Recognising conflicts of interest

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

In this video we will work through a concrete decision: identify interests that may compromise an impartial decision. The aim is to explain the criterion used and apply it to a workplace situation. We will start with the concept, move to the procedure and finish with a case to solve. Rules depend on role, activity and organisation. No single permitted gift value applies to every Croatian person and situation. This course connects interest disclosure and gift assessment to the applicable code. Public procurement examples reflect the 2026 amendments and transitional rules.

A private connection can affect or raise reasonable concern about impartiality; it does not automatically establish corruption. Articles 15 and 16 of the civil-service code address potential and actual conflicts. Articles 75–81 of the Public Procurement Act govern procurement conflicts. Other activities require their own rules.

Apply the following rule: Article 4 covers the listed EU-law fields, EU financial interests and the internal market. The 2025 amendment adds restrictive-measures legislation in the Annex and specified offences against the economy and official duties, embezzlement and bribery of representatives. Other breaches of national law are covered where they also threaten the public interest. Check the work-related context in Article 6, the protection conditions in Article 12 and the exceptions and special rules in Articles 4 and 5.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Identify the decision, interest and connection. Check participation in preparation, assessment or approval. Consider a reasonable appearance of partiality. Consult applicable rules and declare through the designated route. Do not wait for proof of favouritism before reporting a relevant relationship. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

An employee helps select a supplier where her spouse works in sales. Even if she considers its bid technically superior, the relationship must be declared and assessed. An authorised person must decide participation and measures, rather than leaving that decision solely to her. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: Must actual influence on the decision be demonstrated before declaring the situation? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

No. Declaration helps prevent compromised impartiality. Its purpose is assessment and management before the decision, without automatically equating an interest with wrongdoing.

One mistake to avoid is: concealing a relevant relationship because you believe you can remain impartial.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. A report is automatically classified as protected because it contains the word corruption. What check is missing?

Read the facts and apply the national scope, context and conditions for protection. A form label helps organise information but does not determine the legal framework. If the case falls outside the regime, identify an appropriate route without unnecessarily disclosing information.