Status of

Implementation
of the National
Anticorruption
Plan for the
Forestry and
Wildlife Sectors.

Status of
Implementation
of the National
Anticorruption
Plan for the
Forestry and
Wildlife Sectors.

Climate
Governance
Integrity
Program.

PROTICA Consejo Nacional para la tica Pblica

(Captulo Peruano de Transparency International)
Telfonos: (511) 446 8941, 446 8943
Telefax: (511) 446 8581
Correo electrnico: proetica@proetica.org.pe
Manco Cpac 826, Lima 18 PER
www.proetica.org.pe
www.transparency.org
facebook.com/ProeticaPeru
twitter.com/ProeticaPeru

Responsible Team for the Publication:

General Edition Magaly Avila.
Author Magaly Avila, Astrid Aguilar.
Design and layout Manu Mercado.
Photography Institutional Archive.
Lima, PROTICA, 2016
With the support of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety

Index.

ACRONYMS

I. INTRODUCTION
II. METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK
III. BACKGROUND
IV. RESULTS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL
ANTICORRUPTION PLAN FOR THE FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE SECTORS

3
3
4

1. SERFOR
Transparency
The implementation leading position
Achievements
Weaknesses

5
5
6
6
6

2. OSINFOR
Transparency
The implementer role
Achievements
Weaknesses

6
6
7
7
7

3. SERNANP
Transparency
The implementer role
Achievements
Weaknesses

8
8
8
8
8

4. MINAM
Transparency
The implementer role
Achievements
Weaknesses

8
8
8
9
9

5. OEFA
Transparency
Compliance activity

9
9
9

6. THE LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE

11

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ANNEX

13
14

Acronyms.

ADEX
APC
ANP
ARFFS
CAN
CC.NN.
CMNUCC
DAR
DGFFS
D.S.
ESAN
EGILAT
FAO
FEMA
MINAGRI
MINAM
ODS
OEFA
ONG
OSINFOR
PAS
PASF
PCM
R.M.
SERFOR
SERNANP
SERVIR
SFFS
SIADO
SIGO
SINAFOR
SINIA
SITD
SISFOR
SNIFFS
SUNAT
TLC
TUPA
UNALM
UNMSM

Exporters Association (Asociacin de Exportadores)

Natural Protected Area(s)
Forestry and Wildlife Regional Authority (Autoridad Regional Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre)
High Level Commission of Anticorruption (Comisin de alto nivel de Anticorrupcin)
Indigenous peoples communities
Derecho, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales
General Directorate on Forestry and Wildlife
Experts Group on Illegal Logging and Trade
School of Business Administration for Graduates (Escuela de Administracin de Negocios para Graduados)
Food and Agriculture Organization
Public Prosecutors Offices Specialized on Environmental Material (Fiscalas Especializadas en material Ambiental)
Free Trade Agreement
Ministry of Agriculture
Ministry of Environment
Ministerial Resolution
National Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors
Non-Governmental Organization
Decentralized offices
Agency for Assessment and Environmental Control (Organismo de Evaluacin y Fiscalizacin Ambiental)
Supervision Agency of Forest and Wildlife Resources (Organismo de Supervisin de los Recursos Forestales y de Fauna Silvestre)
Administrative Procedure
Presidency of the Council of Ministers
Supreme Decree
National Forest and Wildlife Service
National Service of Protected Natural Areas by the State
National Civil Service Authority
Forestry and Wildlife Sector
Digital Archives System of OSINFOR
Management Information System of OSINFOR
National Forest and Wildlife Management System
National Environmental Information System
Document Processing System
Geographic Information System of Forest and Wildlife Supervisions
National Forest and Wildlife Information System
National Superintendency of Tax Administration
Trade Promotion Agreement
Single Text of Administrative Procedures
National Agrarian University
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
National University of San Marcos

I. Introduction.

II. Methodological Framework.

Peru is the second country in South America with the largest forest cover
and ranks fourth in terms of occupied territory by tropical forest in the
world. Indeed more than half of the Peruvian territory is covered by forests,
representing a total area of 73.3 million hectares.

The aim of this study is to analyze the status of implementation of the

National Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors
(NAPFS). This contemplated questions of two types: i) A principal,
whose answer will solve the information required for this work; and ii)
accessory or secondary questions, which will contribute to the
clarification and solution of the main question(3). The present study is a
preliminary evaluation of the implementation of the NAPFS, so it will
not measure the quality of the progress made by the institutions.

In recent years Peru has begun to implement measures to conserve their

forests in order to meet the requirements of the REDD+ mechanism , i.e. in
order to mitigate the effects of climate change. Among the requirements of
the REDD+(1) mechanism is the implementation of safeguards, i.e. policies
and procedures to avoid social or environmental damage in the preparation
and implementation of REDD+(2). Precisely among the procedural
safeguards we found the need to achieve an efficient and effective
management of natural, human and financial resources and a fair and
equitable redistribution of resources and benefits, better known as good
governance. The latter scenario is the ideal to mitigate corruption risks in
the forest sector.
Given the interest of preserving forests to counteract the effects of climate
change and achieve a scenario of good forest governance to meet the
requirements of the REDD+ mechanism, we are interested in knowing the
progress made so far in the fight against corruption in the forestry sector in
the country.

