The vaccine consignment and the facilitation payment
You are deputy Head of Delegation in a partner country. A local NGO implementing a €3 million EU-funded health programme reports that a customs official is demanding an informal “facilitation payment” of about €4,000 to release a refrigerated consignment of vaccines; the cold chain will fail in nine days. The NGO's director says everyone pays, and warns that raising it will make them a target. The minister's adviser, who chairs the programme's steering committee, telephoned you to say that “these small administrative matters should stay between implementing partners” and hinted that future government cooperation depends on your discretion. A national newspaper has published a piece alleging irregularities in EU aid, and your press officer has received a request for comment. Headquarters has not yet been informed. Regional security has flagged a demonstration near the warehouse for tomorrow.
1. What are your immediate actions in the first 24 hours?
Read the worked answer
Three interests are in tension: the vaccines, the legal position, and the safety of the people on the ground. The rule is not negotiable, but “no” is not an action plan.
1. Get the facts on paper. Who asked, when, what sum, in what words, what evidence exists. Ask the NGO for a written account today. An allegation of this kind is only actionable if it is documented, and the NGO needs to know it is being taken seriously.
2. Instruct the NGO in writing not to pay, and specifically that EU funds may not be used for it. Point to the anti-fraud and anti-corruption clauses in the grant agreement and to their obligation to report suspected fraud. Say what you will do, so they are not left exposed.
3. Inform upward now. Head of Delegation immediately; then headquarters (the geographic directorate and the fraud reporting channel) the same day. You do not have authority to keep a suspected fraud allegation at delegation level, and the minister's adviser has just made that decision harder - which is itself information headquarters needs.
4. Try to save the vaccines lawfully. A written request from the Delegation to the ministry or customs headquarters for release; escalation through the Head of Delegation's political contacts; a formal complaint channel; alternative cold storage; insurer notification. Parallel lawful pressure is not the same as paying.
5. Security. A demonstration tomorrow near the warehouse is a duty-of-care matter: assess, advise the partner, and decide jointly whether to move stock or staff.
2. The minister's adviser calls and asks you, in effect, to keep it quiet. How do you respond?
Read the worked answer
This is the pivotal conversation, and it is easy to get wrong in both directions: agreeing to discretion, or delivering a lecture.
Do not accept the framing. “Small administrative matters” is a description you cannot adopt, even implicitly, because silence now can later be read as acquiescence.
Be warm, factual and non-accusatory. You are not accusing him. Say that you understand the sensitivity and that the Delegation cannot choose discretion in this area: EU funds carry obligations on fraud and corruption that are not within your discretion or his. That moves it from a personal refusal to a shared constraint.
Offer a constructive route. Propose that the two of you unblock the consignment through a formal channel: a written instruction from the ministry to customs, a joint working-level meeting this week, an accelerated clearance procedure. Ask him for that. Asking for help is more effective than threatening.
Do not respond to the hint about future cooperation. No reassurance, no challenge. Neither accept a condition nor accuse him of imposing one.
Write it up the same day: who called, what was said, what you understood, what you agreed to do. Send it to the Head of Delegation. If the cooperation hint is repeated or becomes explicit, that is a governance and political issue for the Head of Delegation and headquarters, not something for you to absorb quietly.
What would change the answer: nothing about the substance - but the level at which it is handled. If the pressure continues, the Head of Delegation should raise it politically and headquarters should know before it becomes a press story.
3. The NGO director says “everyone pays” and warns that refusing will make them a target. What do you tell them, and how do you handle the press request?
Read the worked answer
The NGO is being asked to take a risk created by a system, with less protection than you have. That requires more than a rule quoted at them.
On the payment: be unambiguous - no facilitation payment, and none from EU funds. But pair it with practical support: escalation to customs headquarters, pre-clearance, a different routing, a logistics partner, the Delegation's political channel, and a written statement that the Delegation instructed them not to pay, which protects them if the request is later repeated. If they pay anyway, from their own funds, say now that it is still a breach of their anti-corruption obligations under the grant agreement and would have to be reported - better they know that before than after.
On their safety: take the warning seriously. Assess whether staff are exposed, adjust movements and visibility, put the Delegation's security focal point in contact, and record what you did. A partner should not be left to absorb the risk alone because the EU is procedurally correct.
On the press: no comment on allegations and no denial. A factual line: the EU takes all allegations of irregularities seriously and they are examined through established procedures; the programme continues to deliver vaccines. Have the Head of Delegation or the spokesperson deliver it, coordinate with headquarters' press service, and anticipate that the national newspaper may link the two stories - which argues for getting the facts and headquarters aligned before, not after, a second article.
Consistency test: the press line, the NGO letter and the record of the minister's adviser's call must tell one story.