The PCIJ Blog 2014-09-01 16:58:12

Inge Springe is the founder and director of the Baltic Center for Investigative Journalism. Her stories for the center, which is also known as Re:Baltica, have resulted in action against public officials and helped bring about changes in Latvian economic and tax policy.

Your work in Latvia explored topics including organized crime and corruption. What were some of the most significant stories that you discovered?

In autumn 2011, together with colleagues from Balkan countries, Russia and the Ukraine, we published a project called The Proxy Platform. Re:Baltica, the center which I direct, worked on a part of the project related to a Latvian bank’s involvement in money laundering schemes and murky business offshore.

The Proxy Platform project was divided into several parts. Colleagues from OCCRP discovered that several Latvian banks were used as hubs to channel stolen taxpayer money from Russia and the Ukraine. We took a deeper look at a company called Tormex’s bank account in one of Latvia’s banks – Baltic International Bank. As the investigation showed, this company was used to channel “dirty” money from all around the world. Even Mexico’s Sinaloa drug cartel used this account.

Inga Springe with the Dalai Lama | Photo by Reinis Hofmanis.

Inga Springe with the Dalai Lama. Photo:Reinis Hofmanis.

Along with a colleague from Germany, Graham Stack, I researched an offshore services company called Overseas International Services. The company was based in Latvia’s capital Riga since the mid 90s, and its services were used by individuals from Russia and the Ukraine. The interesting point was that the nominee directors for these offshore companies (mainly registered in New Zealand, Panama, UK) were Latvian people. The most famous of them was an old and impoverished pensioner named Erik Vanagels, who appeared as a nominee director in at least 300 offshore companies.

During our research, the International Overseas Services was shut down. You read the story here.

Our latest and most successful project was about social inequality in Latvia. For the first time we used statistics and examples to show why Latvia is such a poor country.

According to Eurostat data, Latvia has the highest GINI coefficient in EU (the GINI measures income inequality). We calculated the incomes of bottom 90% of Latvia’s society, top 10% and top 1%. The richest households made seven times more than the average among the bottom 90% of the population. You see the info graphics here.

Our research also showed that Latvia’s tax and benefit system is built to advantage wealthy people rather than small wage earners. For example, someone who owns a company could “save” money by registering his/her car on a company’s name. In such a way the company owner could “optimize” on VAT tax, fuel and repairing costs, while poorer people have no such option. To prove this, we got the data for all registered cars in Latvia in 2009 and 2010. We filtered out how many brand new BMW cars had been registered in Latvia. The result showed that 80% of these brand new BMW were registered in a company’s name and not in a physical person’s name.

The project received huge publicity and the prime minister announced reduction of social inequality as a priority for 2013.

What were the results of your publishing these stories?

After several years of talk and promises, for the first time there has been a big effort in government recently to reduce the tax burden on a people with small wages. We believe this will help a lot to encourage people to stay in Latvia instead of leaving the country. I assume that this project was also successful because people are tired and really want changes. So there were all the conditions in place to hit the target – to create some movement among decision makers in Latvia.

As founder of the Baltic Center for Investigative Journalism, what have been the greatest challenges in setting up an organization dedicated to investigative reporting?

The greatest challenge for me still is lack of good journalists who can do deeper analyses, write in a non-fiction style (which is undeveloped in Latvia), speak in English, and, most important – to have passion for a job they are doing! At the beginning I thought I would just hire a journalist, and they would give me a great story after several months. I had never led people before that.

But to my surprise I was wrong. We have very few good investigative journalists in Latvia and they are overwhelmed with their jobs.

Funding is also a challenge. Compared to the US, former Soviet countries like the Baltics don’t have traditions of charitable donation. In addition, we are part of the EU, so we are not eligible for large international funds anymore. The EU spends a lot of money for media, but to “write about” the EU, not to do investigative journalism.

Another challenge was that it took time for other commercial media to understand the idea of non-profit investigative journalism organization. They were cautious at the beginning, but recently many of them have approached us with offers to collaborate.

What is the path that led you to investigative journalism in the first place?

Desire to find answers to all questions. I always wanted to go as deep as possible to learn every aspect of the issue. It is exciting to discover the things that someone tries to hide, and it’s especially great if there are all the conditions in place to make changes to improve the situation. Sometimes (most often) it takes years for much-needed changes to be implemented in real life.

How has the increasing importance of digital and online media (especially the immediacy factor they emphasize) impacted the quality and practice of investigative journalism?

It’s harder to get people’s attention. Because of the vast variety of information available, the audience is more demanding and distracted at the same time. Just because there is more information available, it doesn’t mean that people are more informed.

