Agency brief

The citizen submissions routed to the State Supervision Service (SSS) focus on public sector accountability, official misconduct, and the transparency of supervisory audits. A key operational concern is the lack of public follow-up on an SSS audit at the Environmental Protection and Mining Inspection Body, which employees claim has enabled ongoing retaliation and administrative paralysis. Other submissions raise broader concerns about state officials allegedly sabotaging investments and MPs interfering in regional personnel appointments. SSS should prioritize clarifying the outcomes of its inspection audits to protect whistleblowers and coordinate with the PMO to address allegations of administrative misconduct.

Urgency signals

• High Alleged retaliation against whistleblowers following SSS audit

  Employees who complained to the Prime Minister face ongoing hostile treatment and threats of non-forgiveness by the head of the Inspection Body, following an SSS audit that has not been publicly resolved.

  Review the status of the SSS audit of the Environmental Protection and Mining Inspection Body and coordinate with the PMO to ensure whistleblower protection.

  Evidence →

A request can support more than one focus area, so supporting counts do not sum to the submission total.

1. 01 Follow-up and transparency of SSS audits in inspection bodies High First analysis period

   Supporting count not computable

   Employees of the Environmental Protection and Mining Inspection Body report ongoing retaliation and work paralysis because SSS's audit results have not been officially clarified or acted upon.

   • · Brief PMO leadership on the status and findings of the SSS audit of the Environmental Protection and Mining Inspection Body · Within 7 days
   • · Request a joint case protocol with the PMO to protect whistleblowers in the Environmental Protection and Mining Inspection Body · Within 7 days
2. 02 Allegations of administrative sabotage and barriers for investors Standard First analysis period

   Supporting count not computable

   An investor claims that state officials are actively sabotaging charitable and investment initiatives, requiring formal legal and supervisory assessments.

   • · Publish a clarification on how citizens can submit specific evidence of official misconduct or illegal interference to SSS · Within 30 days
   • · Coordinate with the Ministry of Economy to review specific administrative barriers reported by investors · Within 30 days
3. 03 Political and external interference in regional personnel appointments Standard First analysis period

   Supporting count not computable

   Allegations of Members of Parliament interfering in regional administrative appointments undermine public trust in civil service neutrality.

   • · Publish a clarification on how citizens can submit specific evidence of official misconduct or illegal interference to SSS · Within 30 days

Coordination needs

• Office of the Prime Minister · SHARED_CASE_HANDLING

  The PMO is the primary recipient of these direct appeals to the Prime Minister, and SSS must coordinate on the civil service misconduct allegations and whistleblower protection.

• National Assembly · MANDATE_BOUNDARY

  Allegations of MPs interfering in regional appointments require clear boundaries between legislative oversight and executive personnel decisions.

• Ministry of Economy · SHARED_CASE_HANDLING

  Allegations of state officials sabotaging investment environments require joint review with the Ministry of Economy's investment departments.

What not to overweight

Broad, politically charged rhetoric regarding 'counter-revolutionary officials' or generalized 'sabotage' should not distract from investigating specific, actionable claims of whistleblower retaliation and audit delays.