Document Type : Original Article

Highlights

Summary:

State-owned companies, along with ministries, government agencies, public non-governmental organizations and institutions, advisory administrative councils, and local Islamic councils, are part of the legal entities of public law. The vast amount of funds and financial resources at the disposal of these companies and their significant impact on public life in various areas of infrastructure, natural resources, banking and financial services, food security, health, etc. show the prominent importance of these companies among public institutions. has it. Companies that were first established with the aim of improving the wealth and quality of life of the people, stimulating economic development, attracting investments, etc., and then were privatized to improve their operational efficiency, and today they have increasingly shifted their activities to the international arena. However, they have always been exposed to corruption for reasons such as poor management, close government and political relations with boards and senior management, poor control of conflicts of interest, and lack of accountability through transparency and public reporting. Is threatened. Threats that, without anticipation of control and countermeasures mechanisms, can lead to harms such as corruption and bribery in contracts, misuse of companies to finance political parties and individuals, anti-competitive behavior, and so on.

A review of the experience of leading legal systems in the field of combating corruption in state-owned companies shows that the most effective way to achieve optimal control over the performance of these companies and prevent financial and administrative corruption in them, is to "ensure transparency of financial and administrative affairs."[1]

The present article, using library studies and adopting a descriptive-analytical approach, while conducting comparative studies to provide a model for ensuring transparency of financial and administrative affairs of state-owned companies, after the concept of state-owned companies (first speech), first the general principles of transparency in administrative affairs. And Mali has mentioned them (second speech), then he has shown its practical realization in the countries of the world under four common and well-known models. (Third speech).

Based on the results of the present study, the four principles governing the realization of transparency in state-owned companies are:

1) Establishing the most appropriate response methods, including public access to information on the performance, methods and activities of state-owned companies, as well as public reporting through formal communication with company stakeholders.

2) Exercising organizational transparency through public disclosure of the assets of the parent company, subsidiaries, affiliates of politicians and government officials, introducing the person who controls the state-owned company and is in fact the original owner, as well as introducing other institutions and divisions under ownership; Actively control state-owned companies

3) Participate with stakeholders in the design and implementation of anti-corruption programs

4) Ensuring transparency in relation to the ownership of the company, the management structure and the grants and financial benefits received.

Studies show that Iran's domestic laws and regulations have, to some extent, only implemented the first two of the four principles. Also, a review of the laws and regulations of the world countries regarding the provision of transparency assurance mechanisms in state-owned companies shows that today the above four principles are in the form of four models: "submission of comprehensive annual report", "creation of internal audit process", "dissemination of information" and "inserting corporate budget". Government in the Budget Law "- albeit sometimes in a consolidated form - has emerged in the laws and regulations of countries. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the first model has been neglected in both areas of legislation and implementation, and the second, third and fourth models, despite the provision of legal obligation, each of them is inefficient for some reason.

For example, South Korea can be considered the most prominent country in providing financial and administrative transparency to state-owned companies. According to the Administrative Information Dissemination Law of this country, adopted in 1998, it is necessary to publish information about the performance of all government institutions, state-owned companies and public institutions. In line with this legal requirement, the government has launched a website in which all state-owned companies are required to publish both financial and non-financial information based on specific classifications, enabling every citizen to have a clear view of Obtained the overall performance and ratings of state-owned companies. The general outline of the topics covered by the public release is as follows:

[1] . Other anti-corruption mechanisms in state-owned companies can be summarized in the following nine cases:

1. A) Applying the highest level of ethics and health standards.
2. B) Ensuring the management of successful practices and overseeing anti-corruption programs.
3. C) Ensuring that human resource policies and procedures are supported by anti-corruption programs.
4. D) Design anti-corruption programs based on the assessment of all risks.
5. E) Implementing detailed procedures and policies to combat and counter key corruption risks.
6. C) Managing third-party communications to ensure that they work to the level of anti-corruption standards equivalent to that of state-owned companies.
7. G) Using communication and training to discourse anti-corruption programs.
8. H) Provide safe and accessible consultations and channels of corruption information.
9. G) Monitoring, evaluating and continuously improving procedures based on anti-corruption programs.

• public Law