For journalists (including investigative journalists) it means that we have to be creative in thinking of how to deliver a message in a more attractive way. Very few people are ready to read long form stories of printed text nowadays. The reading of a journalistic piece should be like a kind of game – with pictures and graphics involved.

On the other hand, it’s easier for journalists to find information and sources. Very often I use social networks such as Twitter and Facebook to find information or people I need for my stories.

Have you employed a lot of data-based methods in your investigative reporting? If yes, what kinds of data do you use and how?

I have done several projects that used data. Before the last parliamentary elections in Latvia, my students and I analyzed the donors of the ruling political parties. We merged several databases – data of political donors, the business register, and the state procurement database. This allowed us to see if the companies owned by political donors have won state tenders. The result was quite interesting. To show a summary of the results, we made an interactive infographic.

Talk about your approach to stories. Is there anything unusual about the way you conduct your research or choose your themes.

More and more often I use social networks. Instead of hiding on what I am working, I say it out loud to the public. I don’t go into detail, but I might announce that we are going to do research on the effectiveness of the health system in Latvia. I say: if there are people who have things to say or could help us as experts, you are welcome. I have gotten good results with this approach.

What do you consider some of the most important lessons you have learned over the years?

Be open and honest to people. I never lie about my aim when I approach people. If I know that they might not like the result, I warn them about that. If I can’t reveal the source of certain information, I say that to people instead of lying or pretending. I believe that a good reputation is the most important thing for an investigative journalist, otherwise you lose trust and that means you lose sources and information.

What are the key elements that make an investigative story truly “click”? What do they have to have and what should they not be missing?

Clearly stated facts. There are two important skills for investigative journalist: 1) ability to find information; 2) ability to write the story or produce the film in an easy, understandable way. I have seen several well done research projects which were written in a very complicated or boring way. And people just don’t read it! It’s a waste of time and a big tragedy at the same time.

Making a story work doesn’t depend only on the journalist or the topic of the project. There should be also willingness to change the situation by decision makers. I had been writing about an influential and corrupt Latvian State Revenue Service officer for many years, but nothing changed because he was supported by the ruling political party. Four years after I wrote the story, the political situation in the country changed, and he was removed from his post and later accused of corruption. This example always encouraged me to keep going even if I don’t see the result immediately.

What advice would you give to young, emerging, investigative reporters?

Everyone can be an investigative journalist – this is what I keep saying to my students. Everyone! The main thing is just to have passion, a real desire and interest in what are you doing. The skill will come over time. The second rule: start with a small topic which is close to you. Don’t try to overthrow a president of the country with your first research. Most probably you will fail. Have patience and the result will come.

IN CONTEXT: The power of judicial review

President Benigno S. Aquino III yesterday said the over-reaching powers of the judiciary is the reason why he is considering Charter Change.

“‘Yung judicial reach, kailangan naman yata lagyan ng hangganan (That judicial reach, there should be a limit),” the Chief Executive said in an interview over Bombo Radyo as he pointed out that “lahat na lang pinapakialaman….mukhang sumobra naman.”

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Aquino’s statement was aired by the network yesterday morning, on the same day that Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno scheduled her news conference.

Sereno, however, chose not to comment on the statements of the Chief Executive.

“The Chief Justice does not respond to political questions; I don’t read anything into President Aquino’s statements,” as she added: “I have enormous respect for the President and I am sure he also has enormous respect for the office of the Chief Justice.”
THE CHIEF JUSTICE | Supreme Court Photo

THE CHIEF JUSTICE | Supreme Court Photo

Sereno is the youngest to have held the position of Chief Justice and might be the longest-serving in the position as she is set to retire in 2030 after 20 years as head of the High Court.

But what exactly is the power of the Supreme Court? Is the President right in saying that it is over-reaching especially after it ruled some parts of the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program as unconstitutional? Is the High Court not empowered by Philippine laws to review policies of the executive?

“Despite being a separate and co-equal branch, the judiciary possesses this authority to inquire into and rule on the legality of the acts of the executive or the legislature. It is part of the system of checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution in order to avoid misuse or abuse of power,” the PCIJ reported in our MoneyPolitics website March this year as the Supreme Court was just scrutinizing the DAP.

What is the power of judicial review? What are the effects of a judicial decision?

READ MORE ON THE MONEY POLITICS WEBSITE

“THE POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW”

THE JOURNALIST’S TOOLBOX‘People like us’ by Reg Chua

IN THIS SECTION, we will be featuring regularly articles written by the PCIJ or reblogged from our partner organizations like The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists or the Global Investigative Journalism Network. Enjoy!