In this regard, our main question is to know: What is the level of progress
in the implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the
Forestry and Wildlife Sectors?
In order to determine more accurately the possible results of this
question, it was taken into consideration the resolution of accessory
short questions, with which it seeks to know the status of the
implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry
and Wildlife Sectors. These incidental questions are framed in four
dimensions, which are:
Transparency: public information.
The Role of the institution: role normatively assigned and compliance
with the assigned role.
Achievements: Activities fullled.
Weaknesses: weaknesses in the implementation.
All information was collected from implementing institutions and the
NAPFS period of implementation is considered the same as indicated on
the implementation schedule, i.e. between 2011 and 2015.
To obtain this information we proceeded to review the websites of each
of the elected institutions and their transparency portals and the Portal
of the Peruvian State. Also, request for access to public information were
done, and finally, interviews were conducted with officials responsible
for the implementation of the NAPFS. The study was conducted
between December 2015 and March 2016.

(1) "Enfoques de poltica e incentivos positivos para las cuestiones relativas a la reduccin de las emisiones derivadas de la deforestacin y la degradacin de los bosques en los pases en desarrollo; y la funcin de la conservacin, la gestin
sostenible de los bosques y el aumento de las reservas forestales de carbono en los pases en desarrollo. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/spa/07a01s.pdf (2) CMNUCC 2010, Decisin. 1/CP.16 Acuerdos de Cancn: resultado
de la labor del Grupo de Trabajo Especial sobre la cooperacin a largo plazo en el marco de la Convencin. Decisin 1/CP.16 Acuerdos de Cancn: resultado de la labor del Grupo de Trabajo Especial sobre la cooperacin a largo plazo en el
marco de la Convencin. C) Enfoques de poltica e incentivos positivos para las cuestiones relativas a la reduccin de las emisiones debidas a la deforestacin y la degradacin forestal en los pases en desarrollo; y funcin de la conservacin,
la gestin sostenible de los bosques y el aumento de las reservas forestales de carbono en los pases en desarrollo. En: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/spa/07a01s.pdf (3) Methodology suggested by el Dr. Marcial Rubio Correa
en Anexo I: Un Mtodo para el Trabajo Jurdico. En: El Sistema Jurdico, Introduccin al Derecho. Rubio Correa, Marcial (2002). Octava Edicin, Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per, Lima. Pg. 361-370.

III. Background.
The Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA(4)) signed with the United States
in 2006, it is a binding agreement, which aims to eliminate barriers to
trade, consolidating access to goods and services and to encourage private
investment between the two countries. In addition to trade issues, it
incorporates economic, institutional, intellectual property issues, labor
rights and environmental policies; it began to be implemented in 2009.
With this agreement the Peruvian Government was committed to
elaborate and implement an anti-corruption plan for officials in charge of
managing and controlling forest resources. In this scenario, taking into
account the objectives set out in the "National Plan to Fight Against
Corruption 2008-2011", the State in 2010 by M.R. N 0505-2010-AG
declared of priority the elaboration of the National Anticorruption Plan for
the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors. This task was assigned to the General
Directorate on Forestry and Wildlife (DGFFS), from the Ministry of
Agriculture (MINAGRI), who executed and coordinated the necessary
actions to prepare it.
In July 2011, the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and
Wildlife Sectors was approved by S.D. N 009-2011-AG. Article 2 of the
Supreme Decree indicates that the implementation of the National
Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors is the
responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Environment
(MINAM), the National Service of Protected Natural Areas by the State
(SERNANP), Supervision Agency of Forest and Wildlife Resources
(OSINFOR) and regional governments with powers transferred in
forestry and wildlife topics. Also, each of these entities must respond
according to the allocation of activities set out in the schedule plan and
within the scope of their respective powers. In addition the Ministry of
Agriculture, through the General Directorate on Forestry and Wildlife, will
be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the National
Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors. On the other
hand, Article 3 states that "the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the
Forestry and Wildlife Sectors [...] shall be published on the Portal of the
Peruvian State (www.peru.gob.pe) and the Institutional Portals of the
public entities responsible for it."

strategies, plans, policies and projects to face and end corruption in the
forestry sector", in addition to "ensure the commitment of all the signatory
institutions and a budget allocation for the implementation of the National
Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors "(6) .
Finally on July 18, 2013 the Regulation of Organization and Functions of
the National Forest and Wildlife Service (SERFOR) is approved by S.D.
N 007-2013-MINAGRI, which was created on the basis of Article 13 of
the Forestry and Wildlife Law, Law N 29763. This new agency replaces
the DGFFS and becomes the new agency responsible for forestry as well as
responsible for conducting the participatory process of elaboration and
implementation of the National Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and
Wildlife Sectors (Article 143).
The supreme decree passed in 2013 lists the functions of SERFORs
General Directorate of Policy and Competitiveness of Forest and Wildlife
to "elaborate, propose, update and promote the implementation of the
Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors " (Article 46),
meaning SERFOR retakes the functions of the DGFFS regarding the
National Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors.
In this context, and for this study, the national institutions that were
responsible for the implementation of the Plan, i.e. SERFOR, MINAM,
SERNANP and OSINFOR were considered. OEFA did not appear among
the NAPFS implementing institutions, however the NAPFS
implementation schedule pointed this actor responsible for an activity,
besides being part of the institutions that play activities under the FTA, so
it was included. Regional governments with powers transferred in forestry
and wildlife topics were not taken into account in this study.

