Note the President of the Republic, by law, is no longer chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council .

COCA is under under the Office of the President of the Republic and reports to the Director of the Office of the Presidency.

References: Republican Decree of Law No. 39, 1992, Central Organization for Control and Auditing (COCA)

Law No. 39, 2006 Concerning Combatting Corruption

Decree of the President of the Republic, chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council No. 3, 1996, Concerning the Establishment of the Public Property/Funds Courts

Law for the Establishment of the Public Property Prosecution

Public property is under the Judicial Authority, which is theoretically independent now, as the Supreme Judicial Council is chaired by the chariman of the Supreme Court.

COCA is still under the control of the president's office, and it is the entity more qualified to undertake investigative work on corruption.

References: Law No. 39, 2006, Concerning Combating Corruption, Article 15

The remarkable phenomenon is that the Central Organization for Control and Auditing (COCA) is actually trying to get corruption cases to the courts and succeeding, even though it is the least independent of all the anti-corruption agencies. The results achieved after that are beyond COCA's control.

References: [ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

An extensive search in various media channels (official, partisan and independent) and among acquaintances in the relevant government agencies provided no evidence of the head of an anti-corruption agency being axed for his actions, for the simple reason that there none of them have made any significant moves to test the limits of their "mandates.

References: Anti-Corruption Law No. 39, 2000, Article 11

Various media reports

Peer Review Comments: So far, no chairman or any member of the Supreme National Committee for Combating Corruption has been removed without relevant justification.

Initiation of SNAPP members appointments starts with the Consultative Assembly, the membership of which itself is fully by presidential appointment. The second source, although dated, and the researcher personally testify to the diligent efforts of the former deputy chairman of COCA, interviewed in the article, to challenge the extent to which holds sway over the public-service sector. He was dismissed for this diligence, a fact that will not fade in the memory of current appointees to sensitive positions in any of the anti-corruption agencies, especially COCA.

The third source notes: "At the end of June, the Yemeni Parliament, after more than two months of scrutiny, has approved the board members for the Supreme National Anti-Corruption Committee (SNACC) from the list of candidates proposed by the Shura Council."

References: Anti-Corruption Law No. 39, 2000, Article 11

[ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

"The authorities have embarked on an extensive set of structural reforms since early 2006, although outcomes have yet to materialize. These reforms cover areas such as governance, public financial management, civil services administration and the general investment climate. The formation of SNACC was finalized when Parliament gave its approval to the selected board members." From third source

References: Anti-Corruption Law No. 39, 2000, Article 11

[ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

It is too early to judge how SNACC's work impacts its budgets, which are almost guaranteed to be sustained, since civil service employees salaries continue even if the employee has commited a felony.

References: [ LINK ]

2007 and 2008 Budgets

"The Yemeni institutional infrastructures that are responsible for fighting and preventing corruption have been characterized by a serious crisis of responsibility. In addition, this framework faces many obstacles and a lack of transparency and accountability in its structure and level of administration. Building transparent and accountable institutions for preventing corruption is a fundamental starting point for developing good governance and fighting corruption in Yemen."

"The law requires a degree of transparency and public access to information, and the Press and Publications Law provides for journalists to have some access to government reports and information; however, in practice the government offered few procedures to ensure transparency. In August 2006 Parliament passed a law requiring public disclosure of government officials' assets, and the Supreme National Anti-Corruption Committee (SNACC) worked to implement this during the year. The government provided limited information on Internet sites; however, few citizens had access to the Internet.

The relevant stipulations in the pertinent legislation of these agencies and other related laws further reinforce the imitations of public access to most of the work of the ombudsman agencies.

References: [ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

Relevant legislation

SNACC is the first anti-corruption authority of its kind in the Middle East. From first source

It appears that rather minor, insignificant cases are attracting the attention of SNACC. One example is a case of bureaucratic red tape rather than one of "big" corruption, which is what SNACC was expected to deal with. While not dismissing the strong possibility of corruption in smaller cases, there are surely more areas of bigger corruption that SNACC should take on if any seriousness/sincerity is to be reflected in its work. From second source

References: [ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

SNACC, according to the Anti-Corruption Law, is also empowered to initiate investigations of public property/corruption cases. It is most likely, however, that COCA will undertake the investigative work for SNACC, in view of COCAs experience and resources (specifically, qualified manpower). While the researchers personal experience with COCA demonstrates diligent investigative work and meaningful conclusions, the following would indeed present a problem in making the work as effective as it should be in terms of indictment, prosecution and penalization: The Central Organization for Control and Auditing (COCA), as an anti-corruption watchdog, in practice is not an independent body. It is answerable to the president and presents its report to Parliament once a year. It has been monitoring government revenues, spending, procurement and performance. But its reports are either not taken into account or are being used to blackmail government officials.

While SNACC has reported that many cases have been designated for its perusal, no reports yet exist of any major corruption cases being prosecuted or tried.

References: [ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

"Only low-ranking officials have been prosecuted for corruption since the inception of the Central Organization for Control and Auditing (COCA). The actual number of corruption cases was generally considered to be significantly higher than what was reported by COCA." From second source

References: [ LINK ]

[ LINK ]

It is unrealistic to expect citizens to be able to determine where there is a case of corruption, since very little is publicly revealed about government operations. The people who are aware of their rights are few and far from any knowledge of what is right and wrong in the doings of government.

"The government body said it had received 71 complaints during the second quarter of 2008, noting that it is completing investigations in nine corruption cases, including irregularities related to biddings and bids, forgery offenses and the seizure of public funds and properties, as well as tax and customs evasions."

References: [ LINK ]

[ LINK ] (official News Agency)