IMAGE from http://www.e-bas.com.au/

IMAGE from http://www.e-bas.com.au/

By Reg Chua

Reprinted from (Re)Structuring Journalism. Reg Chua is executive editor, editorial operations, data and innovation at Thomson Reuters. He has also served as editor-in-chief of the South China Morning Post and had a 16-year career at The Wall Street Journal, including as editor of The Wall Street Journal Asia.

Who should you trust? (Or, for all you pedants out there, whom should you trust?)

It’s an important question for all of us, not least when you’re buying a used car (and believe me, I know.)

But it’s probably even more important for journalists, who talk to strangers on a regular basis and need to make snap judgments about how much faith we should have in what they say.

So here’s the bad news: You shouldn’t trust yourself to figure out who you should trust.

At least that’s the case if I understand Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People, a very interesting book by social psychologists Mahzarin Banaji and Anthony Greenwald, correctly. Blindspot is a good book (although Mahzarin is an even better lecturer; she recently gave a great talk to a number of Thomson Reuters folks) that focuses on the biases and prejudices – “mindbugs,” she calls them – that we have, but that we don’t know we have.

Don’t believe me (or rather, her)? Check out the Harvard Implicit Association Test, which tracks, via the length of time it takes for you to run through a series of matching tests, how strongly you associate one group with a set of traits – for example, female names with domestic terms, as opposed to men and work issues, or white faces with Americaness vs. non-whites. Try the test(s): They’re both scary and enlightening. And if you’re like me, you’ll take them a couple of times because you don’t like how the results turned out.

READ ON HERE AT (RE)STRUCTURING JOURNALISM

Live stream of ‘CJ Meets the Press’

CHIEF JUSTICE MARIA LOURDES P.A. SERENO | Supreme Court Photo

CHIEF JUSTICE MARIA LOURDES P.A. SERENO | Supreme Court Photo

AMID issues confronting the judiciary and the Supreme Court’s recent decision declaring some parts of the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) as unconstitutional, Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno will be facing journalists today to answer their questions.

Sereno is the youngest to be appointed as head of the High Court and may also be the longest-serving as she is set to retire in 2030 after a 20-year-term.

MORE OF SERENO’S BACKGROUND ON THE SUPREME COURT WEBSITE.

PCIJ Executive Director Malou Mangahas and researcher-writer Charmaine Lirio will be joining other journalists in this news conference.

We will be live-streaming the event via the Supreme Court Youtube link.

REBLOG: ‘Capture the popular imagination’

REPOSTED FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CONSORTIUM OF INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS’ WEBSITE

Sheila Coronel is the director of the Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism at the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism. Last month, she was named as the next academic dean of the journalism school, a position she will assume in July. Prior to joining Columbia, Coronel founded the Phillippine Center for Investigative Journalism, where her reporting on corruption and graft by then-President Joseph Estrada helped bring about his impeachment and subsequent resignation. She recently spoke with ICIJ for its “Secrets of the Masters” series.

SHEILA CORONEL | Image from http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/

SHEILA CORONEL | Image from http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/

As the director of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, your reporting revealed the massive personal fortune compiled by then-President Joseph Estrada. How did you report that story and what were your main findings?

That story was fundamentally a way of proving corruption – not by getting evidence of the actual corrupt acts, which was difficult, but by investigating where the proceeds of corruption went. We had heard rumors of large-scale bribery and commissions from government contracts and the sale of shares in state-owned companies. Because it was almost impossible to prove bribery, we decided to go after the fruits of bribery instead.

Estrada was a former movie star who had five mistresses and he was building fabulous mansions in the ritziest parts of Manila for them. None of these properties were in his or his family members’ names. They were registered in the names of shell companies and it was difficult to show real ownership. What we were able to do was establish a pattern in the acquisitions: the same law firms were used to incorporate the companies, the same nominees fronted for the purchases, the same architects were used, the same interior designers, landscape architects, etc. Even the design of the houses was the same because Estrada went home to a different house every night, frequently intoxicated, and so didn’t want to be stumbling in unfamiliar territory.

We also spoke to a number of people, including builders, neighbors, friends and associates who had interacted with Estrada in relation to those properties. We found that Estrada had bought 17 pieces of real estate in just the first two years of his presidency, and we said that based on his income tax return and his financial disclosures, he couldn’t have legitimately afforded them. We also found dozens of companies that had been formed by him and his families, and none of these were disclosed in his asset statement. We discovered thriving business enterprises set up by the more entrepreneurial mistresses and these businesses had assets that could not be explained by the president’s legitimate earnings.

READ MORE ON THE ICIJ WEBSITE