Consequently on the 6 of December 2011, the dissemination workshop "

the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors "
was held in Lima and was attended by officials from OSINFOR,
SERNANP, Agency for Assessment and Environmental Control (OEFA),
General Directorate on Forestry and Wildlife, Office of the Comptroller
General of the Republic, regional governments and forest and wildlife
regional technical administrations(5), as well as civil society organizations.
In 2012, Protica, DGFFS, the Council of the Peruvian Press,
ProNaturaleza and DAR signed the Agreement of Commitment for Forest
Transparency where they commit, inter alia, to "develop and implement

(4) Also known as the Free Trade Agreement or FTA. (5) Derecho, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (DAR), 2012, Informe Anual 2011: Transparencia en el Sector Forestal Peruano, Lima, Per.
(6) Informe Anual 2012: Transparencia en el Sector Forestal Peruano Derecho, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales - DAR. Lima, 2013. 109 p.
4

IV. Results of the Implementation of the National

Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sectors.(7)
1. SERFOR
a) Transparency.
In December 2015, NAPFS information was sought on the institutions
web portals. When NAPFS information was sought on SERFORs web
portal the link "Anticorruption Plan" was easily found on the main page
(Figure 1). However, the name is misleading, since it is not known whether
it is the NAPFS or the Institutional Anticorruption Plan. Indeed, since the
adoption of S.D. N 043-2013-PCM each agency within the executive
branch must have an anti-corruption plan.

Upon entering the designated link the user arrives to the

http://calendario.serfor.gob.pe/pasf/ web portal where information on the
NAPFS is provided, from news to progress made by the SERFOR
regarding its implementation. However the last news dates back to
December 2014. Later we learned this web portal was outdated. In the
publications section of this website we found the NAPFS document. In
December 2015 we proceeded to identify the official responsible for the
NAPFS implementation through a direct communication with SERFORs
General Directorate of Policy and Competitiveness of Forest and Wildlife
and after asking for the person we were communicated directly with
Attorney Pilar Martinez Maldonado who confirmed her role regarding
NAPFS implementation. In January 2016 we contacted her again to
request a meeting. After not being able to set a date in the immediacy, a
request for access to public information was addressed to the Policy and
Regulations director, Jos Carlos Minaya Rivas.
The response to the request for public information was received the 10th
February 2016, the request was rejected due to lack of precision in the
information requested (Table 1). After this situation a new meeting request
was made, this time it was accepted.

Figure 1: Screenshot of SERFORs web portal

(7) See PASF en http://www.osinfor.gob.pe/portal/data/articulo/Plan-Nacional-Anticorrupcin-del-Sector-Forestal-y-de-Fauna-Silvestre.pdf y/o

http://calendario.serfor.gob.pe/pasf/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Plan-Anticorrupci%C3%B3n-PDF.pdf
5

b) The implementation leading position.

On the 19th February 2016 a meeting with Maria del Pilar Martinez
Maldonado, SERFORs coordinator of the implementation of the National
Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sector, took place. The
coordinator said her work began in 2012 to work on the implementation of
the NAPFS, which has a more preventive than punitive value. It was pointed
out that the lack of goals and indicators in the implementation schedule
hindered the NAPFS assessment work. Difficulties in understanding the
role of SERFOR were also shown by other institutions. SERFOR
leadership, recognized with the approval of its Regulation of Organization
and Functions (S.D. N 007-2013-MINAGRI), helped in the
implementation process, making coordination meetings, and urged the
other stakeholders to provide information about the progress made at
national level. Despite these problems, the official underlined progress in
the development of the National Forest and Wildlife Information System
-SNIFFS through the control unit and the implementation of a
meritocratic civil service. Moreover, it was mentioned that the American
mission of September 2015 was pleased with the progress made.
Based on her experience, the coordinator recommended to improve and
update the NAPFS action lines, which would identify activities to perform
and improve its implementation, specifying an implementation period for
the NAPFS and prepare more publications.
The coordinator expressed interest in working the updated version this year
and at best achieve approval on this period of time. Given the change of
government it was pointed out the will to submit a proposal to the new
government to continue on the same line, and also try to make it a
government policy and improve its interaction among the institutions.
c) Achievements.
As for the progress made regarding the schedule of the NAPFS it was stated
that for the strategic objective I Institutionalize in the Forestry and Wildlife
Sector practices of Good Governance, Ethics, Transparency and to Fight
Effectively Against Corruption the transparency portals were standardized
according to the guidelines of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers
(PCM) and regulations were enacted to reduce heavy paperwork for users.
In addition, with the support of the National Civil Service Authority
(SERVIR), officials have been trained in ethics, a training program aimed at
strengthening the technical capacities, management and leadership of the
institutions of Forestry and Wildlife Sector (SFFS) was implemented
based on the principles of responsibility of the public service, commitment,
teamwork and dedication to the service of citizens. Regarding the strategic
objective II Establishment of a Comprehensive Strategy against
Corruption in the Forestry and Wildlife sector among the agencies that
make up the SFFS and other sectors whose activities affect the Forest and
Wildlife Heritage of the Nation progress

was made like the approval of the new forestry law and the law of state
modernization, also signing agreements with universities (ESAN,
UNALM), NGOs, FAO and EGILAT. As for the strategic objective III
Generate good practice in the private sector to combat corruption it was
mentioned that they have conducted trainings with ADEX, UNMSM and
ESAN regarding environmental crimes and violations of forest and wildlife
laws, as well as the administrative procedures related to their work. In the
case of strategic objective IV Obtain the commitment of civil society in the
participation and active control in the Fight against Corruption the advances
that were mentioned are the awareness and information campaigns
conducted on citizenship, values of democracy, transparency, accountability
and anti-corruption measures with actors in the forestry sector either
virtually or in events, the Agreement of Commitment for Forest
Transparency was signed, there is a regulation of forest management and the
Prior, Free and Informed consultation of Indigenous Peoples was also
respected during the process of drafting the regulations of the new Forestry
Law. Finally, regarding the progress of the strategic objective V Development
of concerted international efforts in the fight against corruption in the
Forestry and Wildlife Sector it was indicated that there has been internships
on issues related to traffic of forest and wildlife species, mechanisms of trade
in environmental services, and environmental crimes. The coordinator also
mentioned that several activities were held in different dates than those
established in the official schedule, especially those who were scheduled on a
date prior to the date of approval of the Plan.
d) Weaknesses.
During the review of the institutional web portal the name of the official in
charge of implementing the plan in the institution was not found. Likewise,
the NAPFS was not located in SERFORs transparency portal or in the
Portal of the Peruvian State section dedicated to SERFOR. On the other
hand, the lack of updating and greater detail in the information provided on
NAPFS web portal limit the extent of this initiative.
2. OSINFOR
a) Transparency.
In the case of OSINFOR, the website of the institution shows the National
Anticorruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sector when we look in
the transparency archive section (8) (Figure 2), as well as in the forest and
environmental policy category (9), besides appearing on the transparency
website of the institution. Also it was the only institution to show the NAPFS
in its Planning and Organization section of OSINFOR on the site of the
Portal of Peruvian State(10)(www.peru.gob.pe).In the communication
established with the institution to identify the official responsible for the
implementation of the NAPFS, on December 2015, it was noted that it was
the Technical Secretary of the Permanent Multisectoral Commission to
Combat Illegal Logging, then-CEO of OSINFOR, Rolando Navarro Gmez
the person incharge. Unfortunately in January he was dismissed, and it was
reported that the new officer in charge was Lenin Gallardo Camacho, head of
the Office of Planning and Budget.

