ETHIX Transparency Report

Recognized corruption cases across various Argentine provinces reflect how the lack of transparency and absence of control measures have allowed crimes within public procurement processes. In a context where trust in government institutions directly depends on the efficient management of public resources, corruption cases in procurement have a devastating impact on both the private sector and social welfare. In provinces where procurement transparency has been promoted through the implementation of robust information access laws and process digitalization, corruption scandals tend to be less frequent or, when they occur, are managed more effectively. For example, in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires (CABA) and Mendoza, provincial authorities have adopted a series of measures aimed at strengthening citizen control and accountability. In these jurisdictions, procurement processes are more transparent due to the existence of updated, accessible, and operational digital platforms that allow for public auditing and active civil society participation. In these provinces, corruption cases that have emerged have been treated with seriousness and speed. Independent investigations, the creation of external auditing bodies, and the establishment of real-time monitoring systems have reduced the frequency of such crimes. Additionally, political will and commitment to transparency have generated an environment of trust and collaboration between the public and private sectors, which has facilitated the prevention of illicit acts in procurement. However, in other provinces such as Formosa and Chaco, systemic corruption remains a significant challenge. In these regions, the lack of adequate digital infrastructure for procurement and the absence of clear and effective information access laws have created a perfect breeding ground for the diversion of public funds and manipulation of contracting processes. In these places, the lack of internal control, the absence of external audits, and information secrecy allow procurement processes to be compromised by private and political interests, without civil society being able to intervene effectively. In these provinces with greater opacity, corruption scandals are much more difficult to manage. The lack of transparency in publishing procurement data and the absence of citizen participation mechanisms make it difficult to identify irregularities in time. This situation leads to corruption cases not only being ineffectively managed but also perpetuated over time, seriously affecting both the credibility of government institutions and regional economic development. What is observed in this context is that the more advanced and transparent the technological platforms and control systems in the provinces, the less space there will be for corruption. Conversely, in provinces with closed systems and lack of external controls, corruption tends to be much more difficult to eradicate. It is imperative, then, that provinces with high levels of systemic corruption work on improving both transparency and digitalization of processes to effectively curb this problem. Comparing these two realities, it becomes evident that transparency is not just a matter of access to information, but also of political will to implement profound reforms that transform public procurement processes. Provinces with better results have understood that the fight against corruption requires not only strict laws but also a cultural change towards public management that values ethics, transparency, and efficiency in the use of state resources. In summary, corruption cases in Argentine provinces show us the clear difference between those places that have taken important steps to improve transparency and those where corruption continues to be a significant obstacle. The challenge for provinces with high corruption rates is to adopt new technologies, strengthen control standards, and open procurement processes so that all actors have an active role in overseeing the proper administration of public funds. Transparency in procurement not only improves public sector efficiency but also creates a climate of trust that benefits society as a whole.

Improving transparency in public procurement is a complex process that involves both government institutions and civil society. While it is not a change that can be achieved quickly or easily, it is vital for strengthening democratic institutions and ensuring that the use of public resources is adequate, efficient, and responsible. Transparency not only implies the openness of procurement processes, but also commitment to fundamental principles such as equity, integrity, and accountability. In this context, public procurement represents a key area where the lack of control and supervision can give rise to corrupt practices that undermine citizen trust in the government. Provinces that have advanced in the process of improving transparency are those that have significantly digitalized procurement processes and implemented clear laws on public information access. These changes not only facilitate access to information about contracts and procurements but also allow citizens and companies to constantly monitor how contracts and state resources are allocated. Digitalization, in particular, has been an important catalyst for ensuring that processes are more open, impartial, and easily auditable. In provinces with robust digital systems, government actors, companies, and citizens can easily consult documents related to procurements, which reduces opportunities for manipulation and fraud. Additionally, the use of digital platforms allows for greater accessibility and transparency in the process, as procurements and results are easily searchable in real time, contributing to more effective supervision. For example, provinces such as the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and Mendoza have significantly advanced in the digitalization of procurement processes, which has allowed for greater public auditing and better supervision by external entities. These technological advances allow citizens and civil organizations to have an active role in monitoring procurement processes, making it more difficult for corruption acts to go undetected. Furthermore, these provinces have approved public information access laws that, together with digitalization, offer a transparent and accessible system, strengthening trust in the government and its actions. However, provinces that have not yet managed to advance in the adoption of digital technologies and the enactment of clear information access laws remain highly vulnerable to corruption. In these places, procurement processes are more opaque, which generates a trust gap and allows for the manipulation of procurements and diversion of funds to continue undetected or unsanctioned. The lack of digitalization in processes creates an environment in which relevant documents and information are difficult to access or are dispersed in physical or outdated formats, complicating the task of conducting external audits or inquiries by citizens. Additionally, the absence of laws regulating information access in these places means that public procurements are not sufficiently transparent or subject to adequate public supervision. In many cases, this deficit of regulation and technological tools creates a situation where opacity prevails, leaving the way free for corrupt practices that harm the proper use of public funds. The lack of digitalization and clear laws on information access also has a direct impact on competition and the efficiency of procurement processes. In provinces with manual and non-digitalized processes, companies wishing to participate in procurements may face administrative barriers that prevent fair and transparent competition. This can lead to favors for certain companies or groups, reducing the options available to governments and, ultimately, affecting the quality of contracted products or services. Without digital platforms, processes become slow, bureaucratic, and prone to manipulation. Furthermore, the lack of digital tools and legal frameworks to ensure transparency reinforces generalized distrust towards public institutions. In provinces with these deficiencies, the risk of systemic corruption remains high, as procurement circuits remain isolated from public scrutiny and beyond the reach of independent audits. Without adequate means for citizens to actively participate and report irregularities, procurement processes remain vulnerable to abuses. Therefore, to achieve a true strengthening of democratic institutions and public trust, it is essential that provinces that have not yet implemented digital technologies and information access laws do so urgently. It is not just a matter of administrative modernization, but of ensuring that public processes are open and that citizens can trust that state resources are allocated fairly and equitably. Provinces that have already advanced in this regard are demonstrating that transparency in public procurement is not only possible but also an essential tool for preventing corruption and promoting efficiency in the public sector. Therefore, the example of provinces leading the way should serve as a model for those still facing challenges in terms of information access and digitalization. The adoption of these advances is a priority to ensure that public procurement is, ultimately, transparent, fair, and free from corruption.