provision on self-cleaning
will be applied, the use of self-cleaning measures in other branches of law and legal systems have served as guidance. Adjacent questions have also been taken into account. Moreover, the fundamental principles of
procurement law have been found to be of great significance, not least the principles of proportionality and equal treatment.

In conclusion, if all suppliers and contracting authorities were to apply the same basis as guidance when implementing and assessing a self-cleaning, legal certainty in regards to the newly introduced provision would improve.},
  author       = {Eriksson, Linnea},
  keyword      = {offentlig upphandling,self-cleaning,komparativ rätt,EU-rätt,upphandlingsrätt,självsanerande åtgärder,upphandling.},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Self‐Cleaning vid uteslutning av leverantörer till följd av brott som innefattar bestickning eller korruption},
  year         = {2017},
}