c) Achievements.

Figure 2: Screenshot of OSINFOR web portal

b) The implementer Role.

On the 1st of February 2016, the meeting with Lenin Gallardo (11) and
Miguel Enrique Saenz Nuuvero (12) took place. Both officials were not
involved in the elaboration of the NAPFS. When they were given the
schedule of activities of the NAPFS and were asked about the progress
made they mentioned that they had done some activities, for example in the
case of the Strategic Objective I the Management Information System of
OSINFOR - SIGO (13) and the Geographic Information System of Forest
and Wildlife Supervisions - SISFOR (14) were created. The standardization
of Transparency Portals according to the guidelines of the PCM was
fulfilled and there have been courses for staff on internal control given by
the officials of the Comptroller Office. Regarding the strategic objective II it
was noted that "Operation Amazon(15) " was carried out in 2014 and 2015
and it was performed in collaboration with SUNAT, Interpol and the World
Customs Organization. Finally in the strategic objective IV it was
mentioned that a dialogue with the association of engineers was held and a
list of foresters who provided false documentation was provided, however
OSINFOR went no further because it is outside of its powers. Officials
pointed out that most of the requirements given by the FTA have been
implemented and that these appeared to show similarities with the
requirements of the NAPFS. The compliance matrix of the FTA forestry
annex was reviewed and allowed us to confirm this information. In his
opinion, a way to improve the implementation process of the Plan would be
to take into account the recommendations of the Ombudsman Office who
noted the need to strengthen the decentralized offices (ODS) and have
trained officials. If the NAPFS is updated, officials recommended including
some method to achieve greater deterrent effect and this way prevent
corruption. It was also suggested that regional governments should perform
better control, i.e. strengthen sanctions, because the biggest problems are at
that level. Likewise, to find ways to encourage officials because they do not
always have the resources or are not trained. Finally it is suggested that the
SERFOR and/or the regional governments should make a prior
supervision, following a standardized verification protocol, before
approving permits.

After the meeting with OSINFOR officials a request for access to public
information was sent, which was answered on February 26, 2016 via email
and inviting us to retrieve the documentation (Table 1). The information
provided by the agency was very detailed and complements what was said
during the interview, for example in the strategic objective I it is stated that
the SIADO (16) (Digital Archives System of OSINFOR), SITD (17)
(Document Processing System) and the Consultation of Coercive Records
Unit (18) were implemented, the Diagnostic Report of the Internal Control
System and the Work Plan for the implementation of OSINFOR Internal
Control System were approved, and the book " OSINFORs Monitoring and
Control on forestry permits granted to native communities" where there is a
table with the list of professionals who signed annual work plans with
absence of trees was published. The creation and allocation of responsible
officials for the Ad Hoc Committees on Disciplinary Administrative
Procedures and for the Commission on Disciplinary Administrative
Processes took place, as well as the participation in meetings held by the
Intergovernmental Group and to two events linked to anticorruption. The
Permanent Multisectoral Commission to Fight Illegal Logging was also
created and informs SERFOR and the Forestry and Wildlife Regional
Authorities (ARFFS) when sending communications regarding cases where
false information is presented. In the case of the strategic objective II there
have been various legislative proposals in order to ensure supervisory
actions and contribute to the fight against illegal logging, also the marketing
of products coming from unmanaged forests was restricted. On the other
hand, between 2005 and 2015 there have been 4,429 supervisions
comprising 66% of the estimated existing authorization certificates in 2015,
and as a result it has generated 4,042 legal evaluated procedures (91%), of
which as of December 31, 2015, 87% were completed. Finally until January
2016 OSINFOR has signed 40 agreements with other public and private
entities with the aim of strengthening the effectiveness of the activities of the
institution and has been also conducting various training to native
communities (CC.NN.) and other forest sector stakeholders and have run
three workshops for officials of the Public Prosecutor Offices Specialized on
Environmental Material (FEMA). In the strategic objective IV it is stated
that a mechanism that allows a CC.NN representative (observer) to
accompany OSINFOR while performing supervisory activities in CC.NN
permits was implemented. The first half of 2015, 59 supervisions were made
and attended by these forest observers. Regarding the strategic objective V it
was reported that an agreement with Colombias Ministry of Environment
was signed, and in this framework there has been conducted 4 workshops, in
addition to continuing activities of exchange of information and knowledge.
In the sent documents it was stated that, although OSINFOR appear as
responsible for implementing activities under the official schedule of the
NAPFS, some of these activities could not be done by the entity as they were
outside its powers and functions.
d) Weaknesses.
On the official web portal the information regarding the implementation of
the NAPFS or the name of the official responsible for the implementation in
the institution could not be found.

(8) http://www.osinfor.gob.pe/osinfor/documentos/plan-nacional-anticorrupcion-del-sector-forestal-y-de-fauna-silvestre/ (9) http://www.osinfor.gob.pe/portal/documentos.php?&idcat=1

(10) http://www.peru.gob.pe/transparencia/pep_transparencia_lista_planes.asp?id_entidad=13658&id_tema=5#.V1mCLvnhDcc (11) Head of the Office of Planning and Budget at OSINFOR. (12) Official of the sub Office of Planning at OSINFOR.
(13) PAllows real-time information on the progress and results of the processes of supervision, inspection and training made by OSINFOR, in order to monitor and evaluate the performance of management and utilization of forest resources and
wildlife through enabling titles granted by the State. (14) HKey tool in the planning and monitoring of the supervision of concessions, permits and authorizations, as well as in the generation of information that will help to reduce deforestation, mining
affectation areas, wetlands and the probability of presence of forest species nationwide. (15) In these operations OSINFOR supervised the areas with authorization certificates which are identified in the Forest Transport Guides and, if it was the case,
they identified irregularities. (16) It allows safely protect the digital version of the original records of supervision and control of OSINFOR. (17) PIt allows make sure the authorship of information, integrity, privacy, timeliness and auditable evidence.
(18) Allows to know the status of coercive records (resolution imposing fine and that has not been paid within the ordinary period) i.e. if receivable, suspended, if there is a freezing order, if payments have been made and general data of the PAU.

3. SERNANP
a) Transparency
The NAPFS again is not on the web portal or transparency portal of the
institution. This was also the case of the name of the official responsible for
the implementation in the institution and a section devoted to the NAPFS
implementation or the progress made in the institutional portal was not
found. To identify the person responsible for its implementation a phone call
was made and a first name was provided. However, when a second
communication was established it was mentioned that the official responsible
was another and he was on leave, nevertheless it was later confirmed that this
person was not the responsible official. Because of this a request for access to
public information was sent to the Director of Management of Protected
Natural Areas, Cecilia Cabello (Table 1).
b) The implementer Role.
In February 2016 SERNANP responded to the request for access to public
information where they noted the existence of a working group responsible
for coordinating the implementation of the NAPFS in the institution,
following Presidential Resolution N 115-2012-SERNANP, whose current
president is Carlos Bereche Garcia.
c) Achievements.
In response to the request for access to public information SERNANP stated
that the institution has made several advances on implementing the NAPFS
activities like for example in the specific objective I the Law N 27806, Law
on Transparency and Public Information Access and SERNANPs Single
Text of Administrative Procedures (TUPA) were implemented, as well as
designating different officials responsible for public information access.
Compliance reports were also sent to the PCM and the number of requests
for access to public information that were taken care over the last 5 years too.
The GEOPORTAL was also implemented on SERNANPs website, which
reports on the state of conservation of ANP and identifies the loss of habitat
by human activities such as illegal logging. There is legal and technical
information published on the institutional website concerning its powers in
forestry and wildlife topics within ANP, there is also a record of offenders and
press releases on interventions to illegal loggers within ANP. In turn they
indicated that the Tools for promotion and management of renewable natural
resources
was
approved
by
Presidential
Resolution
N
029-2016-SERNANP and SERNANPs Institutional Schedule for
implementation of the Performance Management Model, Pilot Stage - Phase
1, was approved by Secretary General Resolution N 006-2016-SERNANP.
Finally the case "Grocio Gil"(19) was registered in the National Registry of
Dismissals of the Human Resources Administrative Management System of
SERVIR. During 2012, SERNANPs Office of Legal Counsel provided 14
training sessions aimed at the ranger staff, specialists, and/or the heads of
various Protected Natural Areas, representatives of the National
Government, Regional and/or Local Governments, in terms of
Administrative Procedure (PAS) affecting the ANP with national
administration, approved by Supreme Decree N 019-2010-MINAM. Also
during 2014, this office provided six training sessions on PAS.

Rergarding the strategic objective II it was informed that in March 2012

SERNANP conducted a training for judicial officers (judges and
prosecutors) and have a list of convictions for offenses against forests or
forest formations favorable for SERNANP (from 2011 to December 2015).
In addition to these results SERNANP participated and made contributions
to the Forest and Wildlife Law Regulations draft, approved by Supreme
Decrees N 018, 019, 020 and 021-2015-MINAGRI.
It was also reported that currently SERNANPs working group is conducting
the evaluation of the implementation of the NAPFS in the institution.
d) Weaknesses.
The weakness in the implementation of the NAPFS is in the transparency
dimension, by not publishing on its website the plan and the name of the
official responsible for its implementation in the institution, or to account for
the activities progress in compliance with the NAPFS.

4. MINAM
a) Transparency.
In the case of MINAM the NAPFS or the name of the official responsible for
its implementation were not listed on the website or transparency portal of
the institution. We proceeded twice to inquire by telephone the officials
name responsible for the implementation of the NAPFS, in none of them
they answered with certainty. In front of this situation a request for
information was sent to Raquel Hilianova Soto Torres, General Director of
the Policies, Standards and Environmental Management Instruments
(Table 1).
b) The implementer Role.
On February 11, 2016, the MINAM responded to our information access
request. In the response they mentioned that the strategic objectives of the
NAPFS are related to the objectives outlined in the Ministry of Environment
Plan to Fight Corruption so the implementation of actions allows advances
in both plans. In this regard, it is noted that progress has been made in the
NAPFS strategic objective I where actions for information access,
administrative simplification, transparency and strengthening of supervisory
bodies in the MINAM and its affiliated bodies have been implemented. As for
the strategic objectives II and V of the NAPFS, the actions MINAM was in
charge require the implementation of the SNIFFS and the approval of the
regulations of the National Forest and Wildlife Management System
(SINAFOR) as well as meetings are held. As this occurs, MINAM performs
coordination actions, trainings and systemization of information through
sectoral mechanisms and coordinates with the forestry sector.
It was also indicated that the official in charge of monitoring the NAPFS
implementation in MINAM was the Executive Coordinator of the National
Forest Conservation for the Mitigation of Climate Change Program, Mr.
Gustavo Suarez de Freitas Calmet.

(19) In 2013 the sanction of discharge is given by finding him guilty of failing to take appropriate action against the marketing of taricaya eggs, renewal of licenses to groups that had failed to fulfill their obligations and delivery of
permits to groups that did not fulfilled the prerequisites (Resolution N 01442-2013- SERVIR/TSC-Primera Sala).
8

c) Achievements.
Due to what was mentioned above, it is understandable that progress in
implementing the NAPFS in the institution has not been as significant as it
could be. However we can mention the fulfillment of certain activities such as
the design and implementation of the National Environmental Information
System (SINIA), the implementation of the policy and plan of administrative
simplification through the implementation of TUPA and the standardization
of the transparency portal according to the guidelines of the PCM. It should
be noted that these activities are not only given in compliance with the
NAPFS, but also in compliance with the Law of Transparency and Access to
Public Information and its regulations, as well as the Administrative
Simplification Law (Law N 25035) among others.
d) Weaknesses
On its website, MINAM does not show contact information of the official
responsible for the implementation of the NAPFS, nor provides public
information on the progress of its activities. It is noted that while answering
the request for public information the institution did not provide details on
their implemented activities but they are mentioned in general terms.

b) Compliance Activity.
On February 5 a meeting with Diana Mirella Rivera Oliva (20) was held at
OEFAs headquarters. Prior to the meeting the official stated that she had
recently assumed the post for the General Coordination of Integrity,
Responsibility, Ethics and Anti-Corruption. In the interview she mentioned
that she had not participated in the elaboration of the NAPFS. The activity
OEFA was given was to "Implement records of complaints, an offenders
register and a register of companies involved in illegal and corrupt acts".
When discussing the implementation of this activity it was indicated that
OEFA made a record of complaints, an internal record that does not belong
to the public domain. However, according to the implementation schedule it
was expected for this record to be accessible to any citizen, reason why it was
considered as an activity not fulfilled.
The official mentioned the existence of an institutional anti-corruption plan
for the agency that was expected to be approved in a few days. Because of
this, the appropriateness of including OEFA in the case of a NAPFS update
was questioned, as pointed out that the forestry sector is not within OEFAs
powers. Upon taking office recently, the coordinator could not provide
further details on the implementation of the NAPFS.

5. OEFA
a) Transparency.
Despite not being an implementing institution of the NAPFS, the
transparency dimension was also applied to the reviewing of the institutions
web portals, and it revealed the absence of the NAPFS in both of its website
and in its transparency portal. When a direct communication was established
to identify the person responsible for the implementation of the NAPFS, it
was mentioned that the official responsible should be an official from the
General Coordination of Integrity, Responsibility, Ethics and
Anti-Corruption. It was until January 2016 that they indicated that the
official responsible for the NAPFS was the official Diana Rivera Oliva.

(20) Senior Management Advisor, Coordinator of the Design and Control of Strategic Projects and General Coordinator of Integrity, Responsibility, Ethics and Anti-Corruption.

Table 1: Summary of requests for public information access.

Criteria(21)
Institution

Shipping date

Answer date

Addressee

Information required

Complete

Timely

Accurate

29th of January 2016 11th of February 2016

General Directorate of the

Policies, Standards and
Environmental Management
Instruments

- Any document related to the progress made in the

implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the
Forestry and Wildlife Sector
- Any document in which the total or partial implementation
of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and
Wildlife Sector is evaluated
- The name, position and contact details of the officer in
charge of monitoring the implementation of the National
Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sector in
the Ministry of Environment

No

Yes

Yes

SERNANP

29th of January 2016

Management Division of Natural

Protected Areas

- Any document related to the progress made in the

implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the
Forestry and Wildlife Sector
- Any document in which the total or partial implementation
of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and
Wildlife Sector is evaluated
- The name, position and contact details of the officer in
charge of monitoring the implementation of the National
Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sector in
SERNANP

No

Yes

Yes

OSINFOR

10th of February 2016 26th of February

2016 (On February
17th 2016, 5 more
work days were
requested)

Executive Presidency

- Any document related to the fulfillment of the activities

listed in the schedule of implementation of the National
Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sector
- Any document related to the progress made in the
implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the
Forestry and Wildlife Sector
- Any document in which the total or partial implementation
of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and
Wildlife Sector is evaluated
- The name, position and contact details of the officer in
charge of monitoring the implementation of the National
Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and Wildlife Sector in
OSINFOR

Yes

Yes

Yes

SERFOR

29th of January 2016

Policy and Regulation Division

- Any document related to the progress made in the

implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the
Forestry and Wildlife Sector
- Any document in which the total or partial implementation
of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for the Forestry and
Wildlife Sector is evaluated

Request
rejected

Request
rejected

Yes

MINAM

11th of February 2016

11th of February 2016

Source: Prepared by author.

(21) The criteria used to evaluate the implementing institutions responses were that the information was complete, accurate and timely.

10

6. The Level of Compliance.

Following the implementation schedule of the NAPFS and the
information gathered through interviews, requests for information access
and checking websites, we made a comparison between the activities
planned by the NAPFS and the activities carried out by the institutions. If
the activities were not carried out or were carried out partially these were
considered as not carried out and assigned 0 points, however the activities
carried out in full by the implementing institutions were considered as
carried out and assigned 1 point (Table 2). The quality of the
implementation of the activities set out in the NAPFS was not evaluated in
this study due its preliminary nature.
The implementation of the NAPFS has a percentage of overall progress of
31.55%. The percentage of progress by institution is: SERFOR 58.1%;
OSINFOR 44.4%; SERNANP 16.6%; MINAM 7.1%; and OEFA 0%.
Regarding the results it should be considered the difficulties encountered
during the years of implementation of the NAPFS activities, on one hand
there are reasons linked to the political situation, on the other hand there
was the creation of a new forestry institution after the approval of the
Forestry and Wildlife law, Law N 29763, and the mandatory process of
institutional adaptation that different agencies with powers in the forestry
sector made following the adoption of this new law.

11

Table 2: NAPFS Activities Compliance by institution.

Strategic objectives

SERFOR

OSINFOR

SERNANP

MINAM

OEFA

4/5

3/3

3/5

2/5

Strategy I.2: Implement the Policy and Plan of Administrative

Simplification in the Forestry and Wildlife Sector as a strategy to
fight corruption

1/2

0/1

1/2

1/2

Strategy I.3: Strengthen the SFFS Human Resources

Management System for the prevention of corruption

5/8

4/8

2/8

0/8

Strategy I.4: Strengthening supervisory bodies and the supervision

of SFFS authorities

2/4

2/4

0/4

0/4

0/1

0/1

1/1

0/1

0/1

0/1

2/2

1/2

0/2

0/2

Strategy II.3: Strengthen and modernize the information system

and forest control at national, regional and local level, and link it to
other instances of Forestry and Wildlife Monitoring and
Environmental Control

0/1

0/1

0/1

Strategy II.4: Contribute to the capacity building of staff of the

Public Ministry, Judiciary Power and National Police of Peru in
order to strengthen the fight against corruption in the Forestry and
Wildlife Sector

0/1

0/1

0/1

0/1

Strategy II.5:
Establish, within the framework of its powers, an effective legal
framework in the fight against corruption in the management of SFFS

1/1

0/1

0/1

0/1

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE III:

Generate good practice in the private sector
to combat corruption

Strategy III.1: Promote an ethical, control mechanisms and

corruption complaints culture within the private sector and business
associations

1/1

0/1

0/1

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE IV:

Obtain the commitment of civil society in
the participation and active control in the
Fight against Corruption

Strategy IV.1: Develop a culture of ethics, transparency and

anti-corruption in civil society actors linked to the Forestry and
Wildlife Sector
Strategy IV.2: Facilitate and promote mechanisms for citizen
participation and oversight in the fight against corruption in the
SFFS

5/6

0/1

0/2

0/6

2/6

1/1

0/6

0/6

0/1

0/1

0/1

0/1

1/1

0/1

0/1

1/2

0/1

0/2

0/2

25

12

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE I:
Institutionalize in the Forestry and Wildlife
Sector practices of Good Governance,
Ethics, Transparency and to Fight
Effectively Against Corruption

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE II:

Establishment of a Comprehensive Strategy
against Corruption in the Forestry and
Wildlife sector among the agencies that
make up the SFFS and other sectors whose
activities affect the Forest and Wildlife
Heritage of the Nation

Strategies
Strategy I.1: To improve and strengthen mechanisms for
accountability, information access, promotion of ethics and
transparency in the Forestry and Wildlife Sector

Strategy I.5: Strengthening the process of decentralization of

powers in the SFFS
Strategy II.1: Promote the inclusion of SFFS and its articulation to
the National System to Fight Corruption
Strategy II.2: Coordinate and monitor the actions of multi-sectoral
and regional anti-corruption fight and that have an impact on the
Forestry and Wildlife Sector at national and regional level

Strategy IV.3: Promote the active participation of the media in the

fight against corruption in the Forestry and Wildlife Sector
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE V:
Development of concerted international
efforts in the fight against corruption in the
Forestry and Wildlife Sector

Strategy V.1: Implementation of international mechanisms

and procedures to combat corruption associated with the
activities of SFFS.
Strategy V.2: Promote cooperation, exchange of information and
joint actions with international institutions linked to the control,
supervision and international control of the legality of forest and
wildlife products and species

Total activities carried out

Total activities to implement
Percentage of progress by institution
Percentage of overall progress(22)

43

27

36

42

58.1%

44.4%

16.6%

7.1%

0%

31.55%
Source: Prepared by author

(22) Measured from the % generated by the activities carried out from the implementing institutions.

12

V. Conclusions and Recommendations.

Conclusions
The status of the overall progress of the implementation of the NAPFS is
31.5%. The percentage of progress by institution is: SERFOR 58.1%;
OSINFOR 44.4%; SERNANP 16.6%; MINAM 7.1%; and OEFA 0%.
None of implementing institutions shows the name of the ocial
responsible for the implementation on their institutional web portals. Also
two of the four NAPFS implementing institutions struggled to identify the
official responsible for its monitoring.
At the end of the study there was no ocial assessment of its
implementation (23).
The implementation problems appear from the design of the NAPFS as
it is understood that it was prepared without taking into account the
limitations on the powers of the institutions responsible for its
implementation. Also, there is a lack of knowledge on public management
times, indeed on the implementation schedule there are dates of activities
to be undertaken prior to the date of approval of the plan. Furthermore, no
goals and indicators were contemplated, but implementing institutions
and temporality in the implementation schedule were indicated.
Implementers conducted activities that met the NAPFS activities, but
also in the follow-up to other plans such as the Forestry Annex of the FTA,
the Law of Transparency and Access to Public Information, among others.
MINAMs lack of monitoring on the implementation of the NAPFS
creates a good forest governance shortcoming, as the MINAM is the focal
point for REDD+ to the UNFCCC as well as who gives land rights in the
case of creation of protected natural areas, regional conservation areas,
private conservation areas and permanent production forests (24) , however
these actions have been carried out in recent years without proper NAPFS
implementation and interagency coordination.

Recommendations
The ght against corruption is a central issue in forest governance. We
need to generate an update that includes NAPFS progress in its
implementation and works in a coordinated manner across sectors. It
should also have resources allocated for each sector responsible for its
implementation and monitoring.
The elaboration of the second stage of the NAPFS should consider
having impact indicators, performance indicators, products and
sub-activities for proper implementation.
The NAPFS should be involved since its elaboration actors and sectors
responsible for its monitoring and implementation, as well as sectors with
responsibilities in forest control (Comptroller Office, PNP, Attorney
General Office, Ombudsman office, Prosecutor Office).
Regular information and monitoring meetings should take place in order
to assess the implementation of the NAPFS activities. Likewise, the
implementation progress needs to be visible on institutional web portals.
Although they did not make part of the study, sub-national governments
should be involved as key players in the fight against corruption in the
forestry and wildlife sector.
If the NAPFS is updated, interaction and dialogue between all entities
with powers in the forestry sector must be generated, as well as joint work
with institutions involved in the fight against corruption, also civil society,
indigenous peoples and actors linked to the issue.
The NAPFS has been until now a document of prevention in the ght
against corruption, a vision that should continue in its next version.

The division of powers in forestry and the lack of interagency

coordination are part of the elements that have generated a limited
implementation of the NAPFS.

(23) According to the activities included in the NAPFS, it should have been implemented between 2011 and December 2015. (24) See Annex No. 1: Public entities with territorial jurisdiction under
category - Amazonian rainforests. Some of these powers were modified in 2014 following the adoption of Law N 30230.
13

Annex N 1: Public entities with territorial jurisdiction under

category - Amazonian rainforests.
TERRITORIAL
CATEGORY

Rural property

CREATION
(Entity
granting land
rights)

Direccin
Regional
Agraria
(DRA-GORE)

ADMINISTRAT
ION
(Entity granting
resource
management /
Territory or
Resource
Management)

ARFFS
(GORE)
ATFFS
(SERFOR)

CONTROL,
SUPERVISION
AND OVERSIGHT
OF ACTIVITIES

SPECIAL
BODIES

PREVENTION AND
PUNISHMENT OF CRIME

Administrative
sanctions to
persons directly
responsible of
authorization
certificates

Supervision and
coordination on
illegal logging and
illegal mining

Criminal
sanctions

OSINFOR

Oficina del Alto

Comisionado en
Asuntos de la
Lucha Contra la
Tala Ilegal

Constitutional PROCURA
body
DURIA

Polica
Nacional

Fiscala
Especializada
en Materia
Ambiental
FEMA

Direccin
Contra la tala
Ilegal y
Proteccin de
los Recursos
Naturales

Native
communities
Rural
communities
Protected
natural
areas

MINAM
(DS)

SERNANP

SERNANP

Regional
Conservation
Areas

MINAM
(DS)

GORE

SERNANP

Private
Conservation
Areas

MINAM
(RM)

PRIVADOS

SERNANP

Timber
forest
concessions

ARFFS
(GORE)

ARFFS
(GORE)
ATFFS
(SERFOR)

OSINFOR

Non-timber
forest
concessions

ATFFS
(SERFOR)

Oficina del Alto

Comisionado en
Asuntos de
Formalizacin de
la Minera,
Interdiccin de la
Minera Ilegal y
Remediacin
Ambiental

rgano
Constitucional

Legal
defense for
the State

ENVIRONINSTITUTIO
MENTAL
NAL
CONTROL
CONTROL
COMPONENT
Ff entities that
Of entities that grant
grant any
administration
authorization
(INTERNAL)
certificate

Supporting
forces in
prevention,
investigation,
reporting and
interdiction

OEFA

Contralora
General de la
Repblica
Constitutional
body

Fuerzas
Armadas

Permanent
production
forests

MINAM
(RM)

Land reserves for

indigenous peoples in
voluntary isolation

MINCU
(RM)

MINCU/VI/
DGPI PIACI

Uncategorized
areas (26.7%)

Source: Huamani Castro G. (2015). Contexto del sistema nacional de monitoreo de la cobertura de bosques [25].
Presentado en el Seminario-Taller Monitoreo con fines de REDD+: Metodologas, Resultados y Planteamiento

(1) FCPF 2014c, Resolution Eleventh Carbon Fund Meeting. October 6-8. CFM/11/2014/3.Selection of Per Emission Reductions Program Idea Note into the Pipeline En:
https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2014/october/Resolution%203%20Peru%20ER-PIN.pdf (2) CIF 2010, Directrices Operacionales del PInS. 29 de junio del 2010. En:
https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/cif/sites/climateinvestmentfunds.org/files/FIP_Operational_Guidelines_final_spanish.pdf
14

Consejo Nacional para la tica Pblica

(Captulo Peruano de Transparency International)
Telfonos: (511) 446 8941, 446 8943
Telefax: (511) 446 8581
Correo electrnico: proetica@proetica.org.pe
Manco Cpac 826, Lima 18 PER

www.proetica.org.pe
www.transparency.org
facebook.com/ProeticaPeru
twitter.com/ProeticaPeru